|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 04:58 AM
|
Who would win in a fight, a bunch of people with guns or a single person with a nuke?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 04:59 AM
|
The nuke because the gun people are too stupid to aim the nukes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:10 AM
|
Well, there are hundreds of thousands of people, so they should have enough smart people...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:19 AM
|
Anyone else want to answer this? I know someone else is out there, right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:20 AM
|
I say the nuke. Just because most of the guns will be shot in the air or used to kill eachother instead of aiming the nuke.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:24 AM
|
How about we add a few hundred thousand more soldiers with guns? :P
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:25 AM
|
Then it would get really unfair... There's not many things that could stop a nuke from hitting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:29 AM
|
But you can't launch two nukes at once. And even if they were launched at the same time, one would still hit before the other one did.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:32 AM
|
Then why didn't Russia use their nukes on the US during the Cold War?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:33 AM
|
They had no way of launching them at the time. Only land launchers and submarine launchers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:36 AM
|
Okay, so what I'm asking is this:
What will happen when a country has more nukes than all the rest of the world combined?
What if a country decides to attack another country with a small nuclear bomb? It might seem like a stupid idea to think that a country would attack another with such a weapon, but it's possible.
If someone attacks China and China retaliates with an atomic bomb, who knows what the other countries will do then. They may all attack eachother.
I want to know how many people are out there that can think about this kind of stuff...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:40 AM
|
It depends on the size of the bomb. If they're only small ones then they wouldn't be much of a threat. And as for the whole world attacking eachother, I don't see why the other countries would attack any of them. They already have enough problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:45 AM
|
Okay, imagine that two countries have been fighting over a certain piece of land for a while now. One day, one of them uses a nuke as a last resort, thinking that it will end the war. But instead of ending the war, it starts a worldwide chain reaction that ends in a mass extinction. This is all hypothetical, mind you. It's just something to think about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 05:48 AM
|
The nuke would probably just be seen as an act of war and more would be sent to them. Maybe if it was a country that has never had any conflicts with anyone else and the country decides to use the nuke because they want to stop the wars then some of the other countries might not attack. It also depends on how big the nuke is, the bigger the nuke the more likely there will be a chain reaction. Unless the nuke was small then it wouldn't do much damage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|
| 26 Dec 2010 06:01 AM
|
I'm just saying this so people can start thinking. We need to be able to think like this to prevent such things from ever happening...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Report
Abuse
|
|
|
|
|