Board Thread:Fun and Games/@comment-25973561-20150314083225/@comment-25672535-20150320225235

TheDwarvenGuy wrote: Narvin wrote: Unrealistic, first China will not be able to invade, why? First we would have sati lite images of their fleet heading out to attack us, they can't just teleport, then we can fire off all of our thousands of nuclear warheads at China, we have predator drones and an insane amount of technology. Also a lot of people here are very ignorant of the world. Firstly China is a communism, and the people are all happy and secondly China is also a developing country. And the most obvious whopper is why would all of our troops be over seas. The government despite its stupid ideas can still think. They wouldn't leave our country open to attack. Also you forget that America has lots of allies who would support us in a theoretical war with another country. Fire our nukes? If we fired all of our nukes:

A. Welcome to nuclear winter, population everyone.

B. All of our nukes means that russia would probably fire all of their in retaliation for the nuclear attack on their ally. so russia would come out on top with us nukeless.

C. Predator drone can't do much in the way of a world war, where the enemy has fighter jets.

Uh, do you know what a predator drone even is? You know what forget it, I am one of the only ones here who probably watches fox, nbc cnn bbc and other biased and non biased news channels and actually knows **** about what is going on and has a accurate knowledge of U.N NATO and other stuff like that. So... I have already found a hundred holes in your argument as well as mine, I forgot about lazers, and other anti missile tech, as well as the fact that Russia and China wouldn't be able to invade the US and launching nuclear missiles would kind of mean the end of the country that launched them. Realistically know can launch ICBMs without the rest of the world among there's twoards you. So I really don't care if you have another argument I am going to do some research in to it and figure out some accurate information, not some rumours are unrealistic scenarios to defend the right to own military grade weapons. Oh and can you come up with a counter argument to my second post bellow the one you just quoted?