Nuclear weapons

[Rippounet]

33 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

I hope they only proceed with diligence and an abundance of caution.

Of course. When has humanity not proceeded with diligence and caution?

[ants]

On 1/25/2020 at 10:28 AM, Varysblackfyre321 said:

I’m curious to your rationale for such a stance.

I’m very much with Lex Luther that land is one of the greatest assets, and I think that will become even more true into the future. Australia has a lot of land. Although a lot of it currently isn’t viable, if we were willing to cause environmental impact/habitat destruction a lot more would be (eg during WWII the Japanese had a plan to pump millions of gallons of desalinated water into the desert interior). 
 

Australia is currently very dependent on the US if any aggressor decided to invade. I think that is a fool’s proposition, and forces us into supporting wars such as Iraq and Vietnam.  Having our own nuclear deterrent would give Australia military independence, leading us to be involved in less wars, be safer, be more independent and hence have more options diplomatically. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

58 minutes ago, ants said:

I’m very much with Lex Luther that land is one of the greatest assets, and I think that will become even more true into the future. Australia has a lot of land. Although a lot of it currently isn’t viable, if we were willing to cause environmental impact/habitat destruction a lot more would be (eg during WWII the Japanese had a plan to pump millions of gallons of desalinated water into the desert interior). 
 

Australia is currently very dependent on the US if any aggressor decided to invade. I think that is a fool’s proposition, and forces us into supporting wars such as Iraq and Vietnam.  Having our own nuclear deterrent would give Australia military independence, leading us to be involved in less wars, be safer, be more independent and hence have more options diplomatically. 

Not sure if you are joking or being serious, but if the latter, then I agree with this position. Land is indeed the ultimate finite resource on planet Earth, and Australia has a lot of it. In the future, much more of it will be useful, with mass desalination and pumping of water into the interior.

China is the big threat, of course, and should the US implode or lose its ability to protect Australia you really don’t have a chance against an aggressor of that size in a conventional war.

Nuclear weapons would provide the security needed to keep them at bay.

[Impmk2]

3 hours ago, ants said:

I’m very much with Lex Luther that land is one of the greatest assets, and I think that will become even more true into the future. Australia has a lot of land. Although a lot of it currently isn’t viable, if we were willing to cause environmental impact/habitat destruction a lot more would be (eg during WWII the Japanese had a plan to pump millions of gallons of desalinated water into the desert interior). 
 

Australia is currently very dependent on the US if any aggressor decided to invade. I think that is a fool’s proposition, and forces us into supporting wars such as Iraq and Vietnam.  Having our own nuclear deterrent would give Australia military independence, leading us to be involved in less wars, be safer, be more independent and hence have more options diplomatically. 

Having nuclear weapons just makes Australia a much larger target in any kind of exchange, especially as we're seen as a US regional proxy. No one is seriously considering invading, nor has anyone any time in modern history (Japanese plans in WW2 were drawn up by mid-level commanders and immediately shot down as unfeasible by their leaders, which didn't stop it being used as allied propaganda). There's no scenario short of WW3 and a total invasion of SE Asia where anyone would even think about it. At that point everyone is pretty much fucked.

Then you have to consider what Australia developing nukes would mean for the region. Would it make (for example) Indonesia feel insecure? What if it triggers a regional nuclear arms race? More idiots with a button to push. More unstable semi-democracies to lose control of their weapons.

Then there's that it would just be another nuclear arsenal to fall into the hands of an idiot like Trump. We elected Abbot ffs. So again, more nukes just makes the whole world a far less safe place.

Bad, bad, bad plan.