British Expatriate Network

Okay, all you experts out there. someone is going to have to explain to me why is there such an outcry at Obama's comments on nuclear weapons. Why will this hurt his run for presidency? What is wrong with saying that there is no excuse for using nuclear weapons against civilians?

Surely this should be a good thing. Or am I being too non-American?

Taken in the context of all his statements on foriegh affairs it goes to show concern (of his own partys well as republicans ) on his lack of experiance in world matters .

example... his statement that if president musharraf (pakistan ) didnt eliminate the terrorist that train and live within his borders , the united states would invade and do the job themselves .


My opinion is he will eventually team with hillary clinton to be vice president elec and that would be a formidable team for the republican party to defeat ...

Didn't he say that he wouldn't use nukes in any circumstance? Does that mean if someone lobbed a couple of nukes our way, then he wouldn't retaliate? I find that to be a problem. I haven't read up on it, so it might be a case of Fox News types taking his comments out of context.

I also had a problem with him sponsoring an amendment that let employers off lightly who employ illegals. The employers are the exact people they should be going after.

I just don't know about Obama. My choice for prez would be John Edwards, but if it came to it, I would vote for Hillary over him.

Yes well, a Presidential candidate (let alone the actual President) should never announce that he will never push the button and therefore undermine the deterrent of it. That's just nuts. But hey, he's playing to the crowd - it's just harder to do that nowadays.

The context was Al Quaeda. Does anyone actually think that a nuke would be appropriate, the civilian deaths would alienate the world, and rightly so.

"Obama was responding to a question by the Associated Press about whether there was any circumstance where he would be prepared or willing to use nuclear weapons in Afghanistan and Pakistan to defeat terrorism and al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden."

http//www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/08/03/politics/main3130942.shtml

But you can't discount use in any circumstance. What if a bunch of wackos sympathetic to Al Qaeda launch a coup on the Pakistani government and overrun the government and suddenly have nukes themselves. I wouldn't support a pre-emptive strike for any reason, but what if they start lobbing nukes around themselves?

you should never say never as they say. You just never know. I don't want some nut job in, that loops a nuc at the first sight of trouble without searching out other avenues first of all.

http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Zs2DCA9W7s&mode=related&search=

Perhaps, but you don't say out loud that you are, unilaterally, prepared to lay a nuke on a friendly country, unless you want to make it unfriendly. If you look, you will see that every country that gained the nuke, grew up, became reliable. It's what happens when you gain the confidence that most countries in the world are scared to attack you.

I don't know what in hell that video proves, it's a bunch of old rubbish.

The USA didn't.

sure and the USSR did ( become reliable hehehe ) and so has PARKISTAN .. CHINA they have nuke capabilities to .. it really depends on who hold power in said countries .

and had not nukes been used in ww2 japan and germany might have had them also .. to the winner the spoils

when was the last time Pakistan invaded a soveriegn nation for no good reason?

it took awhile but even the USSR realized no good could come from being in Afghanistan.


Whilst I admit that the USA has a mighty military........... diplomatically it cannot hold a candle to Honduras.
That's what I meant by growing up.

is any country a friendly country? Iraq was on our side when fighting Iran. Russia was on our side when fighting Germany. It really all depends on the time, the place and the leader.

What would the US have said if the UK took hostle action against Southern Ireland,saying they supported terrorist action?

Well yeah, I mean that dick Tom Tamcredo (or whatever he is called) has said that as a detterent to terrorists he said we should bomb Mecca and Medina.

Thats akin to Thatcher saying "if another IRA bomb goes off in London, we'll bomb the vatican"

The USA has just not grown up yet diplomatically.

manc has offically posted the under statment of 2007.

Bang bang manc is back in the house lol