DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Nifoziyfar** · 12-04-2010, 01:15 PM

if the US is serious about non proliferation they would simply state "we won't use a nuclear weapon first", why does the US spend 600billion or whatever on defense , station large numbers of troops in the gulf region with airbases, all at taxpayer expense, and always purchase the most high-tech weaponry then? I can't think of any scenario in which a nuclear first strike would be necessary.

The idea is to be able to project force, and that includes nukes. To let anyone know that messing with us means the end of them, and they may not know how we'll do it. If we start telling them what we will and wont do, you lose that edge. But like I said, I cant beleive anyone actually thinks we would use them first or at all. Its just another tool in our box.

12-04-2010, 01:15 PM	#7
Nifoziyfar Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 423 Senior Member	if the US is serious about non proliferation they would simply state "we won't use a nuclear weapon first", why does the US spend 600billion or whatever on defense , station large numbers of troops in the gulf region with airbases, all at taxpayer expense, and always purchase the most high-tech weaponry then? I can't think of any scenario in which a nuclear first strike would be necessary. The idea is to be able to project force, and that includes nukes. To let anyone know that messing with us means the end of them, and they may not know how we'll do it. If we start telling them what we will and wont do, you lose that edge. But like I said, I cant beleive anyone actually thinks we would use them first or at all. Its just another tool in our box.
	Quote