Should the USA nuke the opposing countries and trouble spots?

Question

Just get rid of the trouble and take over the countries to profit the ameriacn people.

Answer 1

probably not but im not ruling it out as an option

Answer 2

probably not it would blow back up in our faces

Answer 3

Ya know. I've been asking that question to myself and others for the last 9 years. As nike says.. JUST DO IT.

Answer 4

That would probably be a disaster.  Atomic wepeons have only been used in combat twice and that was back during world war 2.  We have operated under the concept of MAD for a good while now and it has done well .  MAD stand for mutually asurred distruction.  So if we use nukes chances are someone will get mad and use them on us so no one wins.  So i would say keep things conventional.  

Answer 5

If I asked you to shut up, would I be a hypocrite?

Of course not; where does this ridiculous idea come from.

Answer 6

Are you kidding me!?!  What good for mankind would a nuclear winter do?  Are you George W. Bush in disguise?  Nuking another country would cause more harm than good.  The reason for this is that if you bomb a country, their allies could in turn bomb the h**l out of us.  Thus, there are nuclear warheads in the skyline and ALL of man kind is gone.  Nuking someone to obtain power will open up a horrifying Pandora's Box.  

Answer 7

No, only as a last resort.

Answer 8

h**l no. Once you declare nuclear war, it's over. If we just go around nuking people the UN and other nations will take retaliatory actions.

Answer 9

No. The idea would fit right in with Germany in 1938.