Recruits
Moderator:Æron
Because it's just not wise to give the mental patient a knife, let alone a gun.Even IF they are building nukes, so what? They have a right. It's technology, and no-one has a patent on destruction...if they want to build doomsday machines that might accidentally blow us all to hell, I say why not let them...hell, what's a few more nukes in the hands of nut-jobs?
Especially when that patient has no concern for lost life, both of themself and others.
Asuna Kagurazaka, Negima Magister Nyoro~nEgi Magi
No apology necessary.My apologies. I visit only one political website and that's a blog not a forum. I'm not very inclined to talk about politics. Though I have changed my mind on one particularly volatile political issue, with my own accord, but people from the internet contributed to my change of mind no doubt.
From my personal experience, pretty much ANYTHING can be discussed on the internet, in a calm sane friendly intelligent manner, EXCEPT for politics. Why? I have no idea. It's just an observation backed by years of experience.Oh! Of course there are exceptions. Maybe this board is one? If so, that would rock. But I am still scared. I have seen the coolest people in the world reduced to total incomprehensible tardbabble because of political internet discussions. Myself included. Heck, I once forced several popular members of the aforementioned board (the one I was admin at for awhile) to leave forever.
I think it's cool that you found an intelligent political discussion, and that it caused you to think and change your mind. All I'm saying is, from my personal experience, this is the exception and not the rule.
well duhAt one point among that lengthy among other things response, you mentoned heat damage hurting equipment. Heat damage is among the least of US/"coalition" forces worries.(FC attacks with wall of text! It's super effective!)
but is still a concern. If your vehicle breaks down in the middle of a hot zone, that repair job from before seems a little less trivial. Also, 'twas a counter attack 
like a wobbafet (sp?)I will, thank youRight. Don't stop believing. Hold on to that feeeeeel-ing.With 20 years to hide it, assuming he still had it, do you really think we could uncover it in such a short time? I still hold to the possibility of finding something buried deep underground in silos we've yet to discover sometime in the late game.
all that sarcasm in that statement of yours aside.If you've done things right, people won't be sure if you've done anything at all.
-
Tom Flapwell
- Posts:5465
- Joined:Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:48 pm
- Location:DC
- Contact:
I have the dubious fortune to recognize Japan's TV personality Hard Gay there, and I'm guessing the repeated icons above are from the short-lived Super Mario Bros. Shampoo bottles.
See other much-maligned creatures in my webcomic: http://downscale.comicgenesis.com
See, with thinking like that NO bloody wonder they hate us so much.Because it's just not wise to give the mental patient a knife, let alone a gun.Even IF they are building nukes, so what? They have a right. It's technology, and no-one has a patent on destruction...if they want to build doomsday machines that might accidentally blow us all to hell, I say why not let them...hell, what's a few more nukes in the hands of nut-jobs?
Especially when that patient has no concern for lost life, both of themself and others.
When you've vowed to destroy Israel and have a belief system more or less that of a crusader, no, you shouldn't be given capabilities for one of the most deadly and destruction weapon systems ever known to man.See, with thinking like that NO bloody wonder they hate us so much.Because it's just not wise to give the mental patient a knife, let alone a gun.
Especially when that patient has no concern for lost life, both of themself and others.
Asuna Kagurazaka, Negima Magister Nyoro~nEgi Magi
Lunatics have had atomic weapons for years. The Soviets have them, the Indians and Pakistanis are at war and both have them...why not Iran?When you've vowed to destroy Israel and have a belief system more or less that of a crusader, no, you shouldn't be given capabilities for one of the most deadly and destruction weapon systems ever known to man.See, with thinking like that NO bloody wonder they hate us so much.Because it's just not wise to give the mental patient a knife, let alone a gun.
Especially when that patient has no concern for lost life, both of themself and others.
I mean, hell...only one country has ever detonated them on live targets...and I'll trust their say-so on "who gets them" last.
Hear Hear!I mean, hell...only one country has ever detonated them on live targets...and I'll trust their say-so on "who gets them" last.
And those targets were cities filled with civilians, not military targets. The whole concept of using the Bomb on the Japanese wasn't to destroy their military facilities or equipment, but to scare the shit out of the population by slaughtering some of them in an unprecedented show of power.
I'd consider it the greatest terrorist attack that has ever occured, and don't give me that bullshit definition of terrorism with all these requirements and crap.
Terrorism is simply the act of terrorising the population to achieve an end, like what the US did to Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
I don't think that pressuring Iran and threatening to take military action against it is going to stop it from developing WMDs, it'll just give it all the more reason. The US makes itself easier to hate by acting like it's the only show in town, and manages to gain support for its enemies. People start to believe that US is the Great Satan when it starts trying to push them around. Iran is a messed up place, but I don't think egging them on is gonna help.
And we saw what happened when the lunatics had them; that entire Cold War thing. These nuclear weapons should never go in the hands of anyone that might ever use them. The only reason why I can call Hiroshima/Nagasaki an exception is both because then, we had no clue of their true devestation and the circumstances of that specific scenario. We found out, and never have used them again. They're literally terrible, and the only use those weapons have in the world is to prevent them from ever being used since it's too late to undo their existance. However, with people like Kim Jong Il and Ahmenejad, we're not sure that would be the case which is why we're against them having the capability at all. "We" referring to the UN and all its member nations, not just US.Lunatics have had atomic weapons for years. The Soviets have them, the Indians and Pakistanis are at war and both have them...why not Iran?When you've vowed to destroy Israel and have a belief system more or less that of a crusader, no, you shouldn't be given capabilities for one of the most deadly and destruction weapon systems ever known to man.
I mean, hell...only one country has ever detonated them on live targets...and I'll trust their say-so on "who gets them" last.
Also Comrade, the only reason why the government of Iran (do not confuse the government of a nation with its people) is because of the support we gave to the Shah against the Ayatollah. The Shah of Iran was restructuring the nation to be more western, including giving women the right to vote. The Ayatollah didn't like that and revolted, and we decided against supporting a fundamentalist Islamic Republic against the already established government which was pro-west and working towards better human and civil rights. Unfortunately, the Shah lost and the Ayatollahs know how to hold a grudge.
Regarding the terrorism of the United States during WWII, yeah, we know. We study it. We learn it. The common sentiment is that it was the best way to end the war for both the US and Japan. We considered warning them with a demonstration of the effects of the bomb on a nearby island. However, if we did that, they could have transported US prisoners of war to that island or shot down the plane, bomb, etc. We considered not using it at all, and decided that given the costs of invading Okinawa and Iwo Jima, to actually land on mainland Japan would have been a bloodbath beyond any seen in the Pacific, for both US and Japanese forces, including civilians. We considered only dropping one, and we did. They didn't surrender. We dropped another. They didn't surrender. Only when Russia began an offensive against Japan did Hirohito give up the ghost and surrender.
Was it wrong? Yes.
Did it kill civilians? Yes. Duh.
Did it save American lives? Yes.
Did it save Japanese lives? Yes.
More lives than were lost in both blasts? We assume so, and can only hope that we assume correctly.
Is it cold? Unbelievably so.
Asuna Kagurazaka, Negima Magister Nyoro~nEgi Magi
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests