NATION

PASSWORD

Canada Should Get Nuclear Weapons

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 159114
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ifreann » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:00 am

Antarticaria wrote:
The 93rd Coalition wrote:
A device that kills thousands of people in the blink of an eye and millions, painfully over the course of a few years can, in the wrong hands, be evil indeed.


"I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."

Do you have a point?

User avatar
Antarticaria
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1774
Founded: Sep 03, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Antarticaria » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:01 am

Imperializt Russia wrote:
The 93rd Coalition wrote:
A device that kills thousands of people in the blink of an eye and millions, painfully over the course of a few years can, in the wrong hands, be evil indeed.

It's literally just a bigger bomb.

Nuclear weapons deserve and require respect and safeguarding.
But they are not deserving of a lot of the boogeymanning they receive.

This is not to say that I wish nuclear assault upon anyone - in broadly the same reasoning I do not wish conventional or chemical shelling upon anyone.
These systems hold their place as tools of warfare, however.


I Concur and like all tools of the trade in the wrong hands something can go wrong, one does not blame a hammer for smashing ones own thumb.
Just a average person! Is that too straight forward?

User avatar
Antarticaria
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1774
Founded: Sep 03, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Antarticaria » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:03 am

Ifreann wrote:
Antarticaria wrote:
"I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."

Do you have a point?


The point is in the quote itself the quote was over the invention of the Atomic Bomb from Oppenheimer (Correct My spelling of his name if I am incorrect) .
Just a average person! Is that too straight forward?

User avatar
Organized States
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8426
Founded: Apr 26, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Organized States » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:04 am

As I'm sure it has been stated multiple times before, Canada has no need, nor can they build nuclear weapons under international law (due to Canada's signing of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty). Canada is currently under the nuclear umbrella of the United States, and I'm sure there is no reason for the US and Canada to go to war (the two nations have some of the world's best diplomatic and military relations).

Nuclear Deterrent is not something Canada needs.
Thank God for OS!- Deian
"In the old days, the navigators used magic to make themselves strong, but now, nothing; they just pray. Before they leave and at sea, they pray. But I, I make myself strong by thinking—just by thinking! I make myself strong because I despise cowardice. Too many men are afraid of the sea. But I am a navigator."-Mau Piailug
"I regret that I have only one life to give to my island." -Ricardo Bordallo, 2nd Governor of Guam
"Both are voyages of exploration. Hōkūle‘a is in the past, Columbia is in the future." -Colonel Charles L. Veach, USAF, Astronaut and Navigation Enthusiast

Pacific Islander-American (proud member of the 0.5%), Officer to be

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:06 am

Antarticaria wrote:
The 93rd Coalition wrote:
A device that kills thousands of people in the blink of an eye and millions, painfully over the course of a few years can, in the wrong hands, be evil indeed.


"I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."

The full quote is quite important.

"We knew the world would not be the same, a few people laughed, a few people cried. Most were silent. I remember the Hindu scripture... where the God is trying to convince the Indian prince to do his duty. To impress him, he takes on a multi-armed form and says 'now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds'. I guess we all thought that, one way or another."
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Antarticaria
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1774
Founded: Sep 03, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Antarticaria » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:09 am

Imperializt Russia wrote:
Antarticaria wrote:
"I am become death, the destroyer of worlds."

The full quote is quite important.

"We knew the world would not be the same, a few people laughed, a few people cried. Most were silent. I remember the Hindu scripture... where the God is trying to convince the Indian prince to do his duty. To impress him, he takes on a multi-armed form and says 'now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds'. I guess we all thought that, one way or another."


Apologies.
Just a average person! Is that too straight forward?

User avatar
Ifreann
Post Overlord
 
Posts: 159114
Founded: Aug 07, 2005
Scandinavian Liberal Paradise

Postby Ifreann » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:09 am

Antarticaria wrote:
Ifreann wrote:Do you have a point?


The point is in the quote itself the quote was over the invention of the Atomic Bomb from Oppenheimer (Correct My spelling of his name if I am incorrect) .

Yes, Oppenheimer said that about the detonation of the first atomic bomb. What are you getting at by quoting him quoting the Bhagavad Gita?

User avatar
CTALNH
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9596
Founded: Jul 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby CTALNH » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:09 am

Pays den haut wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:
the first sentence doesn't make any sense.

If you have nukes, by definition you become more powerful (you can now devastate entire cities with ease).

If you have nukes, that has no bearing on the intelligence of your citizens (they would not ''become more stupid'').

Also... Quebec likes peace, fine. Nukes are not about starting wars, they're about security. Canada is more secure with them, Quebec is more secure with them.



It's the opposite. Canada and Québec would be more secure if no one had nukes and someone needs to lead by example. Yes having nukes doesn't affect the intelligence of the people, but having them is stupid.
Lies! Nukes for everyone!
Last edited by CTALNH on Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
"This guy is a State socialist, which doesn't so much mean mass murder and totalitarianism as it means trying to have a strong state to lead the way out of poverty and towards a bright future. Strict state control of the economy is necessary to make the great leap forward into that brighter future, and all elements of society must be sure to contribute or else."
Economic Left/Right: -9.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.64
Lawful Neutral/Lawful Evil half and half.
Authoritarian Extreme Leftist because fuck pre-existing Ideologies.
"Epicus Doomicus Metallicus"
Radical Anti-Radical Feminist Feminist
S.W.I.F: Sex Worker Inclusionary Feminist.
T.I.F: Trans Inclusionary Feminist

User avatar
Andzhalswoodosia
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 366
Founded: Apr 01, 2014
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Andzhalswoodosia » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:12 am

New Aerios wrote:
Andzhalswoodosia wrote:NO! NEVER THERE IS NO WAY CANADA IS GETTING NUKES!!!! IT"S NEVER HAPPENING!!! THE USA WOULD NEVER ALLOW IT!!!! EVER!!!


No need to shout.


USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! (Sorry, I'm a die-hard American)
PEACE, FREEDOM, JUSTICE!
Economic Left/Right: 2.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 1.23

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:12 am

Antarticaria wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:The full quote is quite important.

"We knew the world would not be the same, a few people laughed, a few people cried. Most were silent. I remember the Hindu scripture... where the God is trying to convince the Indian prince to do his duty. To impress him, he takes on a multi-armed form and says 'now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds'. I guess we all thought that, one way or another."


Apologies.

Oppenheimer is reputed to have made a number of quotes from Hindu scripture, many of them - this one especially, when considered in full, can be interpreted as him justifying his work.
Oppenheimer publicly made comments of disappointment that the bomb had not been ready to use against the Nazis, but opposition was almost universal to the Nagasaki bomb following the Hiroshima bomb.

Many of the Manhattan Project scientists regarded the bomb as a wartime necessity, to build and be ready before the Germans or the Japanese could do likewise.
Hence why, after the war, many of them immediately campaigned against nuclear proliferation.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
CTALNH
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9596
Founded: Jul 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby CTALNH » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:13 am

Andzhalswoodosia wrote:
New Aerios wrote:
No need to shout.


USA! USA! USA! USA! USA! (Sorry, I'm a die-hard American)

And nobody gives a fuck.
"This guy is a State socialist, which doesn't so much mean mass murder and totalitarianism as it means trying to have a strong state to lead the way out of poverty and towards a bright future. Strict state control of the economy is necessary to make the great leap forward into that brighter future, and all elements of society must be sure to contribute or else."
Economic Left/Right: -9.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.64
Lawful Neutral/Lawful Evil half and half.
Authoritarian Extreme Leftist because fuck pre-existing Ideologies.
"Epicus Doomicus Metallicus"
Radical Anti-Radical Feminist Feminist
S.W.I.F: Sex Worker Inclusionary Feminist.
T.I.F: Trans Inclusionary Feminist

User avatar
Orvius
Diplomat
 
Posts: 736
Founded: May 01, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Orvius » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:17 am

Anyone else thinking of Fallout right now?

Image
Image
"Our dedicated boys keep peace in newly annexed Canada."
My nation does not reflect my RL beliefs. If it offends you, then you can firmly shove it up your ass respect difference and continue on with your day.
Libertarianism, Individualism, Free Religion, Freedom of Speech, Life-Liberty-and-the-Pursuit-of-Happiness, Right to Bear Arms, Public Liberty (I'm the Anti-Party party), and Anti-Plutocracy(POWER TO THE PEOPLE).
If you believe this is a human right we're seriously going to hunt you monsters down. We see people putting this "right" into their constitutions more and more everyday and it is absolutely appalling. There is nothing more depressing than a bear without arms, you sick fucks.

User avatar
Antarticaria
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1774
Founded: Sep 03, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Antarticaria » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:19 am

Ifreann wrote:
Antarticaria wrote:
The point is in the quote itself the quote was over the invention of the Atomic Bomb from Oppenheimer (Correct My spelling of his name if I am incorrect) .

Yes, Oppenheimer said that about the detonation of the first atomic bomb. What are you getting at by quoting him quoting the Bhagavad Gita?


Ok the problem is that Like any tool it needs to be handled with care and only used when needed. This weapon in question is deadly and a can eliminate a large quantity of human beings and turn them to ash. Its a tool requiring responsibility not to mention one that is banned due to its ability to not only eliminate large amounts of people but to cause more nukes to be launched and in turn kill more people. The world should be storing their nukes they have not making more and especially not prepping them for instantaneous launch the last thing we need is to enter a very tense 'second cold war' and put the world that close to the brink of mass nuclear destruction.
Just a average person! Is that too straight forward?

User avatar
SuperFruitland
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1352
Founded: Jun 24, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby SuperFruitland » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:27 am

The US will never declare war on Canada, as Canada is the US's number one trading partner. Canada goes, so does some of the income of the US.

User avatar
Eastern Denmark
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1189
Founded: Jul 23, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Eastern Denmark » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:32 am

Yeah, for some reason I feel it's different to invade an unstable middle eastern country then it is to invade a trading partner and ally, who also has friends worldwide that would be more than annoyed by an invasion.

But as far as getting some nucleus weapons, they might as well. The U.S. won't be invading them, but it might be a good idea to have weapons of mass destruction.
Too much sanity may be madness and the maddest of all, to see life as it is and not as it should be. -Miguel De Cervantes

User avatar
Organized States
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8426
Founded: Apr 26, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Organized States » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:33 am

Eastern Denmark wrote:Yeah, for some reason I feel it's different to invade an unstable middle eastern country then it is to invade a trading partner and ally, who also has friends worldwide that would be more than annoyed by an invasion.

But as far as getting some nucleus weapons, they might as well. The U.S. won't be invading them, but it might be a good idea to have weapons of mass destruction.

If Canada wants a deterrent, they should get back into NATO's Nuclear Weapons sharing program.
Thank God for OS!- Deian
"In the old days, the navigators used magic to make themselves strong, but now, nothing; they just pray. Before they leave and at sea, they pray. But I, I make myself strong by thinking—just by thinking! I make myself strong because I despise cowardice. Too many men are afraid of the sea. But I am a navigator."-Mau Piailug
"I regret that I have only one life to give to my island." -Ricardo Bordallo, 2nd Governor of Guam
"Both are voyages of exploration. Hōkūle‘a is in the past, Columbia is in the future." -Colonel Charles L. Veach, USAF, Astronaut and Navigation Enthusiast

Pacific Islander-American (proud member of the 0.5%), Officer to be

User avatar
Murkwood
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7806
Founded: Apr 05, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby Murkwood » Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:09 am

Okay kids, let's have some fun, shall we?


Infected Mushroom wrote:I think that Canada should get nuclear weapons.

Things look like they're pretty crazy down in the US border and some day, the USA might suddenly decide to invade and annex Canada (they've shown their willingness to invade somewhere as far away as Iraq for oil).


There is no real benefit for the US to turn on an ally like that. Also, we didn't invade Iraq for oil. We did it to stop WMDs and topple Saddam Hussein.

After all, Canada is sitting on top of extremely resource rich land. It has massive reserves of oil, natural gas, and mineral resources. Should the US or another country turn imperial one day, Canada would be a logical target. Its a massive country with a ton of natural resources (and tons of untapped resources in the Canadian North), yet it only has around 34 million people (less people than the tiny island country of the UK), almost all located in easily targetted cities close to the US border. I am NOT exaggerating when I say if the USA wanted to, it could invade and take all of Canada's major cities in a few weeks.


You are getting this information from...what? Your vast knowledge of playing Civ? The geopolitical ramifications would be insane. Yes, there is a 0.0000000000001% chance that the USA could attack Canada. But to plan for something so silly and unlikely is stupid.

Canada isn't safe. It relies too much on the USA, if the USA turns against it or if the USA is unwilling to defend Canada when Canada gets attacked, it is doomed. Canada must get nuclear weapons. Then no one would dare invade it no matter the profits because Canada could retaliate with a nuclear strike. I'm surprised that Canada doesn't have nuclear weapons. France, the UK, China, and Russia all have them so why not Canada?


You want to know why? It's because Canada isn't a global power. Sorry, it's true. While I admire Mr. Harper, Canada only seems to care about domestic issues. Plus, who says we wouldn't help defend Canada? You were just talking about how important their resources are!

It's time for Canada to get nukes to ensure it is secure. It's time for Canada to join the world's elite and prestigious club of nations, a club whose individual members have the capability to destroy entire cities and forests with the click of a button. It's time for Canada to get some of that glory and power. Now is the time to do it, when war is looming, it will be too late.


Newsflash: Canada, and the free world, are already in that club. It's called NATO. NATO is a collective security agency, so if anyone attacks Canada, they will have the whole Western World on them like a ton of bricks. As long as it's in NATO, Canada will not need nukes.
Degenerate Heart of HetRio wrote:Murkwood, I'm surprised you're not an anti-Semite and don't mind most LGBT rights because boy, aren't you a constellation of the worst opinions to have about everything? o_o

Benuty wrote:I suppose Ken Ham, and the league of Republican-Neocolonialist-Zionist Catholics will not be pleased.

Soldati senza confini wrote:Did I just try to rationalize Murkwood's logic? Please shoot me.

Catholicism has the fullness of the splendor of truth: The Bible and the Church Fathers agree!

User avatar
The Merchant Republics
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8503
Founded: Oct 25, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby The Merchant Republics » Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:19 am

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Pays den haut wrote:If Canada gets nuclear weapons, it will be another good reason for Québec to separate. And by the way Stephen Harper eats in US hands, US don't have to invade them.


why would Quebec seperate if Canada becomes more powerful?

Because, presumably all the sense left in Canada would congeal there.


This is a terribly unneeded plan. The USA may not be what it once was in terms of stability, but they're not going to invade Canada and we certainly don't need to develop nuclear weapons to prevent that. There are perhaps no two countries in the world that are as mutually codependent on one another. True we are certainly more dependent on the USA than they us, but the fact is that we are one of America's biggest trading partner and provide a massive amount of their raw materials and manufactured goods.

If whatever crazed god devised this world of yours deigned that a US invasion happened anyways, we may just as easily rely on our allies in NATO, who would naturally side with us in a unilateral US strike, and crucially are also armed with nuclear weapons. Canada's defensive capacity further is not so weak as to make nuclear weapons our only option. It would be an utter waste of money.

Lastly and most importantly. 90% of the Canadian population lives along the US border, developing nuclear weapons to threaten the United States would ultimately be futile because the USA well knows that using nuclear weapons on the USA besides being MAD, would also be shooting ourselves in the foot. Even if by some miracle we struck first and the US was incapable of firing back (which is the height of ridiculousness) nuclear fallout would affect almost all of the Canadian population just by proximity.
Your Resident Gentleman and Libertarian; presently living in the People's Republic of China, which is if anyone from the Party asks "The Best and Also Only China".
Christian Libertarian Autarchist: like an Anarchist but with more "Aut".
Social: Authoritarian/Libertarian (-8.55)
Economic: Left/Right (7.55)
We are the premiere of civilization, the beacon of liberty, the font of prosperity and the ever illuminating light of culture in this hellish universe.
In short: Elitist Wicked Cultured Free Market Anarchists living in a Diesel-Deco World.

Now Fearing: Mandarin Lessons from Cantonese teachers.
Factbook (FT)|Art Gallery|Embassy Program

User avatar
Rehansu Tir
Diplomat
 
Posts: 801
Founded: Jul 27, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Rehansu Tir » Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:44 am

Infected Mushroom wrote:I think that Canada should get nuclear weapons.

Things look like they're pretty crazy down in the US border and some day, the USA might suddenly decide to invade and annex Canada (they've shown their willingness to invade somewhere as far away as Iraq for oil).

After all, Canada is sitting on top of extremely resource rich land. It has massive reserves of oil, natural gas, and mineral resources. Should the US or another country turn imperial one day, Canada would be a logical target. Its a massive country with a ton of natural resources (and tons of untapped resources in the Canadian North), yet it only has around 34 million people (less people than the tiny island country of the UK), almost all located in easily targetted cities close to the US border. I am NOT exaggerating when I say if the USA wanted to, it could invade and take all of Canada's major cities in a few weeks.

Canada isn't safe. It relies too much on the USA, if the USA turns against it or if the USA is unwilling to defend Canada when Canada gets attacked, it is doomed. Canada must get nuclear weapons. Then no one would dare invade it no matter the profits because Canada could retaliate with a nuclear strike. I'm surprised that Canada doesn't have nuclear weapons. France, the UK, China, and Russia all have them so why not Canada?

It's time for Canada to get nukes to ensure it is secure. It's time for Canada to join the world's elite and prestigious club of nations, a club whose individual members have the capability to destroy entire cities and forests with the click of a button. It's time for Canada to get some of that glory and power. Now is the time to do it, when war is looming, it will be too late.

What do you think NSG? Is it time for Canada to go nuclear?


Well, you're right that if anyone is going to invade canada, it's going to be the US. We're not really in any danger from china or russia or any other country except the one we share a border with, that also happens to have the largest, most powerful military in the world, which also happens to have the idea that canada already belongs to them anyway. If they ever want something we have and we say no, they're gonna just come in and take it.
You are a patriotic Social Democrat. 3 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 36 percent are more extremist than you.

Economic Left/Right: -7.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.74

Personal Score 95%
Economic Score 7%
Based on the above score, you are a Hard-Core Liberal .

Your Libertarian Purity Score
26
16-30 points: You are a soft-core libertarian. With effort, you may harden and become pure.

Social Democracy 92%
Anarchism 83%
Democratic Socialism 67%
Marxism 33%
Neoliberalism 25%
Republicanism 25%
Fascism 17%
American Libertarianism 17%
Totalitarianism 0%

Economics Student
54 Keynesian, 31 Chicago, 8 Austrian

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:45 am

Rehansu Tir wrote:
Infected Mushroom wrote:I think that Canada should get nuclear weapons.

Things look like they're pretty crazy down in the US border and some day, the USA might suddenly decide to invade and annex Canada (they've shown their willingness to invade somewhere as far away as Iraq for oil).

After all, Canada is sitting on top of extremely resource rich land. It has massive reserves of oil, natural gas, and mineral resources. Should the US or another country turn imperial one day, Canada would be a logical target. Its a massive country with a ton of natural resources (and tons of untapped resources in the Canadian North), yet it only has around 34 million people (less people than the tiny island country of the UK), almost all located in easily targetted cities close to the US border. I am NOT exaggerating when I say if the USA wanted to, it could invade and take all of Canada's major cities in a few weeks.

Canada isn't safe. It relies too much on the USA, if the USA turns against it or if the USA is unwilling to defend Canada when Canada gets attacked, it is doomed. Canada must get nuclear weapons. Then no one would dare invade it no matter the profits because Canada could retaliate with a nuclear strike. I'm surprised that Canada doesn't have nuclear weapons. France, the UK, China, and Russia all have them so why not Canada?

It's time for Canada to get nukes to ensure it is secure. It's time for Canada to join the world's elite and prestigious club of nations, a club whose individual members have the capability to destroy entire cities and forests with the click of a button. It's time for Canada to get some of that glory and power. Now is the time to do it, when war is looming, it will be too late.

What do you think NSG? Is it time for Canada to go nuclear?


Well, you're right that if anyone is going to invade canada, it's going to be the US. We're not really in any danger from china or russia or any other country except the one we share a border with, that also happens to have the largest, most powerful military in the world, which also happens to have the idea that canada already belongs to them anyway. If they ever want something we have and we say no, they're gonna just come in and take it.

They've not gone and seized your CANDU reactors yet, so clearly not.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Rehansu Tir
Diplomat
 
Posts: 801
Founded: Jul 27, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Rehansu Tir » Tue Jul 22, 2014 8:52 am

Imperializt Russia wrote:Well, you're right that if anyone is going to invade canada, it's going to be the US. We're not really in any danger from china or russia or any other country except the one we share a border with, that also happens to have the largest, most powerful military in the world, which also happens to have the idea that canada already belongs to them anyway. If they ever want something we have and we say no, they're gonna just come in and take it.

They've not gone and seized your CANDU reactors yet, so clearly not.[/quote]

That's because we'll sell them to anyone who wants them. We even offered to sell them to Iran when they started their nuclear energy program, but they decided they didn't like it - probably because it couldn't be used to create nuclear material for weapons.

But what happens when the US, in the grip of a 10 year drought already and expected to get worse in years to come, comes demanding access to canadian freshwater and we say no? Hello to our new american overlords.
You are a patriotic Social Democrat. 3 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 36 percent are more extremist than you.

Economic Left/Right: -7.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.74

Personal Score 95%
Economic Score 7%
Based on the above score, you are a Hard-Core Liberal .

Your Libertarian Purity Score
26
16-30 points: You are a soft-core libertarian. With effort, you may harden and become pure.

Social Democracy 92%
Anarchism 83%
Democratic Socialism 67%
Marxism 33%
Neoliberalism 25%
Republicanism 25%
Fascism 17%
American Libertarianism 17%
Totalitarianism 0%

Economics Student
54 Keynesian, 31 Chicago, 8 Austrian

User avatar
Imperializt Russia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54847
Founded: Jun 03, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Imperializt Russia » Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:00 am

Of course CANDU is nuclear capable. It's a huge proliferation risk. They're attractive because they produce tritium and plutonium, and can do so from natural uranium, removing the immediate need for a uranium enrichment plant and the huge energy and cost requirements that poses, proliferation risks on top.
Warning! This poster has:
PT puppet of the People's Republic of Samozaryadnyastan.

Lamadia wrote:dangerous socialist attitude
Also,
Imperializt Russia wrote:I'm English, you tit.

User avatar
Othelos
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12729
Founded: Feb 05, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Othelos » Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:05 am

Infected Mushroom wrote:I think that Canada should get nuclear weapons.

Things look like they're pretty crazy down in the US border and some day, the USA might suddenly decide to invade and annex Canada (they've shown their willingness to invade somewhere as far away as Iraq for oil).


Yeah, except we're in a military alliance with Canada, and we've been friends and neighbors for hundreds of years. Not going to happen, ever.

Infected Mushroom wrote:After all, Canada is sitting on top of extremely resource rich land. It has massive reserves of oil, natural gas, and mineral resources. Should the US or another country turn imperial one day, Canada would be a logical target. Its a massive country with a ton of natural resources (and tons of untapped resources in the Canadian North), yet it only has around 34 million people (less people than the tiny island country of the UK), almost all located in easily targetted cities close to the US border. I am NOT exaggerating when I say if the USA wanted to, it could invade and take all of Canada's major cities in a few weeks.

Canada isn't safe. It relies too much on the USA, if the USA turns against it or if the USA is unwilling to defend Canada when Canada gets attacked, it is doomed. Canada must get nuclear weapons. Then no one would dare invade it no matter the profits because Canada could retaliate with a nuclear strike. I'm surprised that Canada doesn't have nuclear weapons. France, the UK, China, and Russia all have them so why not Canada?

It's time for Canada to get nukes to ensure it is secure. It's time for Canada to join the world's elite and prestigious club of nations, a club whose individual members have the capability to destroy entire cities and forests with the click of a button. It's time for Canada to get some of that glory and power. Now is the time to do it, when war is looming, it will be too late.

What do you think NSG? Is it time for Canada to go nuclear?


I think that Canada should have its own nuclear weapons, but not because of defense against the US. The US isn't going to attack canada.
American & German, ich kann auch Deutsch. I have a B.S. in finance.
Pro: Human rights, equality, LGBT rights, socialized healthcare, the EU in theory, green energy, public transportation, the internet as a utility
Anti: Authoritarian regimes and systems, the Chinese government, identity politics, die AfD, populism, organized religion, Erdogan, assault weapon ownership
Free Tibet and Hong Kong | Keep Taiwan Independent

User avatar
United States Kingdom
Minister
 
Posts: 3350
Founded: Jun 24, 2014
Ex-Nation

Postby United States Kingdom » Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:09 am

When the USA has economic problems then we can be able to have nuclear weapons and I am talking about economic problems like the British economic problems that happened after World War II.

User avatar
Risottia
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 54748
Founded: Sep 05, 2006
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby Risottia » Tue Jul 22, 2014 9:11 am

Infected Mushroom wrote:
Pays den haut wrote:If Canada gets nuclear weapons, it will be another good reason for Québec to separate. And by the way Stephen Harper eats in US hands, US don't have to invade them.


why would Quebec seperate if Canada becomes more powerful?

Because the RCMPw/nukes refused to implement dual-language labelling on the launch buttons. ;)
Statanist through and through.
Evilutionist Atheist Crusadjihadist. "Darwinu Akhbar! Dawkins vult!"
Founder of the NSG Peace Prize Committee.
I'm back.
SUMMER, BLOODY SUMMER!

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Duvniask, Necroghastia, Perikuresu, Querria

Advertisement

Remove ads