test the nuclear question i've been concerned about this issue since i was a kid and had

to 'duck and cover' with air-raid sirens blaring testing the warning system relating to nuclear exchange with Russia. ^^ As if our desks would protect us from a nuclear bomb. Right. Eventually, administration 'got it' or realized the threat was not as immanent as proclaimed.. Or perhaps the propaganda against Russia fizzled out.. Who really cares .. American government seems to think it can control other sovereign nations whether or not they can have nuclear capability. Whether through Israel or directly, we feel we can dictate to other countries if they can have 'the bomb'. When i was a teenager, Israel bombed some nuclear facilities of a nearby 'threatening' neighbor. Who really cares where it was; the fact was: Israel/America was dictating nuclear policy. i'm curious about the question: if a country decides to develop nuclear weaponry, will America decide to overtly intervene? Will they try to 'take out' that capability militarily? My contention is: we should. Why? Everyone knows i'm a pacifist.. Why would a pacifist advocate military action? To test the international stage regarding American confidence about dictating nuclear policy. If we invade another country, say Iran or North Korea, to permanently disable their nuclear capability, and if that same country uses nuclear weapons to defend itself, i'm curious if international sympathy would reside with the invading Americans or the defending sovereign nation? ^^ i'm guessing the sovereign nation and so America has acted through Israel in the past (in order to try to hide the true identity of the attacker).. But with awareness like this, we won't be able to do that again.. If Israel or America decides to invade a country on a preemptive strike to disable nuclear capability, the whole world will be watching this time. If the country uses nuclear weapons to defend themselves against Israeli/American attack, more power to 'em. Fuck American arrogance. Elect Romney president; start WWIII. It's pretty clear his stance on a nuclear Iran. If Romney becomes president, it will be 'the end of the world'. Romney's clearly more extreme than Bush. He had the gall to invade Iraq. What would stop Romney from invading Iran? Nothing. Wake the f up America; elect somebody like Ron Paul. He alone has the voice of reason in this insane babble of clawing vultures. [he] Now i know why 2012 has been cited as 'the end of the world' [he] As far as i'm concerned, Romney's the Antichrist. Test the nuclear question; force international perspective to see what barbarians Americans truly are. Video version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9JMSOXSm-Q