Slashdot Mirror


How About a Nice Game of Global Thermonuclear War?

Loconut1389 writes "According to the Washington Post, the Pentagon has a revised doctrine to be signed in the next few weeks would give the president the authority for a preemptive nuclear strike. I would hope that this is a move designed to say we mean business and then never use it, but the means is there for mutual assured destruction."

13 of 1,859 comments (clear)

  1. Doesn't anybody remember the W.O.P.R. by Loconut1389 · · Score: 5, Funny

    My original submission was early this morning and also had a few extras like "Doesnt anybody remember the W.O.P.R.?

    1. Re:Doesn't anybody remember the W.O.P.R. by cloudmaster · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm inclined to believe that This one is more likely.

  2. I believe you meant... by bluesoul88 · · Score: 5, Funny

    A preemptive nukular strike, sir.

  3. It's OK... by MBCook · · Score: 5, Funny

    As long as no other country builds an automatic retaliation system without telling us. I wonder where that idea would come from?

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  4. Re:Bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    you know, I think I saw some shifty looking Arab type (they all look the same, and are evildoers, arent they?) hanging around Crawford and Cheney's new multi-million dollar house. I recommend we pre-emptively nuke those two sites, just in case. I think I even saw some WMD around there! I have satellitely photos proving all this!

  5. Republican obsession with the Nuclear Option by NetSettler · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is this really necessary? Can't we just threaten to place our enemies under the protection of FEMA? That seems to achieve the mass casualty effect just fine, and yet the environmental mess it creates will only take a few decades to clear...

    --

    Kent M Pitman
    Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

  6. Re:hmm, mutually assured destruction... by failure-man · · Score: 5, Funny

    Probably. It's never a good idea to give people who think the end of the world would be a good thing the means to end the world.

    We all very well may die because a fucking cult wants to bring about the events in their "revalations." AN ACID TRIP IN A BOOK FULL OF FAIRY TALES.

    Although, if we go like that then our extinction may well be for the best . . . . .

  7. Not exactly... by Xerxus · · Score: 3, Funny

    It was a project funded by DARPA. These "shells" are fired from a mobile walking tank's rail guns. Theoretically, it could fire a nuke that is untracable and therefore cannot be stopped.

    Summary : Metal Gear?!?

  8. Stump him with Tic Tac Toe by Goalie_Ca · · Score: 4, Funny

    May we can stump bush with Tic Tac Toe. He'll realize he can never win!

    --

    ----
    Go canucks, habs, and sens!
  9. Re:Hmmm by rlp · · Score: 4, Funny

    Slashdot has migrated from tech news to "Tech News and Anything We Can Bitch At Bush Over"

    Next topic - Is George Bush adversely affecting the frame rate of graphics card?

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  10. Re:Once upon a time... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have heard rumors that authority to use atomic shells was (to be) vested in field commanders, possibly as low as the regiment level.

    I think the lowest level for authorizing nuclear attacks should be Air Force Colonels, provided that their bodily fluids are pure.

  11. Re:Uh? by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 4, Funny
    Thinking instead of mindlessly repeating the garbage that some anti-war hippy is telling you might be smart.

    Gentlemen, gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the war room!

    --
    http://www.rootstrikers.org/
  12. Don't worry, they got him on the fine print by Phat_Tony · · Score: 4, Funny
    Shhh... don't tell Bush, but there's nothing for us to fear.

    The Pentagon only gave gave him exactly what he asked for: the capability to order a "nucular" first strike.

    --
    Can anyone tell me how to set my sig on Slashdot?