Uh. If you were like that your morals would be so bad, you shouldn't even be respected as a human being. Secondly, you wouldn't even be a leader with that extreme mentality.
-
Smogon Premier League is here and the team collection is now available. Support your team!
-
Follow our Instagram!
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
atomic war: a real possibility?
- Thread starter Umbreon Dan
- Start date
Uh. If you were like that your morals would be so bad, you shouldn't even be respected as a human being. Secondly, you wouldn't even be a leader with that extreme mentality.
It's an interesting theory (and you presented much better / logically than the other guy), and I like the thought of it being something good. It seems everyone is just coming up with different ways the world is going to end, why can't it be something good for a change? Just go kill yourself if you hunger for the world to end so badly. s:
Where do giants fit into human evolution though?
Supposedly people used to be way taller in certain areas of the world, to tell the truth, Im also rather skeptical on that part, but I´ve heard about taller ancestors somewhere before
I never said it would be real, all I was trying to say were the different ways to interpret it and what it might be if it was real.
What 'the end of the world' might mean for us, really.
Personally, looking at how fast we are changing due to current events I would say that we will look nothing like our formal selves in 3 years, so much so it could be considered the end of us as we know it.
I dont get what your problem is anyway, I just came to post my opinion and didnt try to attack anyone and show a different but plausible way we could interpret thigns.
Now before you go out and tell me to stop posting why dont you go look back at your posts in this thread and see how much content they actually have compared to mine. Lets just be cool and discuss things without baseless attacks.
Err you would be dead wrong. Are you taking hallucinogenics or something because I haven't noticed any recent physical changes in human beings.
3 years for a major physical change that makes a generation of humans indistinguishable from the rest? Are you fucking kidding? You do realize that even small physical changes take millions of years to happen, right?
Oh and what recent events would cause humans to undergo evolution now?
Im not saying physical characteristics dude. Im saying the changes that are made in how society runs and our methodology of finding whats important and the different changes we make like green energy.
There have been a bunch of changes lately on our lifestyles, maybe not individual; but if you read up on whats going on in the world and the focus it seems we went a long way from 10 years ago, hell even 5.
Its like an ant hill that has been operating in the same mound for a couple of months, it finds out that its not working as well as it used to and it gets broken down and they have to find a NEW hill to live in; or build a new one.
Except with us it will be ideas and the base of how we run things, like where we get our energy from among other things.
Now I dont know how ants work and how they live, its just an analogy that fits perfectly what I see going on.
I hope I cleared things up for you, I just have been noticing this thread going down the flame road so I thought id say something to defend myself and get things back on track.
Hey, I agree completely with the South Korean's having the better technology etc, but the actual troops in the army themselves are apparently incredibly incompetent, which would be a bit of a problem.
Also, although SK have the 6th largest army in the world, they're still approx. 400,000 short of NK...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse
read and weep
read and weep
Kim Jong Il certainly is crazy. Everyone states that it would be stupid for him to nuke America but suppose he is smarter then we all give him credit for. Yes, to attack America would be suicide, but what about a different approach? Suppose he gives them to any one of the many organizations/ terrorist cells that hate America and says "Bomb the shit out of them". That way America still gets attacked but his country doesn't get leveled in the process.
Do not underestimate the military might of North Korea. It has a highly diciplined and well equiped army of over 1.2 million strong, making it one of the largest in the world. Admitedly, its military technology is rather primitive, and the rest of the country is an economic Chenobyl, but their armed forces are not to be underestimated.
Despite that, I think North Korea is on its last legs. We don't know what the new "Brilliant Leader" has in store for the world when he ascends to power, but even China has found making excuses for North Korea too embarasing to contemplate (space exploration? And then the North follows up with another nuclear test?) and Russia has stopped caring. I think the regime is headed towards collapse in the near future.
This does makes he issue of nuclear arms relevant, but at this stage North Korea lacks the delivery systems to attack the USA, and I don't think they will last long enough to develop them. That said, if it does, we could be in for interesting times. Luckily, I don't live near either countries, so I don't particularly mind.
Yours callously,
Ascalon
Despite that, I think North Korea is on its last legs. We don't know what the new "Brilliant Leader" has in store for the world when he ascends to power, but even China has found making excuses for North Korea too embarasing to contemplate (space exploration? And then the North follows up with another nuclear test?) and Russia has stopped caring. I think the regime is headed towards collapse in the near future.
This does makes he issue of nuclear arms relevant, but at this stage North Korea lacks the delivery systems to attack the USA, and I don't think they will last long enough to develop them. That said, if it does, we could be in for interesting times. Luckily, I don't live near either countries, so I don't particularly mind.
Yours callously,
Ascalon
Unfortunately DLE , in the age of the atomic bomb America can't afford to be so gung-ho anymore. "Never say make me to someone who can" - anyone with a nuclean weapon, 'can'.
I've not read the whole thread but the likelihood of a nuclear war is very low. A nuclear strike by terrorist groups (and also keep an eye on nuclear-armed Pakistan with terrorist sympathisers in their army and struggling to keep control in the country) is another issue.
Most western countries are allied through NATO and stuff and wouldn't attack each other. And MAD would ensure that others wouldn't try shit. Retaliation is pretty much guaranteed (or the threat of it is) when Britain, USA to my knowledge at the least have submarine launched missiles. I've read an article on some of the UK's trident nuclear subs, they can stay underwater undetected for months and they fire missiles so fast that they can't be intercepted and each missile can carry multiple warheads exponentially more powerful than the individual nukes at Hiroshima.
North Korea and Iran using nukes as a pre-emptive strike is unlikely due to the fact they'd get levelled if they had the audacity to try it. Kim Jon whatever his name is may be crazy but his high-ups in the regime most likely aren't and would probably want to keep their lives. Also, said countries don't have the weapons systems to get a missile to target anyone except regional enemies. I think they're using it as either leverage for negotiations and as a crazy form of self-defence. If the USA was to go after Iran, it has the threat of crippling its economy by destroying Saudi Arabia's oil fields and similarly NK could go after the thousands of US troops in South Korea. It would also give them a deterrent against regional enemies like Israel and South Korea.
[/end blagging crap]
Most western countries are allied through NATO and stuff and wouldn't attack each other. And MAD would ensure that others wouldn't try shit. Retaliation is pretty much guaranteed (or the threat of it is) when Britain, USA to my knowledge at the least have submarine launched missiles. I've read an article on some of the UK's trident nuclear subs, they can stay underwater undetected for months and they fire missiles so fast that they can't be intercepted and each missile can carry multiple warheads exponentially more powerful than the individual nukes at Hiroshima.
North Korea and Iran using nukes as a pre-emptive strike is unlikely due to the fact they'd get levelled if they had the audacity to try it. Kim Jon whatever his name is may be crazy but his high-ups in the regime most likely aren't and would probably want to keep their lives. Also, said countries don't have the weapons systems to get a missile to target anyone except regional enemies. I think they're using it as either leverage for negotiations and as a crazy form of self-defence. If the USA was to go after Iran, it has the threat of crippling its economy by destroying Saudi Arabia's oil fields and similarly NK could go after the thousands of US troops in South Korea. It would also give them a deterrent against regional enemies like Israel and South Korea.
[/end blagging crap]