Why do you hate Bush?

[Vile Requiem]

It never amazes me that people don't wonder how a 1000 page act winds up in front of congress 2 days after 9/11.

 

1000 page acts don't write themselves in 2 days. The sucker was planned, much like Hillary's 1000+ page long Health Care opus.

 

Congress immediatly after 9/11 would have passed the "Kill 1000 Muslim First Born Sons to spare us Bin Laden's Wrath Act" if anyone had thought it up, that's how not wanting to "look weak" against terrorism they were.

[Dav]

thing i dont get about america is thatr it sits there with coutless nukes and other WMDs, devolps new weaponry and says "communism is evil, we dont like your country". They then wonder why nations like iran and north korea want to make nukes...

 

seems stupid to me, and the WMDs in iraq were sold to them by the americans in the first place!

 

Now here i9s how to rid the world of wmds.

 

America destroys its own nukes and other WMDs, has othwer nations follow then send in the UN to make sure the job is done. Once that has happend they can tell everone else they dont need them get rid of your weapons.

[Nokia]

thing i dont get about america is thatr it sits there with coutless nukes and other WMDs, devolps new weaponry and says "communism is evil, we dont like your country".  They then wonder why nations like iran and north korea want to make nukes...

 

seems stupid to me, and the WMDs in iraq were sold to them by the americans in the first place!

 

Now here i9s how to rid the world of wmds.

 

America destroys its own nukes and other WMDs, has othwer nations follow then send in the UN to make sure the job is done.  Once that has happend they can tell everone else they dont need them get rid of your weapons.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah.. its absolutely rediculous how if some country wants to set up a nuclear power station they have to ask permission from america. The yanks will probably tell them it needs to be installed by a qualified US oil company (the oil will run out in a few years so they are trying to make sure the oil companies wont go bust after it runs out). If you are a America Approved® nation then you can build nukes all you like, getting approved probably has something to do with how many american multinationals you allow into your country to leech it of all its money and how many windows® licenses in the country. having the government comps run linux will probably get you modded down closer to the "rogue nation" list.

 

Of course if you do manage to get America Approved® and you do have an army with some decent equipment you are expected to join in any silly wars america starts to do with fear, revenge, oil or copyright laws. Just see what happend the french, its not like america was occupied by the iraqi's who were throwing american babies into shredders and the french were just sitting there twiddling their thumbs.

[MasterDrake]

thing i dont get about america is thatr it sits there with coutless nukes and other WMDs, devolps new weaponry and says "communism is evil, we dont like your country".  They then wonder why nations like iran and north korea want to make nukes...

I can see your point there, but currently our suppl of nukes are degrading over the years and we need new ones to keep going.

 

seems stupid to me, and the WMDs in iraq were sold to them by the americans in the first place!

 

Yes, because you know I have a whole stock pile of nukes in my backyard that I sell like christmas trees.

 

Now here i9s how to rid the world of wmds.

 

America destroys its own nukes and other WMDs, has othwer nations follow then send in the UN to make sure the job is done.  Once that has happend they can tell everone else they dont need them get rid of your weapons.

Hah, bad idea lets get rid of our nukes then everyone can ethier A. Nuke the !@#$%^&* out of us or B invade because currently our forces are occupying another country.

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah.. its absolutely rediculous how if some country wants to set up a nuclear power station they have to ask permission fro

m america. The yanks will probably tell them it needs to be installed by a qualified US oil company (the oil will run out in a few years so they are trying to make sure the oil companies wont go bust after it runs out). If you are a America Approved® nation then you can build nukes all you like, getting approved probably has something to do with how many american multinationals you allow into your country to leech it of all its money and how many windows® licenses in the country. having the government comps run linux will probably get you modded down closer to the "rogue nation" list.

 

Of course if you do manage to get America Approved® and you do have an army with some decent equipment you are expected to join in any silly wars america starts to do with fear, revenge, oil or copyright laws. Just see what happend the french, its not like america was occupied by the iraqi's who were throwing american babies into shredders and the french were just sitting there twiddling their thumbs.

 

Your a !@#$%^&*ing idiot I revoke your talking privilages.

[Dav]

I can see your point there, but currently our suppl of nukes are degrading over the years and we need new ones to keep going.

 

or just let them run out, TBH the US has such advanced weapons nukes are not necaccary anymore.

 

Yes, because you know I have a whole stock pile of nukes in my backyard that I sell like christmas trees.

at one point the US likes saddam, sold him some shiny new WMDs to defend his country from attack (moreover the ameicans oil supply)

 

Hah, bad idea lets get rid of our nukes then everyone can ethier A. Nuke the !@#$%^&* out of us or B invade because currently our forces are occupying another country.

 

Ill give you that, its an extreeme comment but it just illustrates the reality pof the situation. Alot of countries are devolping WMDs so thay have sometghing to trhow back at the US if neccacary, think about it.

 

You are a poor underdevoped non democratic nation and america doesnt like you. America had all the most advanced weponry and a huge army, you have nothing close. In fear you want something HUGE just to give you a remote chance of being left alone, what do you do? Make a nuke so if america throws onw your way you can send one back.

 

Iran were quoted to say "if we are interfeared with we will steap up our nucular program" traslated "leave us the !@#$%^&* alone to get on with our own lives"

 

 

 

 

Yeah.. its absolutely rediculous how if some country wants to set up a nuclear power station they have to ask permission fro

m america. The yanks will probably tell them it needs to be installed by a qualified US oil company (the oil will run out in a few years so they are trying to make sure the oil companies wont go bust after it runs out). If you are a America Approved® nation then you can build nukes all you like, getting approved probably has something to do with how many american multinationals you allow into your country to leech it of all its money and how many windows® licenses in the country. having the government comps run linux will probably get you modded down closer to the "rogue nation" list.

 

Prehaps a bit OTT but it does seem that internation relations with the US can govern what you can and cat do in terms of weaponry.

[MonteZuma]

Dunno. Nuclear energy is one thing, but I think it is important that Iran does not have the capacity to make nuclear weapons. But, if Israel did not have nuclear weapons, I think that Iran wouldn't care to have them either.

 

I have no idea what should be done about Iran and the nuclear reactor.

[Aileron]

pfft...countries like Iran don't think of nukes in a defensive way. If they had nukes and Israel did not have any and didn't have any allies who had any, they would nuke Israel as soon as the wind was blowing the right way.

 

I'm positive of this. I'm moderately right-wing and I can think like that - How would a fundimentalist theocracy compaire to me? We should by no means allow Iran to build nukes.

 

I honestly do believe in this case that Iran might be after power and not after weapons - though we can't take chances with this. I just hope the Russian bueracacy is up to this.

 

btw, Iran had to ask the US to build nukes because the UN isn't doing their job at the moment.

[PoLiX]

seems stupid to me, and the WMDs in iraq were sold to them by the americans in the first place!

 

Yes, because you know I have a whole stock pile of nukes in my backyard that I sell like christmas trees.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Watch Uncle Suddam sometime. We helped him rise to the top, and then gave him weapons to wage war on Iran. Rather then us doing it and having the blood on our hands, we decided to let someone else take the blame and do it for us. It was around the time that Suddam's family began doing crazy things that he began losing it.

 

His brother-in-laws and one of his uncles (or cousins, can't remember) were the ones that began all the killing and torchering. Suddam just never tried to stop or fix it, !@#$%^&*, never had the time with the US always on his back, so he ended up with the blame of it.

 

Suddam just kind of lost it cause his entire family basically began turning on him, and even went as far as locking his own wife away.

 

 

Just like Bush, anything other people do, even if you have no part in it, you end up with the full blame of. But we just can't see that from another point of view until we take our heads out of our !@#$%^&*es and really think about it.

[PoLiX]

I still don't like Bush, it's just there is some things I agree he had no part in and gets the blame for. It's just the personal family issues that make me still hold a grudge on him.

[MonteZuma]

pfft...countries like Iran don't think of nukes in a defensive way.

I think they do. Middle Eastern countries obviously feel threatened by Israel - and the US.

 

If they had nukes and Israel did not have any and didn't have any allies who had any, they would nuke Israel as soon as the wind was blowing the right way.

I think that Iran would not strike at Israel with nuclear weapons out of fear of US retaliation. I do agree though, that Iran cannot be trusted with nuclear weapons. But the problem is, they think that the US and Israel can't be trusted with them.

 

btw, Iran had to ask the US to build nukes because the UN isn't doing their job at the moment.

Iran wanted the US to build nuclear weapons?

[Dr Brain]

Wrong, monte. They aren't afraid of the US and Israel with nukes. After all, the last time anyone was nuked by us was 60 years ago, and I doubt that number is in any danger of shrinking.

 

The only way we will ever nuke someone is if they nuke us. That means the only time Iran should fear us is when they HAVE nukes, not the other way around.

 

They want nukes so that they get a barganing chip in world affairs. They want to play with the big boys.

 

cgsfss, when did the United States of America nuke it's own population? We've detonated nuclear weapons on our own soil from time to time, but to my knowledge, no people were ever killed. When we detonated our first H-Bomb, I think there were some cases of radiation poisoning among the seamen, but other than that, I do not know what you are talking about.

[MonteZuma]

Wrong, monte. They aren't afraid of the US and Israel with nukes.

I don't think that they are afraid of an unprovoked nuclear attack.

 

But I think that they feel that the US and Israel tries to exercise too much control and influence in the region. I think that they feel that if the US or Israel decide that they disagree with some Iranian policy or action that the US might decide to conventionally attack Iran and/or remove the current regime (the way they did in Iraq). I think that Iran would like to have nuclear weapons to deter such an attack.

 

But this is all hypothetical. Maybe they just want nuclear power?

 

After all, the last time anyone was nuked by us was 60 years ago, and I doubt that number is in any danger of shrinking.

Probably.

 

But the problem with inductive reasoning is that it can slap you in the face. If farmer Brown enters a chicken coop every day and always leaves his axe hung up on the wall of the coop the chickens eventually learn by inductive reasoning that they have nothing to fear from Farmer Brown or the axe.

 

But if a chicken used deductive reasoning, it might come up with a different conclusion. Farmer Brown has an axe, Farmer Brown eats roast dinners on Sunday nights. The coop next door is now empty. Wtf? The chickens get nervous and decide to get hold of a nuclear weapon to deter Farmer Brown.

 

The only way we will ever nuke someone is if they nuke us. That means the only time Iran should fear us is when they HAVE nukes, not the other way around.

That sounds good in theory, but Iraq was a big lesson in how far the US is prepared to go to eliminate a 'potential' threat. You and I might think that nukes might only be used as a last resort, but it isn't you and me that needs to be convinced. In any case, I don't think that Iran wants nuclear weapons to protect itself from other nuclear weapons. I think they want them as a deterrent to protect and preserve their regime - from conventional attacks.

 

They want nukes so that they get a barganing chip in world affairs. They want to play with the big boys.

Maybe that too. I think most nations want that.

[cgsfss]

They tested the nuke on military personnel?

 

 

By Robert Gehrke, !@#$%^&*ociated Press, 6/30/2003 19:46

WASHINGTON (AP) The Pentagon used potentially dangerous chemical and biological agents in 50 secret tests involving military personnel in a decadelong project to measure the weapons' combat capabilities, according to a Pentagon findings released Monday.

 

The tests were done between 1962 and 1973 and involved 5,842 service members. Many were not told of the tests, some of which involved releases of deadly nerve agents in Alaska and Hawaii.

 

The information released Monday disclosed eight new tests that primarily used nonlethal bacteria and in some cases caustic chemicals. And it revealed for the first time experiments to find ways to use submarines to distribute biological weapons.

[Sass]

Do I like Bush? I agree with the republican way more than the democratic way, however, I don't see Bush as a great leader. I just don't . Reagan was a great leader because he seemed to have more conviction than many other leaders (naturally this helped him put an end to the cold war). But I don't see Bush as someone who really understands what our military is all about.

 

Having been in the military, I can !@#$%^&*ure you that there are a lot of gun toting kids there ready to kill anything that moves. They like to fight, and most likely they will fight any war that our president puts them in. However, the power of our military in both might and technicality seems like it is going over the top. I feel like we are the once Red crimson Russian who was trying to Napoleonize (sp?) their way in the world.

 

I don't want that. I want a leader who knows that our military will annihilate any enemy, but not one who puts us in a war to mediate two sides. There is simply no reason for it. I'm referring to China and Taiwan here fellas. I'm afraid that if we try to save Taiwan, Bush will have effectively destroyed everything he is trying to build....the economy, relations, the world.

 

So yes, I'm a bit pissed at our latest 'state of the union'. Perhaps it is time for getting younger more long term and future thinking adults in to the government. It is really about generation here.

 

So - would I side with Kerry. Ha...no. I'm not into Stalin. I still believe that hard work deserves reward and nothing should come for free.

[Sass]

lol, Monte, no one plays by any rules in engagement. I'll tell em to try. rofl come to reality with us my friend.

 

The only reality of war is this: he who lives by the sword, dies by it.

 

btw, are neutron bombs still in existance?

[MonteZuma]

lol, Monte, no one plays by any rules in engagement.

I've not mentioned any rules of engagement.

 

...But, fwiw, most civilised nations do follow rules. One of those rules is the Geneva Convention.

 

Most uncivilised regimes will follow some sort of code when they are faced with compliance or oblivion.

 

I'll tell em to try.  rofl  come to reality with us my friend.

Who is th"em" and who is "us"?

 

The only reality of war is this: he who lives by the sword, dies by it.

Sometimes. But sometimes he who doesn't have a sword gets reamed by he who does.

 

btw, are neutron bombs still in existance?

Yes.

[MonteZuma]

I've mentioned engagement because you compared sports to war.

Let me rephrase to help you understand:

 

Governments prefer to have a massive military, tactical and technological advantage over their enemies when they go to war. They don't choose to wait until their opponent "is equal to our might". But I'm sure you know how ridiculous your statement was.

 

Shall we move on?

 

Served on the US military have you?

If you are implying that most people in the US military have great knowledge about diplomacy and conflict resolution, and great analytical skills, you are sadly mistaken.

 

The em is the folks that you attempt to brainwash with your leftist view of the world.

If I wanted to be brainwashed, the first thing I would do is join the military.

 

The us are the ones who understand reality.

You shouldn't be so !@#$%^&*sure.

 

My quote was Biblical.

You think that a 2000 year old quote gives your statement credibility?

 

Where did you pull yours from?

It isn't a quote. It is a statement.

 

(Insert explicitive here.)

Huh?

[Phyran]

Iran had a democracy until the CIA threw it down and installed a tyrant because Iran was a little too friendly with British oil companies.

After Iran overthrew the hated tyrant they start calling the U.S. "the great Satan"

[Sass]

lol Monte, since you have never served in any miliary, US or otherwise, I'll excuse your stereotypical at!@#$%^&*ude as nothing but ignorance.

 

The real funny thing is this: why would you discredit a quote from the Bible when infact you have written on your avatar something about 'God's Country'. I'll assume that you are Muslim. But if that were true you should have said almedina alallah.

 

Going to keep trying? You'll need to come out of the kiddie pool, lefty.

[Phyran]

oh, btw cfgss -- the military has a new chemical ready....it hits the enemy with an aphrodisiac so strong that men will stop fighting and start groping each other for some hot sausage -- yes, a chemical that turns soldiers into gays. 

 

better run now, their gonna make u start lovin hot dogs!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

i thought it was a new weapon that causes maximum pain from 20 miles away

[Dav]

S!@#$%^&* i am sure there are poeple in the millatary that are apposed to war.

 

Think about this one for a second, if you leave iran alone then they have no reason why they would want to drop a nuke on you, even if they do decide to launch a nuke you have the most advanced anti weapons systems in the world that will prevent it coming anywhere near you.

 

I vote never attack unless threatend, iraq was never a threat to you or anyone else, iran is the same.

 

 

So what if they biuld a nuke, iran knows it still cant take on the US id it decides to attack but it does know that it has some form of deterrant. Thats all nukes are, a deterrant, a way to make people think twice about starting a war i very much doubt anyone would use one.

 

 

And tell me what is wrong with motes at!@#$%^&*ude, there are other alternatives, help the people rebel and overthrow their leader if he is a tyrant, peace talks negitiations !@#$%^&* even paying them with insentivs. Whats wrong with "we will buy all your stock of a product and set up businesses if you sell us some oil and fix oil prices for the next year" a deal they cant refuse, both people win.

 

If it comes down to it and iran goes in an invation spree and tries to take over other nations, is a true threat to other nations and ALL OTHER OPTIONS HAVE BEEN EXAUSTED WITH NO RESOLVE then almost everyone is in favor of war as at that stage it is absolutly neccacary.

 

 

One message to you pro bush pro iraq people, lets not waste time and money when there are other options, dont irritate other nations with rash decitions and actions when more productive courses of action are available.

 

A quote from micheal moore which i believe to be accurate:

 

The beef that osama has with the US is that the US went to kuate, just so happend its the same reason osama feels saddam is a tyranant.

[Aileron]

Sigh...sorry guys, I've been on 56k for the past week and didn't bother to look up this topic for a while...

 

Nothing productive is coming out of this topic, so I'm locking it.

 

If you want to actually talk about Irani weapons start a new topic without the flames please.