Advertisement

Previous   Next

Are you still concerned about nuclear war?

Asked at Rock Chalk Car Wash, 1215 E. 23rd St. on November 20, 2008

Browse the archives

Photo of Steve Tibbits

“No, I am not. I think that our military does a good enough job and our government has it in control.”

Photo of Dustin Harding

“Not so much anymore. I think recently, considering terrorist attacks and such, that’s more of a threat then nuclear war.”

Photo of Noel Hicks,

“Yes, especially with Iran. The chances of them getting their hands on a nuclear device kind of scares me.”

Photo of Brian Gay

“No, and the reason is I think that everybody has enough nuclear (weapons) that they can destroy everybody, so I think that they don’t want to do that.”

Comments

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

From the citation:A new report, specially prepared for Barack Hussein Obama, has been released, according to Fox News.Makes me really happy to have such a touchy-feely guy as Barack Hussein Obama at the helm of the Ship of State!http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2008/11/21/report-dominance-influence-predicted-fade/"The next two decades will see a world living with the daily threat of nuclear war, environmental catastrophe and the decline of America as the dominant global power, according to a frighteningly bleak assessment by the U.S. intelligence community."The world of the near future will be subject to an increased likelihood of conflict over resources, including food and water, and will be haunted by the persistence of rogue states and terrorist groups with greater access to nuclear weapons," said the report by the National Intelligence Council.The analysts said that the report had been prepared in time for Barack Obama's entry into the Oval office on January 20, where he will be faced with some of the greatest challenges of any newly-elected president."The likelihood that nuclear weapons will be used will increase with expanded access to technology and a widening range of options for limited strikes," the 121-page assessment said."A link to the complete report:http://www.dni.gov/nic/NIC_2025_project.htmlWhat?Me worry?

0

beawolf 5 years, 5 months ago

My neighbor says that the plutonium he is stockpiling in the back shed is for his nuclear generator, but I think he's building a bomb. So yes, I'm am worried. Perhaps I should consider a pre-emptive strike?

0

prolix 5 years, 5 months ago

Still have vestiges of nuclear-cold-war-fear in my blood from being a teenager in the 80's. Remember that River Phoenix movie, Little Nikita? Also-i had a total panic attack a couple of years ago during a flight from Asia to Europe. The pilot announced that we were over Siberia and my brain went all, "White Nights" on me. I had a sudden urge to try to flush my passport down the toilet.

0

tangential_reasoners_anonymous 5 years, 5 months ago

Funny, only recently, they were nuke-u-ler.

0

gccs14r 5 years, 5 months ago

Marion, No one uses atomic bombs any more, and haven't since the 50s. They're all nuclear.

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

""I don't think this kind of thing has an impact on the unconverted, frankly. It's not even preaching to the converted; it's titillating the converted... I'm fond of quoting Peter Cook, who talked about the satirical Berlin cabarets of the '30s, which did so much to stop the rise of Hitler and prevent the Second World War." Tom LehrerHoohaa!

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

Yeah! More name calling from Girlfriend!

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

gccs14r (Anonymous) says… Marion needs to look up the difference between an atomic bomb and a nuclear bomb. As a hint, one makes use of fission and the other makes use of fusion."Marin writes:gccs14r (Anonymous) needs to look at what I wrote.I did not use the term "nuclear bomb".gccs14r (Anonymous) is a typical useful idiot at play.

0

OldEnuf2BYurDad 5 years, 5 months ago

What exactly is the question? Nuclear/atomic "war"; or violent use of nuclear/fissionable material?To the first, I say that the USSR died, taking the threat of nuclear war with them. To the second, I say that it's just a matter of time before an atomic device is detonated in the name of God by some terrorists. It will happen in my lifetime, in part because of the demise of the USSR.

0

gccs14r 5 years, 5 months ago

Marion needs to look up the difference between an atomic bomb and a nuclear bomb. As a hint, one makes use of fission and the other makes use of fusion.

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

"The next war could take more lives in the first 24 hours and be over in less than a week."War is improving it's efficiency!

0

9070811 5 years, 5 months ago

"I hope some of you useful idiots realise that you are telling us that it is OK for a raving mad fundamentalist Muslim regieme to possess atomic freaking bombs for “defensive” purposes."And there are plenty of crazy religious fundmentalists here in the U.S. and most of them are Christian. How bout that?Would it not be raving mad to invade a country that had nothing to do with attacks of 9/11? And then not go after the ones responsbile? Is it crazy for that gov't to have nukes? Defensive purposes after being bombed?

0

kujayhawk 5 years, 5 months ago

I think the stock market has already priced in a nuclear war.

0

9070811 5 years, 5 months ago

It's okay for the U.S. to have lots of nukes....but nobody else can have em!!!

0

jumpin_catfish 5 years, 5 months ago

bndairdundat says…From 1900 to 2000 averaged one war related death every 20 seconds worldwide.Try and be as uplifting as possible.

0

bndairdundat 5 years, 5 months ago

From 1900 to 2000 averaged one war related death every 20 seconds worldwide. The next war could take more lives in the first 24 hours and be over in less than a week.

0

madmike 5 years, 5 months ago

Windlass, get back on your meds, and I mean right now! The threat of anu upcoming nuclear exchange doesn't have anything to do with Iraq, or you Kum-Bay-Ahh wishes and attitudes! The nearest and mosr likely threat is from an Iranian-Iraeli nuclear exchange. In their ernest desire to commit suicide and go to Allah, they just might also send one flying towards anyplace within 1,200 miles from their launch points, just to make a point, knowing that their entire country will be destroyed in the response. A response from the Israelis, not Obama, who will be sitting in the White house situation room, wringing his hands and asking Jimmy Carter on advice on how to surrender.

0

Windlass 5 years, 5 months ago

War is so stupid. How many wars have we had now? How many more will we need? And why does anyone think in terms of a "nuclear war" just because we were bombed on 9/11? We're not even that important. All we know how to do is kill on a grand scale. Truth cannot be re-written. Iraq did nothing to us, period.

0

madmike 5 years, 5 months ago

Aside from notnowdear being "unique", there is a likelyhood that the Iranians will use a nuclear warhead against Israel if they are allowed to produce one. I still believe that Israel will not allow it and conduct a pre-emptive strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, prompting yet another Arab-Israeli war in the mideast.

0

madmike 5 years, 5 months ago

Good to see that notnowdear is off her meds again. By the way, i am still in that black chopper over your house, sending those government radio waves into your tin foil hat.

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

Windlass (Anonymous) says… If God so created the world then why does a so-called Christian nation (the U.S.) bomb the he** out of it?Marion?"Marion writes:I don't know; go ask a Christian.Ask also about the bombing operations run by Great Britain, Germany, the old Soviet Union, the new Russias, Argentina, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Pakisatan, India and any other nation which has conducted bombing operations at any time since the invention of the aerial bomb and airplane.

0

Windlass 5 years, 5 months ago

If God so created the world then why does a so-called Christian nation (the U.S.) bomb the he** out of it? Marion?

0

Flap Doodle 5 years, 5 months ago

He seems to have forgotten that we're all "internet thugs".

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

Uh oh. Name calling, posting as if he were British, useless adjectives... Yep, he's about to pop his top off again. Ahh, so predictable.

0

Flap Doodle 5 years, 5 months ago

Stillhavingawonderfulinternetlife.

0

wildsun22 5 years, 5 months ago

OH that's what i'm saying!?!?!?!?

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

I hope some of you useful idiots realise that you are telling us that it is OK for a raving mad fundamentalist Muslim regieme to possess atomic freaking bombs for "defensive" purposes.

0

wildsun22 5 years, 5 months ago

so what are you doing "marion" except freeking out. your long blog basically says. "we don't know" thanks for filling in the blanks.

0

Multidisciplinary 5 years, 5 months ago

Oh great. JackKats has put the theme from Benny Hill into my head now.Think about it. Now it's there.Just wanted to share the pleasure.

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

Why do I need to see a movie?

0

Multidisciplinary 5 years, 5 months ago

Good excuse to watch Blast from the Past again.Walken...too funny. Imagine having him for a buddy. Or a relative at holiday dinners, talking while waiting for the meal, when not everyone is in the room. He leans forward in his chair, and tells a story about when...you get the picture.

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

You people need to scrap that "nuclear device" thing!A smoke detector is a "nuclear device".We are talking about atomic freaking bombs here!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWoNDxjOksM&feature=related

0

BorderRat 5 years, 5 months ago

No, but the Nucular one that "Dubya" always talked about kinda worried me.

0

Multidisciplinary 5 years, 5 months ago

Trobs (Anonymous) says… Why worry? If we have a nuclear war, it's all over. No long drawn out conflict, just flash and we're done.---Trobs, you need to go see the movie tonight at the 'viewing'.They even had that movie at CD trading post in Emporia last week.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 5 months ago

This question implies that I was at one point in time concerned about nuclear war.

0

Flap Doodle 5 years, 5 months ago

Shocka!"Reporting from Washington -- Antiwar groups and other liberal activists are increasingly concerned at signs that Barack Obama's national security team will be dominated by appointees who favored the Iraq invasion and hold hawkish views on other important foreign policy issues.The activists are uneasy not only about signs that both Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates could be in the Obama Cabinet, but at reports suggesting that several other short-list candidates for top security posts backed the decision to go to war."http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-foreign-policy20-2008nov20,0,4430107.story?track=rss

0

Chris Golledge 5 years, 5 months ago

Nuclear war between nations, not at this state of affairs, who knows what the future will bring? MAD is madness, but it works, for the most part.A nuclear attack by a faceless enemy that manages to obtain a bomb from some destabilized country, that is likely only a matter of time. Humans are not perfect; somewhere at some time someone will screw up and lose a device. No matter how unlikely an event is, if the odds are greater than zero, it will happen eventually. If terrorist group X with no claims to any government manages to get a device and float it into NY harbor, who are we going to strike back at?At the same time, I don't lose sleep over that any more than I lose sleep over the possibility of getting killed in a car wreck on the way to work.On middle east states developing nuclear power plants for civil energy production: Which is a cheaper furnace, an oil burner or nuclear? On the other hand, you can't really blame them for looking around for the biggest stick they can find to protect themselves. Is it self protection they seek or aggressive capabilities? No way of really knowing, but the Bush doctrine of reserving the right to a preventive first strike is hardly setting an example we would want others to emulate and it is not a tone that would set other countries at ease.

0

sunflower_sue 5 years, 5 months ago

R_I, don't you know how to pull over and say: "Get out!"? (How would one punctuate that sentence?) Then, would someone please diagram it for me?

0

autie 5 years, 5 months ago

If we have a nuclear war, does that mean I won't have to mow the lawn? Can't we just go fission instead?

0

notnowdear 5 years, 5 months ago

Only if that shadow government Bush so readily touts as running our country decides to pull a "Jericho" on us.Otherwise, I am not at all worried about nukes.

0

Flap Doodle 5 years, 5 months ago

The 6 tons of nitrogen-packed corn is holding up well. I've got a cave full of flints ready for knapping. I'm ready for the time when we'll all wear lots of leather & drive strange cars really fast. Does anybody know where I can get an autogyro?

0

jonas_opines 5 years, 5 months ago

I'm not worried about the war, I'm worried about the zombie hordes that come After the war.

0

SMe 5 years, 5 months ago

"The rusty wire that holds the corkthat keeps the anger in gives way and suddenly it's day again.The sun is in the Easteven though the day is done.Two suns in the sunsetCould be the human race is run."The Final Cut - Pink Floyd

0

gccs14r 5 years, 5 months ago

No country has used a nuclear device in war, but we live in the only country that has used an atomic device in war. We do not hold the moral high ground with regard to usage of weapons of mass destruction. So far, we have not invaded anyone who has a nuclear device, so that apparently is an effective deterrent to our aggression. Given our postwar behavior in places outside of Western Europe, I can't blame anyone for wanting one. The more aggressive we are, the easier it is for other nations to justify their belligerence toward us. We're our own worst enemy. Obama won't have time to fix it, but maybe he can keep things from getting worse.

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

Trobs (Anonymous) says… Why worry? If we have a nuclear war, it's all over. No long drawn out conflict, just flash and we're done."Marion writes:Depends on how widespread such a war might be.

0

Trobs 5 years, 5 months ago

Why worry? If we have a nuclear war, it's all over. No long drawn out conflict, just flash and we're done.

0

RETICENT_IRREVERENT 5 years, 5 months ago

I'm more concerned about the offspring of the nuclear family unit having war in the backseat while I'm driving.

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

cont'd:"Iran denies weapons ambitions, and Syria asserts the site hit more than a year ago by Israeli warplanes had no nuclear functions. But the two reports did little to dispel suspicions about either country.The U.N. nuclear watchdog agency also said Wednesday that a Syrian site bombed by Israel in 2007 had the characteristics of a nuclear reactor.The documents were being shared with the 35 nations on the IAEA's board.On Syria, the agency also said that soil samples taken from the bombed site had a "significant number" of chemically processed natural uranium particles. A senior U.N official, who demanded anonymity because the information was restricted, said the findings were unusual for a facility that Syria alleges had no nuclear purpose.The same official characterized U.N. attempts to elicit answers from Tehran on allegations that it had drafted plans for nuclear weapons programs as at a standstillThe Syrian report said "it cannot be excluded" that the building destroyed in a remote stretch of the Syrian desert on Sept. 6, 2007, was "intended for non-nuclear use."Still, "the features of the building .. are similar to what may be found in connection with a reactor site," it said, suggesting facility's size also fits that picture.The report took note of Syrian assertions that any uranium particles found at the site must have come from Israeli missiles that hit the building, near the town of Al Kibar. And it cited Damascus officials as saying the IAEA samples contained only a "very limited number" of such particlesBut the report spoke of a "significant number of ... particles" found in the samples.The senior U.N. official said "the onus of this investigation is on Syria" and noted that the traces were not of depleted uranium — the most commonly used variety of the metal in ammunition, meant to harden ordnance for increased penetrationSatellite imagery made public in the wake of the Israeli attack noted that the Syrians subsequently removed substantial amounts of topsoil and entombed the building in concrete. But the report also suggested similar activities at three other Syrian sites of IAEA interest"Analysis of satellite imagery taken of these locations indicates that landscaping activities and the removal of large containers took place shortly after the agency's request for access," it said.Beyond one visit in June to the Al Kibar site, Syria has refused IAEA requests to return to that location and examine the three other sites, citing the need to protect its military secrets.In addition, said the report, "Syria has not yet provided the requested documentation" to back up its assertions that the bombed building was a non-nuclear military facility.Iran denies such plans, saying it wants to enrich for a future large-scale civilian nuclear program. But suspicions have been compounded by its monthslong refusal to answer IAEA questions based on U.S., Israeli and other intelligence."

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 5 months ago

I am not "worried" about nuclear war; I am certain of its likliehood, at least on a limited scale.Ahmajinaboob says that he's got the makins' of a bomb......http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455024,00.htmlFrom the citation:" Produces Enough Uranium to Build Nuclear WeaponThursday , November 20, 2008Iran has now produced roughly enough uranium to make a single nuclear bomb, according to atomic experts analyzing the latest report from the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency, The New York Times reported Wednesday.To date, Iran had enriched about 1,400 pounds of low-enriched uranium suitable for nuclear fuel, according to two confidential reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency that were obtained by The Associated Press.Several experts told The Times the milestone was enough for a bomb, but Iran would have to further purify the uranium fuel and put it into a warhead design — a technical advance that experts in the West are unsure Iran has been able to achieve."They clearly have enough material for a bomb," Richard L. Garwin, a top nuclear physicist who helped invent the hydrogen bomb and has advised Washington for decades, told the newspaper. "They know how to do the enrichment. Whether they know how to design a bomb, well, that’s another matter."The report found the Islamic Republic was installing, or preparing to install, thousands more of the machines that spin uranium gas to enrich it — with the target of 9,000 centrifuges by next year.The report on Iran — which also went to the U.N. Security Council — cautioned that Tehran's stonewalling meant the IAEA could not "provide credible assurances about the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities." And it noted that the Islamic Republic continued to expand uranium enrichment, an activity that can make both nuclear fuel or fissile warhead material.While that conclusion was expected, it was a formal confirmation of Iran's refusal to heed Security Council demands to freeze such activities, despite three sets of sanctions meant to force an enrichment stop.cont'd:

0

canyon_wren 5 years, 5 months ago

I'm with countrygirl. Brian Gay's comment about how "everybody has enough nuclear (weapons) that they can destroy everybody, so I think that they don’t want to do that” doesn't exactly reassure me when the Middle East countries have a mindset that includes suicide bombing. I certainly don't sit around worrying about nuclear war but I don't discount its possibility. The future holds the possibility of a lot of actions that will change the world and not for the better. I believe we just have to do the best we can right now to make life for ourselves and others as tolerable as possible.

0

countrygirl 5 years, 5 months ago

With Iran and North Korea both having nukes, I worry some. Pretty unstable countries to have that kind of weapon power.

0

The_Original_Bob 5 years, 5 months ago

It doesn't keep me up at night. My Y2K provisions are fully stocked in the bunker. I'd like to think the Y2K paranoia might have been worth all the fuss. I'm ready for anything.Fun fact: My MREs don't expire until July 2068. Wine ages. Bourbon mellows. Who is living better than me?

0

leadstone 5 years, 5 months ago

Naaaah, It doesn't concern me near as much as some cafeteria food does. What's up with the mac-n-cheese? You can flip the plate upside-down the whole time you're in line and nary a noodle you'll lose. Looks like Oppenheimer had another government sponsored project. Kill the Reds...save the noodles.

0

Tom Shewmon 5 years, 5 months ago

Since November 4th, many Americans are thinking about it more.What was it Joe Biden said about Obama being president?"Gird your loins". Yeah, that was it.

0

blue73harley 5 years, 5 months ago

No because I know how to "duck and cover".Plus I have plenty of ammo, plastic sheeting, duct tape and whiskey.

0

Newell_Post 5 years, 5 months ago

I was sitting around with some other old hippies the other day talking about the good/bad old days and we were all astonished to still be here. None of us had expected the world to last this long. We all expected a nuclear exchange long before now.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.