Dangerous

This alone makes trump unelectable.

He is too stupid to be in such a position, to a point it puts the entire world in danger.

thehill.com/policy/defense/274730-trump-says-he-would-not-take-nuclear-off-the-table-in-any-situation

thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/290217-scarborough-trump-asked-about-adviser-about-using-nuclear

Other urls found in this thread:

zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-13/trump-calls-election-observers-stop-crooked-hillary-rigging-vote
vox.com/2016/8/3/12367996/donald-trump-nuclear-codes
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

But seriously if we have them why would we not use them if the situation was desperate enough?

He was not talking about using them in extremely desperate situations where the US was about to be ruined or something like that, user.

What he is suggesting here is simply careless handling of nuclear weapons.

Good I hope he uses them and blows everyone up. Better than letting you rule over a world of dumb brown people, schlomo.

>flag
>doesn't want ISIS getting nuked
Really makes you think.

>Asking perfectly legitimate questions is dangerous

MAD works because if push comes to shove, you use your nukes. If someone stated they were never going to use nukes, and other countries believed them, then there would be no deterrence against using nukes against the USA.

Trump has proven time and time again he has a fundamental understanding of how things actually work instead of the politically correct 'understanding' of how we are told things work. Want to stop immigration? Put up a physical barrier. Want nuclear weapons to be a deterrent? Say you're willing to use them. Want your enemies to be afraid to rig the election? Remind them why the second amendment exists.

>I want my enemies to believe I won't never hurt them

You are retarded

Trusting anything weasel Scarborough says. Got any other sources, shill?

Isis is just few kms away from Israel. nuking isis = we get fucked too

> Everyone says you can't use nukes
> Trump elected
> Dismantles nukes because apparantly we can't use them
> Everyone complains that you can't get rid of nukes
> But you can't use them

>t. samson option

Retard

Joe is Joe

>this alone makes Trump unelectable

Nice try, libshit, but you're still retarded.

The nuclear option is what prevents a nuclear end of civilization. All parties with access must be willing to use them in order to stop any one of them from actually using them; mutually assured destruction.

Telling the sandniggers that they face a nuclear holocaust should they attack the US while Trump is president is the greatest defensive measure against them. Sandnigger culture is like a pack of wild dogs. They use force to get their way, and they only back down when confronted with a force greater then themselves. They're extremely primitive and seem to think that they still live in an era of conquest where kings can be made by attacking the right people and taking all their shit over a long enough period of time.

If we dropped one nuke and turned a barren stretch of desert into a glass ocean, and all the sandniggers were near enough to get a good view of the blast, all this ISIS bullshit would cease within the month.

>Not understanding what is spread of radioactive dust and radiation

>Common sense.
>Thinks that nuking IS will cause nuclear fallout over Israel.
>Once again proving that Israel should be renamed Is real.

Its pretty much an objective fact though that nuking isis will cause a spread of radioactive dust into israel, user.

and?

Trump Calls For "Election Observers" To "Stop Crooked Hillary Rigging" The Vote

zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-13/trump-calls-election-observers-stop-crooked-hillary-rigging-vote

I think that's funny.

drop a nuke on those hadjis guaranteed they wouldn't fuck with the US of A for the next 500 years

>hurr durr trump said it so it must be valid
>literally what is mutually assured destruction

Good thing out parents spent 50 years coming to terms with what nuclear war actually means so some ignorant asshat and his army of autists could come and blow us all to shit on a whim

>Muh radioactive dust.
We've been dropping nuclear bombs for ages. If nuclear dust was a problem then Australia would be full of shitposters and Japan would have become kawaii.

Oh wait those things happened anyway.

Looks like you fags decided to occupy in the wrong area. If you were Smart you would have occupied Mexico & been right below us. Good luck with your neighbors.

It's because in his altered version of reality he thinks he wins at PA.

I did not hear him calling for similar inspection during the republican primaries, where he was leading

>would rather see his country fall than the world burn with it

The whole strategic doctrine around of nuclear weapons is that they are a deterrent. The "nuclear taboo" promoted by the left undermines this function, as nuclear weapons cannot deter aggression if no one thinks you will use them.

>being a sociopath

>being a pussy

Fuck, beat me to it.

>being underage

Trump clearly suggested he will just use them if the US is attacked though. and he was not even talking about a case of savere emergency... he does not understand the consequences of nuclear war. he is a danger to the entire world

Is it just me or trump is a falseflag operation to get hillary elected?

>Being old & relying on that $0.05 deposit to make ends meet.

>Being a faggot who wont burn the world just to give his country another chance to live.
Literally who would nuke the USA if the USA nukes IS?
The idea behind MAD is that both countries are nuclear armed like Russia and the USA. People might get pissed off at the USA but when it comes down to it the USA has nuked 3rd world shitholes before.

>actually thinks a foreigners life is equal to a fellow countrymans

Could you be any more cucked?

Joe is Joe, doe

fuck you i hope iran nukes the fuck out you faggot.

Should have just gave them land in South Africa. But oy vey we need Babylon

Oh god yes, DO IT. Trump forever, glass entire middle east and irradiate all the dirty kikes next door.

and nothing of value was lost.

This is something everyone already knows by the time they've done basic history of the 20th century.
Of course they are there for use if push comes to shove. Trump thinks they are as applicable in warfare as regular bombs. That's what's troubling.

This could change the philosophy and practice of nuclear arms for the worse.

Americans just can say hi to their russian masters
Trump is a Kremlin plant
That guy is a disaster

>not understanding which way the wind blows.

hint, its not towards the sea. fuck man, i thought heebs were supposed to be smart.

>getting the arguments both for and against a particular option is stupid
>checks the flag
Must be the Mizrahi shift.

>This alone makes trump unelectable.
i feel the opposite
this makes me want to vote for him even more

>Trump think they are as applicable in warfare as regular bombs
Why shouldn't we use them?

> #GlassSyria #GlassLebanon #GlassJordan #RadTheKikes
Get these trending.

The threat posed from nuclear weapons is greatly exaggerated

>Trump thinks they are as applicable in warfare as regular bombs.

He never said that. What he said was he would not take any of his cards off the table, nor should he.

As a registered voter and citizen of this nation, I do not want my government to give the impression that our nuclear stockpile is nothing more than a pile of junk.

If he was a Kremlin plant and a disaster. Putin's plan would be to get Hillary into office who is heavily anti-Russian. Learn to logic 101.

How do you threaten people who believe they're getting a million virgins in heaven anyways? Why would nukes be a deterrent to them?

This is a fucking good thing, gimping America's nuclear program (like everyone's been trying to do for quite a while because it's seen as a waste of money) just increases the likelihood that China (once they actually develop usable nuclear weapons) or Russia to strike the U.S.

It's called trading potential and throw weight. Think of it like this, if Israel or Iran were to get into a nuclear fight, the odds are basically the same assuming Iran gets its S-500's it's buying and actually develops a deliver system. Both have similar nuclear capabilities and both have similar ABM capabilities, so it lessens the likelyhood of a confrontation. But lets say now that Israel gets into a nuclear conflict with The States or Russia. The States and Russia have literally hundreds of times the warheads, thousands of times the throw weight (Total "weight" yield of the warheads that the nation can "throw") and significantly superior ABM systems.

If you gimp the U.S's program to the point where it's THAT much smaller than Russia's, it all of a sudden becomes very appealing to the Russians to hold that above American's heads, ie: with a gimped arsenal the States wouldn't be able to properly or sufficiently retaliate to a far superior Russian strike, and in a nuclear exchange it would be very clear who the winner would be from the start,

Aside anything else, keeping America's air force and nuclear assets generations ahead or in the case of nuclear assets (because Americans literally can't build missiles worth a goddamn thing) competitive.

confused much or drunk?

It's not even half exaggerated.

Not to mention it will essentially kill millions upon millions of innocent citizens

Who are all these "innocents" in the Middle East that I keep hearing about? Because it looks like nothing but guilty fuckers over there from where I'm standing.

Semitic cultures in general are nothing but poison.

>have nukes
>promise you'll never use them for any reason ever ever forever double pinky swear because it hurts libruls feelings
>might as well not have nukes
sage CTR threads folks

No need for threats, kill them all. Kill all you might even suspect of being muslim, wipe out every race where muslims are majority with ethnic bioweapons. There is no cure for islam, only prevention and quarantine and eradication.

Yeah I'm sure dropping a nuke wouldn't make more radicals. Good idea Brody.

judging by your posts you do not understand radiation in general, nor do you understand nuclear weaponry and warfare specifically.

that or you are just some jew shill trolling.

There was a poor syrian posting in Sup Forums a few months ago. i'm not sure if it was a proxy or not, but what he said was, that he just wanted to live his life and that's it, but he was cought in a terrible war and that his life and the life of his family are in danger.

Even if he was just a proxy, there are alot of people in syria who are actually like that user, just people who were at the wrong place at the wrong time, cought in a war.

Had the yanks nuked Kabul after 9/11 we wouldnt have any of this shit today. If it made the Japs think twice about their god on earth (The emperor) then it would certainly make the sandies think about the relevance of Allah let alone their dictators.

As opposed to Hillary starting multiple simultaneous wars?

I thought you jews were smart

>Talks about people being dangerous to the world
>Jew

Aw, poor little Syrian who wants to emigrate to Europe so he can impose Sharia on them and assault their people in the streets. Brings a tear to my eye.

Yeah, fuck people's feelings. Life ends on planets, so what? Get over it.

The whole point of a nuclear deterrent is that you're willing to use them. If you say you are unwilling to use them they no longer work.

Let's bomb a nuclear bomb few kilometers away from your home, im sure you will be okay with it user :^)

You're not allowed to say that, Jew. Your distant cousins would be alive if people whining about a circumstance they cannot change focused instead on doing what they could. Lots of Germans and Austrians in the "just caught in war" nonsense. If someone "just caught in war" is passively helping ISIS then he should watch his children die, -- because he will anyway.

Wasn't murika going to "get on par with the rest of the world" through ABM that actually fucking works rather than with better missiles?

You're a fucking moron, nuclear weapons aren't the Soviet 1960's arsenal anymore. Weapon yields have been greatly increased since then and they haven't gotten bigger or using different fissile material

Example: Russian 25Mt warhead carried on an ICBM with room for more than 6 penetration aids, whereas before a 25Mt warhead would be so heavy it would have to be carried in a strategic bomber because the bomb is the weight of the missile.

Wanna know why? Well lets start off with nuclear yield. E=mc^2, the mass of the fissile material is the same and the speed of light isn't fucking changing, so how are yield SO MUCH greater then? Efficiency. Nuclear weapons as they've developed have been almost completely about creating more X-ray's than Gamma rays. Gamma rays don't add to the power of the weapon, because they shoot straight through the foam and plutonium, through the side of the warhead and into the environment. X rays are what make your "boom". They create a huge pressure wave on the inner stage, the more pressure you have, the bigger boom you have.The efficiency of modern nuclear weapons is such that tactical nuclear weapons have been considered for strikes now by the U.S and Russia for the last 30 years because the radiation output of even hundreds of these bombs is so low that the lasting effects would only be harmful on human life for less than a week, and hardly harmful after a few days directly under the ground zero.

It's why you don't hear anyone seriously talking about nuclear weapon radiation now a days. Because EVERY aerospace and nuclear engineer will shit on them for knowing nothing, or at least how nuclear weapons worked in the 1970's.

Get out, Kike.

Nobody cares about Kabul. But Muslims count the success of their totalitarian project by lands gained. Nuking Mecca and Medina would force them to admit they were not succesful.

Do you understand why people are not willing to use them,user?

Maybe its because, idk, they are weapons of mass destruction that kill indiscriminately and open the doors nuclear war that will put the entire world in danger?

Damn you are stupid. Of course Trump would not use nuclear weapons but he HAS to say that he won't rule them out because otherwise our enemies won't hesitate to attack. Do any of you have any real world experience with human nature?

Eisenhower, Goldwater and Johnson all considered using nukes in Vietnam, yet no one claim they're unstable nutjobs.

And other forms of war dont kill indiscriminately?

coming from the KIKE that threatens to nuke all of us if we kick them out of palestine.

"The GOP nominee refused to rule out using nuclear weapons in europe or against extremists"

user, even you should be able to see how fucking stupid trump's statements are.

>My source of a source
Seems legit.

There are far more precise weapons that don't eradicate entire populations from an area, user.

That's why your country agreed to never develop them, right, Moishe?

That's what you get for living in a warzone, kike.

>"The GOP nominee refused to rule out using nuclear weapons in europe or against extremists"
Has Israel ruled out the use of nuclear weapons to keep itself alive?

At the time Kabul was the head city of the Taliban that openly harboured Osama Bin Laden. If you had have nuked Mecca in 2001 you would be dead now.

>Flag

Opinion discarded.

Two birds with one stone.

fuck off rothschild puppet
he doesn't give a shit about any of you.
and that line was not initially jewish. their tribalism supersedes yours.
you have been jewed by the eternal anglo you fucking kike

Nuclear bombs are not as bad as you think, Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined was nothing compared to the US napalm bombings on Japan. We killed far less people with nukes than we did with fire.

On top of that look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki today, they are perfectly fine, you can even walk on ground zero where people now live.

Radiation doesn't stay for too long and we can minimize how much of it we put out. The only reason we used nukes is for the blast which we used to destroy important war factories used by the Japanese which we could not reach with napalm.

Refusing to rule out the use of something is not the same thing as actively encouraging the use of something. Do you really not see the difference?

And let's not divorce that statement from Trump's persona as a negotiator, either. Trump is saying there is no good reason to take his cards off the table pre-emptively, with nothing in exchange. That's just a shit negotiating tactic. Nuclear weapons use, like anything else, is a bargaining chip. Why should our nation throw away a bargaining chip? What's in it for us?

>I don't know how islamic culture operates

It would snuff out any radical actions despite how many radical sentiments it might inspire. It's a savage, primitive, and barbaric culture that relies on being the bully on the playground.

These people have no idea how a nuclear deterrent works, do they?

There's literally no point in having nukes if you're not prepared to use them.

Yehoodi when you dismantle your fascist regime and apologize to the people of Palestine then you can open your mouth and talk about other nations. Until then: MARGBAD ISRAEL

That's when you drop the second one, and if they are still throwing their tantrum just fucking exterminate them, they'll never learn.

there is zero point in having nukes if you're not even going to at least give the impression that you might use them.

maybe if you nuked palestine they'd stop attacking you

>If you had have nuked Mecca in 2001 you would be dead now.
Why?

I see absolutely no problem with using low yield nuclear weapons right now.

thanks for #CTR for me!


wtf i hate drumpf now, i am now a hillary shillary just like you op

>ITT: trump supporters not understanding that there are very good reasons why people say they refuse to use nukes.

They are just as stupid as the candidate they support, it seems.

vox.com/2016/8/3/12367996/donald-trump-nuclear-codes