Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More dangerous than having nuclear weapons, is holding the notion that using them can have some sort of beneficial outcome. The guy is unhinged and I would trust him about as far as I can throw a grand piano with one arm tied behind my back.
You could say exactly the same about the guy currently residing in the White House:
Trump's New 'Low-Yield' Nuclear Weapon: Two Bad Ideas Rolled into One
This is just a ploy to get aid from USA make trump look good, they were going any further with the Nuc missiles.More dangerous than having nuclear weapons, is holding the notion that using them can have some sort of beneficial outcome. The guy is unhinged and I would trust him about as far as I can throw a grand piano with one arm tied behind my back.
They situations are not very equivalent.
And the current US President isn't really behind the US consideration of these sorts of weapons. It runs deeper.
The thing to be worried about with the US move on low yield weapons is that it shows a shift in thinking as to how things are going to play over the next few decades. After a relatively quiescent 25 years things may change. There were plenty of low and variable yield weapons ('tactical' nukes) about during the cold war. Their numbers and variety diminished during from the 90s.
I wouldn't be surprised if the UK wasn't quietly and seriously thinking about these things. We gave up the WE177 family of weapons by the late nineties.
development of these "low-yield" weapons is at odds with three decades of carefully negotiated nuclear de-escalation by his predecessors.
Depleted Uranium shells used (recently) in tank warfare are a type of Nuclear weapon. They leave radioactive contamination on the battlefield long after the troops have gone home. Kosovo, Kuwait.....
I agree.You could say exactly the same about the guy currently residing in the White House:
Trump's New 'Low-Yield' Nuclear Weapon: Two Bad Ideas Rolled into One
They are not considered a nuclear weapon since no reaction takes place. They just use a radioactive substance to pierce armour.
A bit like the EU then [emoji23]I don't trust him.
This has happened before, his dad came out all nice and smiley and met then South Korean leader to gather support and stop sanctions, when the money starts flowing in again, he carried on what he was doing.
He basically has no money and he wants us to be charitable so he can use it to destroy us.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.