Quote Originally Posted by Tarlam!
Zig, Scott, 'buck,

pure rhetoric on you parts. Why would l'il Kim use nukes once he has them? He has them. He hasn't used them yet. Argument just collapsed.

Scott, the world is not better because your country has nukes. It makes L'il Kim, Pakistan et All want their own. Finally get that as a fact. It is a fact. It's called an Arms Race.

'buck. I am not vs you. That's in your head and it is flattering ONLY YOU.

None of you have made a case for the USA to have nukes, and everybody else not to; The fact is, THERE IS NO CASE.

Tarlam!

It's difficult to apply any meaningful learning exchange when YOU jump all over yourself with "SLAM BAM commentary" as you elicit below Tarlam!

" 'buck. I am not vs you. That's in your head and it is flattering ONLY YOU."
Tarlam!

Sometimes "an EGO SUCK Mask" proceeds US, Maan. Please GET REAL Tarlam!. This issue has hardly anything to do with YOU or I.

Discussion with you Tarlam!... always gets to "more challenging than trying to teach an OLD dog new tricks". Why is that?

SWEEP it away !

TRY to attack just this ISSUE... with focus. Try harder Tarlam! to keep any?EGO SUCK MASK out of it PLEASE.

Back to the matter at hand, Tarlam!

My objective is to discover on this thread a direction that is both plausable, (realistic) and effective in ensuring that NO more Nations / Countries have nuclear weapon capability that may/will lead to a disaster. To tackle this matter inside a context of what exists.

To ensure a course of acting responsible for OUR future. More important. That of future generations. Freedom of potential harm of a Nuclear Holocaust.

Tarlam! your approach: Disarmament on a World wide scale.

woodbuck27: I am on the side of saying that approach isn't realistic. It won't happen in OUR foreseeable future, probably ever.

Given the wide division in OUR views on this issue, introduces a classic debate on the scale of. Is it " BLACK or WHITE ". There can be no GRAY area's. Ehh ?

I believe to get to the Black or white one must examine the gray.

OK ?? Tarlam! May we confine OURSELVES within the context of the issue?

I have faith in a proper discussion that we will realize an answer we all may live with. No pun intended.

Tarlam! and woodbuck27 are miles apart in ** OUR personalities. May we confine this to proper intellectual discussion? Too much of that ** is pointless in regards to seeking a solution that will protect OUR future.

Too much of that will damage this thread.

Maybe my wishes are as Utopian as your suggestion of " World Wide Nuclear Weapon Disarmament", as a solution, Tarlam! ?

We need FOCUS.

Only then may we determine through respectful discourse a method both real and effective.

Maybe in you. I'm guilty of rhetoric tantamount to suggesting that "your out to lunch" Tarlam!. If I'm just that... everytime I pop into your view that's sad.

I don't pursue a challenge, involving Tarlam!. I pursue TRUTH.

I'm sitting here and thinking. WOW ! Isn't that nice that Tarlam! has "of course" the ultimate response. Get rid of all the Nuclear weapons. Of course that is "the BEST way".

Then I scale the issue of protection and nuclear arms back to the common man's right to or not to own a gun (for whatever reason). Given that I certainly realize that my World is composed of GOOD and EVIL.

What is my responce to any government stance to take my guns from me?

Well clearly, that response is NO !

There is absolutely no reason for my Government to dictate what I may own that is not going to be used in any way to do harm to innocent people.

So "in fact" I have my pseudo Nuclear weapon and noone's taking it from me and I will only voluntarily give my guns up, if that is overall suitable for me.

I don't even want the Government to regulate me and my guns (my property in my proper and responsible care). When such a program is over the top unrealistic given it's cost monetarily and an invasion of my privacy and rights.

Why should the GOOD and generally respectful people like myself, live without a gun, or worse offer ourselves up to a system "a Gun Registry" that may inform the BAD guys... of my capability to defend myself from their evil intents?

It's a case of what they don't know may hurt them. I'm as many men. I would not hesitate to defend myself or my loved one's and property with a gun. if that option was called upon.

I'm OLD School- tough as they come. Noone ever invades my life with evil intent and doesn't suffer me. If necessary, I would not hesitate to bring that invader down with whatever means is at my disposal. Even to go as far as using my guns as a weapon. Whatever it takes !!

SoTarlam! It's come see come saw.

Countries that already have Nuclear Weapon capability will NOT disarm,Tarlam!

In order for that to work "in Utopian Theory" is that ... ALL Nuclear weapons would have to vanish fron OUR planet.

The next or logical question, based on that as a solution. How do YOU propose that be accomplished? Base your solution/plan on reality.

That usually, in a REAL sense, comes down to cost and then it's tossed away. So again from that standpoint ...NO to Nuclear Weapon disarmament on a world wide scale. It's just not practical as a solution.

It's an unreal proposal you make Tarlam! and also very dangerous to even consider. May I add and putting it in Black and White terms, Tarlam!

That suggestion is plain n' simple.... STUPID to consider as a viable option !!

Back to woodbuck27 and my guns.

Well they have always been used strictly to prepare for and to hunt wildlife. I don't own guns with any real day to day emphasis on having them as a source of protection. I have other means of security, but no less I deserve the right to keep them and do so in privacy and to back myself up if the evil side comes down on me and my home.

I'm well aware that "the Bad Guys" are everyday gaining more POWER to and do harm innocent people. To deny that "as a reality" in all aspects of living today, is a delusion and a means to encourage only the Bad guys determination to harm all of us Good guys.

They don't discrimminate as the opportunity may present itself.

We must examine this issue from the concept of.

Does N.Korea have a Nuclear weapon? If so as it now appears they do. Then the proper approach is for N.Korea to get rid of that capability. No other option is available to N.Korea as "the World" overwhelmingly supports NO to Nuclear Arms and N.Korea.

How do we exercise pressure on N. Korea and monitor N. Korea as the measures are put in place, to disarm N. Korea of any Nuclear Weapon capability. That is the issue of focus here Tarlam!, not anything else.

Why are we getting sidetracked with discussion on something as stupid as World Wide Nuclear Weapon disarmament, that just isn't practical or sensable from any standpoint Tarlam! ???

To go there is to waste OUR God given abilitiy to reason capably.

The solution to all car accidents = Get rid of all car?

Hardly. Not the proper resonse.

The solution to all murders or other violations of "the Law" and in the commission of any such crimes using a gun = Get rid of all guns?

Hardly. Not the proper response.

The proper resosponse to the World generally opposing N.Korea and Nuclear Weapon capability = The rest of the World's great Power's getting rid of their arsenal's of Nuclear Weapons?

Hardly. Not the proper response when that has hardly anything to do with the problem.That problem is N. Korea, not the World's Powers,Tarlam!.

So what have you got Tarlam! to counter my position?