Go back
Why dont we bomb New Zealand

Why dont we bomb New Zealand

Debates

Clock
2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Clock
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Sicilian Smaug
?
With inter-continental missiles armed with 5 megaton thermonuclear bombs. Just to see if they'l travel that far.
Brilliant!!!


Unfortunately, the next target on the list is you.


Do you like apples?

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Sicilian Smaug
No, does your mother?
Not particularly, she's fond of many fruits.


Perhaps... even you.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

It's extreme but if it takes out scottishinnz I say "Let's do it!"

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Wajoma
It's extreme but if it takes out scottishinnz I say "Let's do it!"
You know Waj, I'm so glad I apparently annoy you so much. The stress will kill you long before me.

Clock
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Sicilian Smaug
?
With inter-continental missiles armed with 5 megaton thermonuclear bombs. Just to see if they'l travel that far.
Because a single nuke costs 20 million dollars? Why spend more to get rid of a pesky zit than it's worth?

hmmm. Is this a test? svw wanders off thinking it must be a trick question.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Why dont we bomb New Zealand?

Because the French already have!

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by invigorate
Why dont we bomb New Zealand?

Because the French already have!
Pre-emptive strike against me (admittedly I was only 5 at the time, and lived on the other side of the planet), all for the sake of Wajoma!

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by StarValleyWy
Because a single nuke costs 20 million dollars? Why spend more to get rid of a pesky zit than it's worth?
Read some history and do the math.

We spend a lot more per death than we once did. When Og bashed in his neighbor's head with a rock, killing was nearly free. When archers used much smaller stones and shafts of wood, killing was still cheap. Now we spend thousands and more per death. No one is worth the price we pay to kill them.

A well placed nuke drops the price back down to a few hundred dollars per death (and it gets rid of obnoxious architecture, too).

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Wulebgr

A well placed nuke drops the price back down to a few hundred dollars per death (and it gets rid of obnoxious architecture, too).
In which case, please DO nuke me. Palmerston North could do with the gentrification!

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Hold it, hold it, I take it back, what if some sheep get blown up as well as scottishinnz...

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Wajoma
Hold it, hold it, I take it back, what if some sheep get blown up as well as scottishinnz...
yeah, better just get your sniper rifle out instead....

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by scottishinnz
In which case, please DO nuke me. Palmerston North could do with the gentrification!
it would practically be beautification...

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Sicilian Smaug
?
With inter-continental missiles armed with 5 megaton thermonuclear bombs. Just to see if they'l travel that far.
They are called intercontinental ballistic missiles for a reason, and, like others have said, you would be wasting a lot of money, both in the missiles and in the lost profits from the 100 millions sheep melted by the explosions.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.