• probably as you're leaders have no respect for this planet or human life. It wont end well for the American people as they don't seam to think ahead like every war they have started in the last 50 years has the US won one yet? Or is people being at war the goal?
    • Jenny The Great ⭐
      Thanks for sharing and for asking. Here you go again, questioning me with accusations. Then when I answer your questions in the comments section, you get very sensitive, start crying and resort to insults. Will the US nuke Iran is a simple Yes or No question. Probably is a good enough answer. My leaders? I was not born in America, but I am curious to know of any nearby future events and opinions.
    • 11stevo73
      if that is the case ,the leaders of Australia will agree its a good idea if they are told to.
    • Jenny The Great ⭐
      One of the clearest examples of Australia and the US working together has been the defence relationship and the symbiotic nature of which ensures an increasing array of information sharing, personnel exchanges and so on. Iranian officials have chanted "Death to America" and "Death to Israel." The US has warned Iran against any regional escalation in the wake of Israel's war with Hamas.
    • 11stevo73
      Why would they chant such things? What has the US done for them to chant that?
    • Jenny The Great ⭐
      Iran is governed by the Islamic Republic, which finds the US and the country's values, as well as international law and customs reprehensible.
    • Urban Spaceman
      Huh? Probably as you are leaders have no respect for this planet or human life? I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense.
  • I doubt it. Nuclear weapons are generally used as a stick to shake at other countries. No one (civilized) wants to actually use them, as it could potentially mark the end of the world.
  • Generally, I'd say no, but if Iran uses them first, all bets are off. 11/8/23
  • Not in the foreseeable future. *** For one thing: using a nuke would have very serious international consequences. And not just the outcry against using such an "inhumane" weapon (one that indiscriminately kills civilians). The much more serious international political problem is that radioactive fallout is not restricted to the target locale, typically not even to the target nation (unless the target nation is very large and the winds happen to be blowing in a direction favorable to the attackers). Nuke Iran and whatever nations have to deal with the resulting radioactive fallout are going to outraged at the U.S. *** We should also remember that "nuclear sub" refers primarily to the nuclear engine, not to the warheads. Any sort of sub can carry a nuclear warhead, not just nuclear subs. Nuclear subs - therefore - are not primarily used or intended to be used to deliver a nuclear attack. Instead, their primary strategic importance is in ***stealth***. They can remain underwater for very lengthy periods of time (compared to diesel powered subs), and can operate very deeply, and the engines are very "quiet" (very, very quiet) compared to diesel powered subs. They can approach the coast of foreign nations without being detected - which, indeed, is useful for launching nukes from a sub, but there are very many other uses of such capability.
  • I certainly hope US doesn't nuke Iran. Not that I'm pro Iran. I am anti any expansion of war.
    • Urban Spaceman
      That's the best way to be.
    • mugwort
      Thanks for your reply. Glad you think so too.
  • Very doubtful unless they attempt a first strike using nuclear weapons. Using nuclear weapons is just too dangerous for the entire world. Only a fool in desperation would consider them. Get and read the book, On The Beach. Although fictional it would give you a good idea what would happen if a nuclear war broke out.
  • I wouldn't have thought so, unless Iran nukes the US first.

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy