PDA

View Full Version : Why Is It Ok For Usa & Uk To Have Wmd?



echidna
05-07-2003, 10:13 AM
so why should the UK and USA be openly packing these weapons, while telling others that they cannot?

the USA maintains that their arsenal is a deterrent [this deterrrent incidentally, seemed to do nothing against the S11 kamikazes], yet it is unreasonable for N Korea to have a [much smaller] similar deterrent

apparently it is reasonable for the USA/UK to wage war against Iraq in the name of disarmament [despite not finding any WMD]

the USA has been blocking anti-testing and anti-missile measures for decades now, so why should we believe that they want [real] disarmament?

why should we be concerned about the nature and actions of other regimes, when the USA blocks the formation of an international criminal court unless the USA gains immunity from war crimes prosecutions in that court?

It seems that the politics of the big stick is the rational, and since the guy with the stick wants everyone in the middle east to drop their sticks except israel [who has a number of the biggest sticks] why should we trust that the USA is equitable in it's aspiration for peace when it wants to hold WMD indefinitely?

j2k4
05-07-2003, 02:43 PM
It is VERY simple.

We sincerely believe our views to be righteous and correct.

We can't avoid appearing arrogant, so we don't waste time trying.

We do have the biggest and best sticks, and we carry them with pride, as (remember) our cause is righteous.

We aren't going to give up our goodies just because YOU think we should; after all, we don't know WHO YOU ARE.

We don't mind if friends (Israel, U.K., etc.) have big sticks, too-we trust their custodial capabilities.

We really get nervous when countries like North Korea become nuclear-capable, because we regard them as politically unstable (remember-the decision is ours to make: big sticks, etc.)

I could go on, but that would be....arrogant?

echidna
05-07-2003, 03:22 PM
So it is purely subjective
do you accept that many people in N Korea might feel the same way about their sticks as you do about the USAs?
both the USA and N Korea have been talking up the fight for years so both should have the right to fear [although i quite sure that the USA is the more fearsome - who have you seen N Korea attack in the last 40 odd years? while i can think of at least 6 nations that the USA has attacked during that time

i don't beleive that US/UK interests are or have been historically righteous or correct quite the contrary
[and i'm from an ex UK colony so i'm supposed to be part of the 'willing' gang]

BTW israels primary reason for gaining nuclear capability is to act as leverage against the USA, so that the USA essencially cannot restrain israel
[israel has been and is a good regional pit bull for the USA, but if you really wanted to reign them in and they felt threatened enough, they would simply start a nuclear escalation which the USA couldn't stand
israel has had total military dominance in the reagion thanx to US support well before they declared their capability, they have no need of a deterrent apart from their overwhelming conventional forces]

my point is that i and a lot of people around the world think that WMD just make the world a lot more dangerous not any safer
did the deterrent have any efficacy upon the S11 kamikases? i doubt it
but i'm sure that the overwhelming perception of arrogance impressed upon them

PS why particularly did the USA think that bombing the rubble where afganistan used to be, would punish the S11 crew? [ie. the saudis]
saudi A is still touted as nominally a US ally in the region despite the fact that almost all of the S11 hijackers where saudi and that saudi A provides far more support for 'anti-american' fundamentalism than afganistan could provide it's own people
PPS are you of the opinion also that guns don't kill people, people do? also why do you characterise killing machines as 'goodies'? and why do you 'really get nervous' when you've got the best and biggest sticks

FuNkY CaPrIcOrN
05-07-2003, 04:24 PM
*EDIT*

Not going to get into this.Too busy drinking my Beer and eating Steak.....God Bless America.

*EDIT*

j2k4
05-07-2003, 04:40 PM
Echidna-

I should have also mentioned (by way of clarification) that our foreign policy decisions are made with the aid of a crystal ball of unknown origin and an ancient, dog-eared book that only Bush is allowed to read.

That is to say, we keep our own council; ex-U.K. colonials are not normally part of the President's advisory staff.

I hereby turn you over to Mr. FuNkY CaPrIcOrN, who may or may not choose to "Tell you why..".

FC-if you please? ;)

echidna
05-07-2003, 05:35 PM
i know too well that the USA keeps it own council
it's probably why most of the world don't agree

the system of crystal balls and the old book seems a bit reckless
with the firepower at your disposal
is this a new system dubya has instituted? what did you do for the hundreds of years before that? :blink:

Rat Faced
05-07-2003, 06:41 PM
That is to say, we keep our own council; ex-U.K. colonials are not normally part of the President's advisory staff.


So.......there is no one from the East Coast of the USA on his advisory staff?














Had to get that in..... ;)

Rat Faced
05-07-2003, 06:55 PM
As to the topic....


Ever hear of Pandora's Box?

The USA, UK, France, USSR, China, Israel etc etc etc etc have all got NBC capability, and once attained, there is no going back. You cant unlearn the knowledge.....much as i wish we could.

You have to therefore try and stop the spread of this technology the best you can, which is fair enough, and everyone (or most people ) would agree with it.

To use this 'fact' as a political weapon on issues that have absolutely nothing to do with NBC...as was the case recently, is immoral.

To then not defend Hospitals from the looting of desperatly needed medical supplies because no troops were available....while they are available to defend the Ministry of Oil (where there was no threat) is also immoral.

The slaughter of people that dont agree with your point of view (Saddam, the early years) is also immoral.


What im getting at is that there is NO right answer, and so attacking one country for an immoral act that cant be corrected (eg possesion of NBC) is in its own way 'immoral', you have offered no way of safely disposing of all the crap we have made......in fact im not sure that there IS a way. Even if (and that is an IF that is verging on the impossible) you got ALL the powers involved to totaly disarm in this way. If only 1 country didnt, then no one would.


Please forgive my use of the word "Moral", which should NEVER be used in political debate, as what is moral one place is immoral in another...and neither of the places has a right to judge on the other.

Unfortunatly I cant think of another word that expresses the opinion, but is universally acknowledged...Im just a drunk uneducated Brit............without a large map of the world on his wall either. ;)

j2k4
05-08-2003, 03:16 PM
Rat-
It's a tough go all around when it comes down to the 'WHY' of things.

I have a theory I can currently apply only to the U.S.:

As our President is limited to two four-year terms, the U.S. can only pursue (with any degree of coordinated resolve) any particular path for eight years; not really long enough to effect (with any real assurance) long-term change-that is to say, changes cannot be etched in stone.

The effect of this circumstance is, for purposes here, two-fold:

No 'good' or 'worthwhile' plan or philosophy can be safeguarded from interference or outright repeal; the ultimate political check.

Likewise, no 'bad' or 'worthless' plan/philosophy would survive, either.

So-the only influence, or sustaining force, for any idea-good or bad-must ultimately stem from the citizens who either will or will not be swayed.

echidna
05-08-2003, 05:27 PM
i must disagree the USA has been running an arms race time trial
This (http://www.zmag.org/list2.htm) is a lot of militarism
i think that the US knows but won't admit that it is more politicaly expedient, to distract and profiteer though oil and arms trading manipulated by conflict propagation with or 'official' US deployments, in order to ignore the fact that the USA needs to address it's internal economy and trade deficit
The scale of domestic poverty crime and the prison population is already the stuff of legend, people must notice but are still unswayed to spend their tax on other than like this:
Reagans last go in 1989 was $376.2 billion [or was that bush 1 & co.]
George Bush [part I] military budgets were as follows:
1990 358.7 billion
1991 316.5 billion
1992 328.6 billion
1993 312.1 billion
Clinton's military budgets (during his first term) were as follows:
1994 290.3 billion
1995 272.1 billion
1996 265.6 billion
1997 254.4 billion
Clinton's military budgets (during his second term) were as follows:
1998 265.3 billion
1999 270.6 billion
2000 280.8 billion
2001 305.4 billion
2002 343.2 billion
2003 396.1 billion reference (http://www.clw.org/milspend/pentagonbudget.html)
it is very consistent and who knows how much the CIA turns over
these funds prop up vast amounts of the US economy
and goes to encorage intense resentment in the majority world where these funds end up causing death, pain and suffering

i think i can remember some other states with central planning and millions of people working for the governmet :ph34r:

hobbes
05-08-2003, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by echidna@7 May 2003 - 11:13


the USA maintains that their arsenal is a deterrent [this deterrrent incidentally, seemed to do nothing against the S11 kamikazes], yet it is unreasonable for N Korea to have a [much smaller] similar deterrent







Right or wrong is irrelvant.

I'm certainly happier 9/11 involved two domestic airliners and not a hydrogen bomb (sold to the highest bidder) in downtown Manhattan.

It is not really North Korea we fear, but their motivated customers.

Terrorist attacks are only attempted by motivated political or religious groups (notice, I have avoided the word "terrorists" as this is a perspective issue) who do not work with the open support of their homeland or their current hosting nation. Had the Saudi government taken responsibilty for 9/11 and claimed that it correctly reflected the hatred of Saudis, in general, I think it would be called "the hole formerly known as Saudi Arabia".


So, this is why we act proactively, with 9/11 as the teaching point.

Right or wrong, fiddlesticks.

As a nation we are going to search out and destroy that which we perceive to be a threat. We do this because we can, and you would as well. A stitch in time.......

Since you don't know my history, I have 3 threads dealing with accountability and the need to demonstrate proof (WMD) that Iraq WAS a threat to the US. Otherwise we will come off as imperalist liars spouting rhetoric to achieve hidden political agendas. Point being, I try to be objective and not use my flag as a blindfold to hide myself from the truth. I try not to twist the truth to fit into some sort of preconceived conclusion.



EDit- moved aside to correct thread

ShareDaddy
05-08-2003, 09:01 PM
Either way you look at it, anyone with nuclear capability can be a threat, however as the US and the UK are both governed by laws, belong to NATO and the UN there are several laws regarding storage, security and use of such weapons to dissuade improper use. As IRAQ, North Korea and various other nations are not governed by such laws there is and will always be extreme risk with letting them create and distribute WMD at will.

I would like to offer this metaphor:
First think of the Earth as a very large prison, from which there is no escape. Second think of the US and UK as prison guards lets say, as with all prisons the prisoners do not get to pick and choose the guards. So now we have a prison and we have guards, like it or not. Now the Guards have WMD, this is in effect a method of insuring the prisoners do not get out of hand (remember it is what the guards think is out of hand, not what the prisoners think). Now a prisoner begins making his own WMD, should the guards allow this to happen, let him create them, control them, sell them? No, the guards are there to insure the prisoners do no harm to the prisoners or the guards, or effect damage to the prison.

I was going to use a different metaphor; something relating it to children, however the Prison thing just happened and I think it works well.

clocker
05-09-2003, 01:30 AM
No doubt that a large percentage of the Congolese would find your prison metaphor rather apt.

hobbes
05-09-2003, 01:48 AM
What if the guards are corrupt?

We have to honestly admit that if WMD were to be used against an American enemy without provokation, we would use some fall guy intermediary and claim innocence. We would righteously condemn such act and would swear to get to the bottom of all of this.

The US, as clearly the most powerful country in the world, can do what it wants to secure it's own security. This will not come without consequence if we act without justification. Eventually an anti-American coalition will evolve and we will be crushed. Please look at the sine curve called history, which documents the cyclical rise and fall of nations.

That is again why I preach responsibility and credibility.

We are not "right" and the rest of the world "wrong", we are just selfishly securing the future of our country. How we do this, largely effects our success in the long run.

kAb
05-09-2003, 03:50 AM
We can control our WMD. Rogue countries like Iraq and Iran, can't. Plus they promised not to have any. But then they break their promise.

Russia should never have had WMD either, they&#39;ve let way to much info on WMD slip through their hands <_<

echidna
05-09-2003, 05:21 AM
@hobbes ::
i apreciate your position but,
i think the USAs perception of how its &#39;proactive&#39; actions/stance is viewed in the majority world is inaccurate
to say that they seem prvocative would be a diplomatic understatement

@Sharedaddy ::
to think that the USA abides by international law is to demonstrate a severe historical data deficeit
eg. the two last engagements in afganistan[not so much] and iraq[fully], the prisoners in guantanamo bay, laos and cambidias carpet bombing and dioxine poisoning experience and staging a coup de tat on behalf of the chiquita bannana company for starters
no one with any understanding of the stautus quo and how we got here should honestly beleive that this cop isn&#39;t breaking the law
it is mafia policing leaving chaos in its wake to drum up better business
bush part 1 built the WMD capability for saddam through the cia while he had his other hand up reagans ass

&#39;wake up and smell the coffee Mrs Bueller he&#39;s just leading you down the primrose path&#39;
and f%ck living in a prison if your content with that fine the a lot of us don&#39;t call that living, especially with these guards


it seems so frustrating that the &#39;most powerful nation on earth&#39; won&#39;t be so for ever as hobbes points out, but while it is it has the unique oportunity to disarm and defuse the world it sent mad at los alamos
we won&#39;t lose the know how but i like the medical imaging technologies which have spun off.
but when the USA goes it&#39;s another ball game and the chance will be gone
the world sees the USA spending all of our environments and resources as fast as you can while running the first ever solo arms race marathon and playing dictators off against each other to leverage trade deals
you leader talk high and act low
there is no trust just acceptance and everyones myriad conections and exposures to the US market
there&#39;s talking the talk but . . .

fight the power or spurn the words of the star spangled banner kiddies :: remember the revolution it might be time again

MagicNakor
05-09-2003, 05:51 AM
Originally posted by echidna@9 May 2003 - 06:21
remember the revolution it might be time again
You mean you&#39;re over-taxed and have no actual representation in your government?

:ninja:

Edit: typo

echidna
05-09-2003, 06:17 AM
Originally posted by MagicNakor+9 May 2003 - 15:51--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MagicNakor @ 9 May 2003 - 15:51)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--echidna@9 May 2003 - 06:21
remember the revolution it might be time again
You mean you&#39;re over-taxed and have no actual representation in your government?

:ninja:

Edit: typo [/b][/quote]
i wouldn&#39;t disagree with that
should we start a poll :P

harrycary
05-09-2003, 07:04 AM
I&#39;m from America and I don&#39;t want ego-maniacal dictators like Saddam Hussein or Kim Jong-il gaining/having access to weapons of mass destruction.

History, if anything, has shown that such leaders are more prone to use them.

This is not to mention the [despicable]crimes against humanity that are inflicted by such men.

Frankly, someone has to go in there and get rid of these jagoffs. And I don&#39;t care who does it. It just seems we[Americans] are the only ones willing to.

Yeah, the US has its problems, but Democracy is still the best form of government on the planet(IMO).

that&#39;s my &#036;.02

echidna
05-09-2003, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by harrycary@9 May 2003 - 17:04

History, if anything, has shown that such leaders are more prone to use them.

you lie,or are misled
History, if anything, has shown that only one nation has ever been aggresive enough to use nukes
and you&#39;re trying to tell me that it indicates that nations other than the USA are the ones more likely to use these weapons
thats a high pile of horse eggs partner and i aint digging that sh*t
i will grant that the USA is unlikely to use nukes agaisnt the USA and that as such the US posession of WMD is less of a risk to the USA than other nations holding, but don&#39;t you kids worry about having all those bombs and factories for making bombs about the country side? you know that NBC is owned by General Electric Corperation who have been right hand pentagon partners in atomic bomb and balistic missile RnD and production since day one, don&#39; t you? know who tells you what and why
Oh and don&#39;t beleive M&#036; encarta misinformation bill gates reckons that the US won the vietnam war :o huh
he should realy get some better reseachers he can afford to know better

j2k4
05-09-2003, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by echidna@9 May 2003 - 08:03
thats a high pile of horse eggs partner and i aint digging that sh*t

echidna-

Have you moved to Texas?

I thought I settled the original question on page one. ;)

harrycary
05-09-2003, 09:50 PM
echnida,
Sorry brother but history has shown my statement to be true.

Hitler and his use of the V2 rocket. Surely a weapon of mass destruction of its time. Not to mention his use of the gas chamber which defines "weapon of mass destruction".

Saddam himself was very close to completing his "big gun" in the early 90&#39;s. But, the UK stopped him. The big gun was very capable of launching a WMD into neighboring countries.

These are but 2 examples off the top of my head.

Now, I don&#39;t know where you&#39;re from, or your age, but I&#39;m old enough to know better than to get into a pissing contest with you about your beliefs and obvious hatred of the US.

That being said, reply all you want. I won&#39;t be reading this thread anymore as I&#39;ve already wasted 10 minutes of my life that I won&#39;t ever get back.

p.s.

i will grant that the USA is unlikely to use nukes agaisnt the USA and that as such the US posession of WMD is less of a risk to the USA than other nations holding

huh?

MagicNakor
05-09-2003, 11:12 PM
I think he said the USA won&#39;t nuke itself. :huh:

:ninja:

j2k4
05-10-2003, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by MagicNakor@9 May 2003 - 18:12
I think he said the USA won&#39;t nuke itself. :huh:

:ninja:
That would be somewhat counterproductive, yes, but still-many here have NOT mastered the obvious. B)

MagicNakor
05-10-2003, 10:50 PM
Although, technically it has nuked itself. Sure, they were just tests...but it can count. Sort of. ;)

:ninja:

hobbes
05-10-2003, 11:24 PM
Originally posted by MagicNakor@10 May 2003 - 00:12
I think he said the USA won&#39;t nuke itself. :huh:

:ninja:
Sometimes, I&#39;m my own worst enemy. I&#39;m glad I don&#39;t have WMD&#33;

Rocko
05-10-2003, 11:34 PM
I think that is not fair what US does. They are making the life of may ppl ugly, they also have destroy historicals monuments in Irak. Even if they are right about the posiblility of Saddam attacking them this is not the way.

One day i thought we have evolved enough to don&#39;t kill ppl just for *political reasons*, but now i see that the power is in hands on dumb ppl.

Believe me at this side of the world almost no one support US activities.

Rocko

echidna
05-12-2003, 05:18 AM
Originally posted by harrycary@10 May 2003 - 07:50
echnida,
Sorry brother but history has shown my statement to be true.

Hitler and his use of the V2 rocket. Surely a weapon of mass destruction of its time. Not to mention his use of the gas chamber which defines "weapon of mass destruction".

aparently harrycary won&#39;t read this but,
the USA is the only nation still using gas chambers for execution and has more ballistic missile capability than any other nation

so if V2 rockets and gas chambers are WMD then
the USA is the granddaddy of the former and a state by state cottage industry preservation of the later

who taught harrycary history?

harrycary
05-12-2003, 05:36 AM
I though I wouldn&#39;t be back, but Rocko...brother...you shouldn&#39;t knock the US that quickly.
Don&#39;t bite the hand the feeds you my [obvious]young friend.

As stated in this (http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/ites/0896/ijee/ej3faf2.htm) document, the United States has given &#036;244 billion+ in aid between 1962 and 1994 to other countries. In 1996 alone we gave &#036;12 billion+ in aid to other countries.(Latin America alone rec&#39;d &#036;589 million, of which Peru got the 2nd largest chunk, &#036;91 million)
This is not to mention the military aid (http://www.public-i.org/Latam_Peru_tables.htm) we have given your country(Peru). This totaled in excess of &#036;423 million between 1996 and 2001.

I&#39;m not trying to justify anything. I&#39;m just pointing out the fact that for all of our bad points, we do our fair share of good for this entire planet.

Frankly, [our]democracy rules&#33; And judging by the amount of aid we give everyone else, that just proves it. So enjoy whatever you&#39;ve got down there in South America because you do owe it to the United States.

Damn&#33; Another 10 minutes of my life I won&#39;t get back.

p.s. echidna, the US use of the gas chamber? Apples and oranges my friend. Don&#39;t confuse a penalty for murder with the topic at hand.

kAb
05-12-2003, 10:15 PM
Originally posted by MagicNakor@10 May 2003 - 14:50
Although, technically it has nuked itself. Sure, they were just tests...but it can count. Sort of. ;)

:ninja:
:lol: technicality&#33; :lol:

Rocko
05-12-2003, 10:36 PM
Originally posted by harrycary@12 May 2003 - 00:36
I though I wouldn&#39;t be back, but Rocko...brother...you shouldn&#39;t knock the US that quickly.
Don&#39;t bite the hand the feeds you my [obvious]young friend.

As stated in this (http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/ites/0896/ijee/ej3faf2.htm) document, the United States has given &#036;244 billion+ in aid between 1962 and 1994 to other countries. In 1996 alone we gave &#036;12 billion+ in aid to other countries.(Latin America alone rec&#39;d &#036;589 million, of which Peru got the 2nd largest chunk, &#036;91 million)
This is not to mention the military aid (http://www.public-i.org/Latam_Peru_tables.htm) we have given your country(Peru). This totaled in excess of &#036;423 million between 1996 and 2001.

I&#39;m not trying to justify anything. I&#39;m just pointing out the fact that for all of our bad points, we do our fair share of good for this entire planet.

Frankly, [our]democracy rules&#33; And judging by the amount of aid we give everyone else, that just proves it. So enjoy whatever you&#39;ve got down there in South America because you do owe it to the United States.

Damn&#33; Another 10 minutes of my life I won&#39;t get back.

p.s. echidna, the US use of the gas chamber? Apples and oranges my friend. Don&#39;t confuse a penalty for murder with the topic at hand.
So, you&#39;re paying other countries so they agree with you actions??

Rocko

j2k4
05-14-2003, 04:11 AM
Originally posted by Rocko@12 May 2003 - 17:36
So, you&#39;re paying other countries so they agree with you actions??

Rocko
Yup.

Been doin&#39; it for years-where YOU been? ;)

Spindulik
05-15-2003, 07:32 PM
Originally posted by echidna@7 May 2003 - 11:13
so why should the UK and USA be openly packing these weapons, while telling others that they cannot?...




The difference is, the USA and UK know how to humanely handle and use weapons. Saddam and his thugs, on the other hand, use their weapons to murder and threaten people.

Saddam is crazy enough to use weapons in the wrong manner, just think if he had a nuke in his possession.

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-16-2003, 03:42 AM
You fuckin&#39; people are so nieve
The world would be controlled by communists and hitlers if it were not for the USA.
Maybe this whole thing would be over already.
The world should be grateful to the US as it has had the power to take it over for the last 50 years and did&#39;nt.
Every nation in the history of the world that had this kind of power (in their own time of course) has used it to try and take over as much of the world as they could.
Europe owes it&#39;s freedom to the US.
We brought down the evil empire (the Soviet union) dispite all the bleeding heart liberals that if they had there way would still exist.
Germany would still have it&#39;s wall and saddam would still be in power
And what about that fuckin&#39; rat of a country France?
The way France is acting now is the way they have acted throughout history.
They only helped the US in the revolutionary war to screw the brits and it was very little help at that risking not one French lives.
I have a smidge of French in me so don&#39;t even go there.
The french have no HONOR&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;
They welcomed Hitler instead of fighting him.
When we went to free the french they even fought against the allies on Hitlers behalf
Fuckin&#39; surrender monkeys&#33;
It&#39;s a ridiculous question" why is the Us allowed to have WMD"
We invented WMD and have only used them twice 60 years ago which ironicaly saved more lives than will ever be known.
God.....I could go on and on.
Germany should be ashamed as WE drew the line in germany spending Billions and Billions of our hard earned money and American lives keeping it free and for that matter the rest of Eurpoe
The French have even gone to the cemeterys where we buried our dead...you know the thousands upon thousands of dead Americans that fought for them and that continent.
They spray painted on tombstones "get your trash outta here and stuff like that&#33;
FUCK YOU FRANCE you fuckin&#39; coward bastards&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;
Oh yeah ECHIDNA are you actually trying defend that "country"
You and Your fuckin&#39; "country"is a disgrace&#33;&#33;
CHEEZEFUCKINGWEASLE
I just re read your original post you fucking idiot
"why shoul we" "why should we"
Are you that fuckin&#39; stupid?&#33;
I think you should worry about the cowardness and backstabbing of your own country before you worry about anything else.
You FUCK&#33;
Half the fucking weapons were finding now have MADE IN FRANCE with recent delivery dates right on them&#33;


It&#39;s about time the truth be told

clocker
05-16-2003, 04:20 AM
Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@15 May 2003 - 21:42



It&#39;s about time the truth be told
Just out of idle curiousity. which part of this screed did you "edit"?

MagicNakor
05-16-2003, 04:25 AM
Vitriol like that makes me wish more kids paid attention in history class. <_<

:ninja:

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-16-2003, 04:26 AM
One period.

oops.

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-16-2003, 04:31 AM
Yes it&#39;s vitriolic.
When your people fight and die for a country and they spit on their graves it makes me very angry
Your comment about history implies that I don&#39;t know what I&#39;m talking about.
Can you tell me where i&#39;m going wrong here?
Thats what liberals in this country do.
Attack the message by attacking the messenger. ;)
The next thing you&#39;ll be saying is I don&#39;t know how to spell therefore I must not know what I&#39;m talking about.

Take me on point by point since you know your history&#33;

MagicNakor
05-16-2003, 06:05 AM
I honestly do not have time to rehash the ten years of history you should have been learning, unless you didn&#39;t graduate high school, which would make that statement redundant, nor do I have time to rehash each and every point in that drivel.

The world would not be taken over by Hitlers and Communism if there was no USA.
Saying that we should all be grateful to the US for not taking over the world is like pushing someone and then grabbing them and saying you stopped them from falling. It reminds me of that one King of the Hill episode where Bobby is constantly "saving" Hank&#39;s life.
Had the French not interfered during the American Revolution, it wouldn&#39;t have been much of a revolution.
The Soviet Union was self-destructing.
The French did not welcome Hitler.
America did not invent "weapons of mass destruction." They&#39;ve been around in varying forms before America was even a glimmer in England&#39;s eye.

As I said, this would be longer, but I have not the time.

:ninja:

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-16-2003, 06:43 AM
Oh man you are so full of shit.
Your right about the being grateful part but thats it&#33;
----------------------------
"The world would not be taken over by Hitlers and Communism if there was no USA."
----------------------------
You say it therefore it&#39;s true.

The french help was key to victory but again they did it to spite the brits.
----------------------------------------------------
"The Soviet Union was self-destructing.
The French did not welcome Hitler.
America did not invent "weapons of mass destruction." They&#39;ve been around in varying forms before America was even a glimmer in England&#39;s eye"
--------------------------------------------------
I have to say ...This is total trype

The soviet union minus the presence of the USA would have taken over much of the world including Europe and did take over much of the world anyway&#33;
The french my freind did welcome Hitler.
They were complicit with the nazi&#39;s.
Heard of the VICI gov?

It&#39;s condecending holier than thou people like you that fill the world with lies.
You say it is.. therefore (your so smart) it must be true&#33;
We have lots of them here in the US.
You Condecending probably politically correct bastard&#33;&#33;
Your full of shit&#33;
You had the time but thought that a quick condecending answer would put me in my place.
You really piss me off with that Soviet Union Crap.
The liberals in this country love to reright the history books taking all credit away from a great president.
Are you so stupid that you really think that the USSR would have just imploded on it&#39;s own?
Are you really that stupid or are you just so full of yourself?
Do you hate the US.
Is that the problem?
You really sound like a democrat.
Are you part of the "liberal elite"?
You know....those people who think that average people like me don&#39;t know whats good for the nation.
You speak of free speech all the time but when you disagree you attack mainly the messenger.
And what weapons of mass destruction were around in the 1700&#39;s
mmm damn can&#39;t think of one...oh wait I know those damn cannonballs and muskets.
Don&#39;t forget about arrows now&#33;
Go back to BOOKWORLD and readup on your history and come back when you find some WMD in the middle ages.
Fuckin&#39; idiot&#33;

MagicNakor
05-16-2003, 09:01 AM
It&#39;s unfortunate that you&#39;ve been spoon-fed pablum, which becomes blatently obvious the more you attempt discourse. Perhaps you ought to read up on Communism and Hitler before you go saying I&#39;m "full of shit." Don&#39;t worry though. I&#39;ll use small words for you.

Now, way way back in 1991, the USSR dissolved into fifteen seperate countries. Before you go saying the USA destroyed the USSR, you really should look into the basis of Soviet Russia. But, apparently you want me to spoon-feed you more. So, here goes. A horribly brief and shallow overview of the USSR (which is an acronym for Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, by the way), and unhappily cutting out the meat of the subject. After the Bolshevik Revolution, the government adopted socialism, gradually moving towards communism. It was destined to fail from the beginning, since the Soviet Russians underestimated the degree to which the non-Russians would resent Russian rule. Consider that the non-Russians comprised more than 50% of the USSR. Secondly, their economic planning failed to meet the State&#39;s needs, due to the arms race. This, of course, led into economical decline, forcing a need for reform. And since people are not machines, the ideology of communism never really captivated the people, and eventually lost its influence.

In 1985, Mikhail Gorbachev came into power. He was the last leader of the Soviet Union. The State was in ruins financially, and political turmoil was rampant. He brought in a two-tiered reform system. The two tiers were glasnot and perestroika. Freedom of speech and rebuilding. He didn&#39;t realize that giving complete freedom of expression to people who had decades-old pent up emotion would be so powerful. His rebuilding policy didn&#39;t have the results he promised. The Soviet people were able to openly criticize Gorbachev. And the non-Russian areas of the USSR began to revolt, Estonia being the first. This was 1987. Soon after, Lithuania and Latvia demanded their own independence. Gorbachev can&#39;t crack down on them; it goes against his policy of glasnot, but if it runs its course, it&#39;d spell ruin for the rest of the USSR. Then the Armenian people (in the south Soviet Union) demanded to join the Republic of Armenia. Denied. Violent protests eventually spilling into war. This continues until present day.

Afterwards, Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova, Byelorussia, and the Central Asian republics all begin nationalist movements. This weakens the central State, as it can no longer trust its own people in the republics. And because of glasnot, nothing can be done. In August of 1991, some hardline Communist kidnap Gorbachev and go on television saying that he will no longer be able to govern, due to illness. Mass protests occur in Moscow, Leningrad, and most of the other major cities. The hardliners bring in the military to quash them, the military rebells and says they will not fire on their fellow countrymen. Three days later, the hardliners surrender, as without the support of the military, they have no hope in governing the State.

After these protests, it becomes obvious that the population will accept nothing but democracy. Gorbachev concedes. In January 1992, the Soviet Union no longer exists.

If you want to fill in the gaps, take your history again. Or read some books. The Soviet Tragedy is particularly good. Regretably it&#39;s late. So I&#39;ll have to finish this later on.

:ninja:

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-16-2003, 10:22 AM
Oh man what a bunch of bull shit

Your a Condecending Asshole with Dillusions of Superior intellect&#33;
Gorby had no choice and he never planned for it to go as far as it did
The whole thing you just wrote is your opinion with dates and names that are correct.
It looks like history but it&#39;s only your opinion.
Your ability to write and form your opinion is better than me but that don&#39;t make you right.
I am not pavlov&#39;s dog.
I would submit that you are.
Your version of history leaves out much and I will not respond to you again.

Barbarossa
05-16-2003, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by Spindulik@15 May 2003 - 19:32
The difference is, the USA and UK know how to humanely handle and use weapons.
Tell that to the kids that are getting badly maimed from unexploded cluster-bomb remnants. :angry:

j2k4
05-16-2003, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@16 May 2003 - 05:22
Oh man what a bunch of bull shit

Your a Condecending Asshole with Dillusions of Superior intellect&#33;
Gorby had no choice and he never planned for it to go as far as it did
The whole thing you just wrote is your opinion with dates and names that are correct.
It looks like history but it&#39;s only your opinion.
Your ability to write and form your opinion is better than me but that don&#39;t make you right.
I am not pavlov&#39;s dog.
I would submit that you are.
Your version of history leaves out much and I will not respond to you again.
Shock-

You make it extremely difficult for those who may agree with you (to whatever extent) to do so.

You&#39;d have to go a bit to find ANYONE as conservative as this correspondent, but to forecast the end of the Free World and the success of the Thousand-Year-Reich (absent the U.S.&#39;s efforts), is going a bit far.

Several of the members here who are steeped in history (as you say you are) believe the world would be a far different place had not the USA &#39;interfered&#39; at critical junctures; to leap, though, to YOUR conclusion is a bit of a stretch.

I made a point in another thread re: the U.S.&#39;s support and sponsorship of Israel: Had we not been at least a vicarious presence in the mideast for the last 50-plus years; had we demonstrated a post-WWII determination to return to Wilson&#39;s brand of isolationism instead, what would have prevented the USSR from having, in effect, &#39;annexed&#39; the entire region, along with it&#39;s (oil) resources?

I am reasonably sure this would have happened, but again, how long might this have prolonged the lifespan of Communist Russia? No one can say; as has been pointed out here, the USSR was on the road to ruin already.

My point(s), then:

This is a GREAT place for debate; I have found none better.

It is a DANGEROUS place to &#39;pronounce&#39;.

Flaming will get you NOTHING.

Watch your spelling and punctuation, now-we are particular about such things-and please pay special attention to your USE OF CAPS. :P

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-16-2003, 09:08 PM
I agree with some of what your saying.
People like Magic Nakor are intellectually dishonest.
His whole rant was a personal attack on me disguised as some kind of politically correct history lesson
Granted he is better at writing than me but that does&#39;nt subtract from his dishonest and erroneous version history.
I can&#39;t wait for my history lesson about weapons of mass destruction Before we were a glimmer in England eye.
Thankfully It&#39;s statements like these that expose him.

Rat Faced
05-16-2003, 09:31 PM
WMD is another name for NBC (Nuclear Biological Chemical)

Granted Nuclear weapons are very recent; both Biological and Chemical weapons have been used throughout history.........from the 1st time a tribesman pissed upstream of another tribe, and disease ridden corpses were catapulted over the walls of beseiged cities.



The artillery has always been looked at as &#39;mass destruction&#39; and thats been around for Centuries.

And so has burning or smoking your enemies out in woodland/savannah.



And modern (at the time) tactics and Rifles were certainly classed as WMD against Spears and daggers in Africa or even against the North American Indian (Before they had rifles themselves)



You are a product of your times, so to you WMD means Nuclear.


I wonder what will be classed as WMD in 1000 years time.

They&#39;ll probably laugh at todays Nuclear in the same way you&#39;ll laugh at the above.

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-16-2003, 09:46 PM
Your flat out wrong.
Weapons of MASS destrution.
The key word here is Mass.
The ability of man to wipe out mass populations with weapons did&#39;nt exist until the 20th century.
It&#39;s not even arguable.

Rat Faced
05-16-2003, 09:50 PM
Maybe you should read up on your History again..........

There have been whole Cities wiped out through disease because of these tactics; often it spread further than the City under attack (Disease = Biological)




But even without the above: WMD is subjective to the times in which you live.

Rifles wiped out entire cultures.......ie MASS destruction

Read the last part of my previous post again.

J2k4..........maybe you could explain &#39;subjective&#39; to ShockAndAwe.....

clocker
05-17-2003, 12:45 AM
Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@16 May 2003 - 00:43

Don&#39;t forget about arrows now&#33;
Go back to BOOKWORLD and readup on your history and come back when you find some WMD in the middle ages.
Fuckin&#39; idiot&#33;
The Battle of Agincourt (http://www.aginc.net/battle/)

Read &#39;em and weep...

MagicNakor
05-17-2003, 12:50 AM
I wasn&#39;t going to revisit this thread, mainly because it&#39;s getting to be repetitive. However, I also didn&#39;t expect j2k4 to agree with me (partially, at least). ;)

As for ShockAndAwe, there really isn&#39;t anything to say to you. You obviously don&#39;t have the sense that God gave a goat. <--(This is a personal attack.) (This is not.)--&#62; If you want to call an extremely understated overview of the last years of the USSR a "politically correct rant," go ahead. But it will be you that is being erroneous. In fact, to your statement that I left out much, I acknowledged that even before I started. If one was to go into great detail about Soviet Russia, it would fill pages and pages. It would become, oddly enough, book-length. Strange that there&#39;ve been copious amounts of books and essays dedicated to that very subject. Perhaps you should read some of them. Amazon.com has well over 26,419 for your perusal. However, I wasn&#39;t in Russia during the time of the collapse of the USSR, so I have no first-hand anecdotes for you (which seem to be all that you will accept). If you care to open an encyclopedia, or perhaps visit any of the numerous websites dedicated to the USSR, you&#39;d find that my "politically correct history lesson" is, indeed, historically sound. I am not given to being "intellectually dishonest," especially not on a medium where it is stupidly simple to double-check facts.

Since you&#39;re likely to believe that Columbus discovered America in 1492 (although there is evidence showing it was 1485, and discounting Leif Erikson and some recent, rather dubious information regarding Zheng He, and yet again disregarding the Indians), we&#39;ll use that date. England came under Roman rule around 59 AD. Around 409 Roman rule ended in England, who basically abandon the frontier area to move back in-land, and some time thereafter the Roman Empire collapses in on itself. The Vikings come over around 865. It&#39;s not until 1066 that England gets a somewhat stable government, after William the Conqueror&#39;s win at the Battle of Hastings. William the Conqueror came from Normandy, by the way. If one wanted to, the asumption that England-as-we-know-her wouldn&#39;t exist without the French may not be far off. I&#39;m not going to get into the litany of kings that England&#39;s seen through her time. That would be such a longer post than a complete recounting of Soviet Russia that it would be silly. The first sucessful British colony in North America was in 1587, eventually spreading, and those colonies won their independence in 1782. To sum up, England as a stable country is 1066. The first British colony in North America is 1587. There are 521 years of history between when England was "formed" and when she began colonizing North America. If you want to be pedantic and use 1492, there are 426 years of history. No matter how you look at it, it&#39;s a lot of history.

Rat Faced already made the point about weapons of mass destruction. It doesn&#39;t have to come with a blinding flash of light and a large mushroom cloud. Biological and chemical weapons are nothing new. The earliest recorded use of biological warfare is in 6 BC, when the Assyrians poisoned enemy wells with rye ergot, and Solon using hellebore during the siege of Krissa. In 1346, the Tartar army threw plague-infected corpses over the walls of Kaffa. It forced the defenders to surrender, and it&#39;s believed that people infected with the plague who left the city may have triggered the epidemic throughout Europe (1347-1351), in addition to the ill-fated boats from Messina. Considering that it killed 1 out of every 3 people in Europe, 25 million people, I would consider that "mass population." Variola-infected clothing was "gifted" to the South American Indians in the 15th century by Pizarro, smallpox-infected blankets were given to the Indians at Fort Carillon by Sir Jeffery Amherst. Greek fire (673 AD) was very similar to napalm. Fortunately (or unfortunately), the recipe for this mixture is long lost (in the middle 700s), and attempts to recreate it have been unsucessful. As Rat Faced already said, rifles killed off whole cultures. Perhaps two of the best examples of this would be the Pizarro conquering of the Inca, and Cortez conquering the war-like Aztec. The Beothuk were completely eradicated through a combination of European disease, European weaponry, and European slavery. The last Beothuk, Nancy Shanawhdit, died in 1829 of tuberculosis. One could argue that swords could be a weapon of mass destruction, if you consider the razing of entire towns to constitute "mass destruction." Though I doubt it, so I&#39;ll let it rest.

:ninja:

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-17-2003, 01:45 AM
Blah blah blah
Psychobabble
I thought I had seen it all
Fuck you ,you fuckin condecending asshole
I have never seen so many words with so little meaning.
You make these outrageous statements as if they were facts.
Poisoning water is not a weapon of mass destruction you fuckin' idiot
What did you do?
Search the internet all day untill you found some ridiculous example.
If your definition of WMD stands then every nation on earth and even I myself posess in my own house under the kitchen sink these weapons
A typical example of grasping for straws!
Done


barbarossa -Quote
Tell that to the kids that are getting badly maimed from unexploded cluster-bomb remnants.

What else should we tell these kids?
1.Were digging up the mass graves your mother and father are buried in.
2.The people that did this to them are gone.
3.You can practice whatever religion you want to now without fear of persecution.
4.You can voice your opinion without fear of retribution
5.The wood chipping machines have been dismantled.
6.The professional rapists that raped your mother and the rest of the women in your family are gone.
7.The people that tortured your dad before they killed him are gone.
8.The money that was meant to feed your family but stolen in order to build palaces you will have now
9.Europeans and anti American zeleots would rather talk about your friend Ahmed who got hurt while we were trying to get those bad men that did this to you.
Were very very sorry

btw magik
Your so smart you hang out on kazaa all day.
Probably downloading porn.
You see my personal attacks are quick and to the point.
Not some ridiculous,bombastic,self grandising statement

hobbes
05-17-2003, 03:05 AM
Originally posted by clocker+17 May 2003 - 01:45--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 17 May 2003 - 01:45)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--ShockAndAwe^i^@16 May 2003 - 00:43

Don&#39;t forget about arrows now&#33;
Go back to BOOKWORLD and readup on your history and come back when you find some WMD in the middle ages.
Fuckin&#39; idiot&#33;
The Battle of Agincourt (http://www.aginc.net/battle/)

Read &#39;em and weep... [/b][/quote]
Mud is a WMD?

Shit, it&#39;s all over my yard&#33;

Honey, call in the kids, we are paving the lawn tomorrow&#33;

Rat Faced
05-17-2003, 11:27 AM
If your definition of WMD stands then every nation on earth and even I myself posess in my own house under the kitchen sink these weapons
A typical example of grasping for straws&#33;



You miss the point so totally that im now sure your just trying to wind people up....no one can be so thick.


WMD is defined by the era you live in..........A Rifle isnt WMD when both sides have Rifles, and tactics used reflect it. A Rifle is WMD when used agains Spears and Arrows against people that will just keep coming in a straight line, without using cover.


But the example of wiping out 1/3 of Europe by Biological means would still be WMD today.....and that was done 100&#39;s of years ago.

You say poisoning a well isnt WMD? Well how about a reservoir that serves New York or Washington? Its the same thing, just a different scale.....and before you start saying 20 million people are not the same as 20,000......remember that as a proportion of the world population at the time, its exactly the same.

clocker
05-17-2003, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by hobbes@16 May 2003 - 21:05

Mud is a WMD?

Shit, it&#39;s all over my yard&#33;

Honey, call in the kids, we are paving the lawn tomorrow&#33;
Do not pave your lawn, hobbes&#33; It&#39;s ecologically unsound.

Try using lighter chain mail on your children.
I hear the new Oskosh By Gosh carbon fiber armor is very good...

Rat Faced
05-17-2003, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by clocker+17 May 2003 - 12:22--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 17 May 2003 - 12:22)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--hobbes@16 May 2003 - 21:05

Mud is a WMD?

Shit, it&#39;s all over my yard&#33;

Honey, call in the kids, we are paving the lawn tomorrow&#33;
Do not pave your lawn, hobbes&#33; It&#39;s ecologically unsound.

Try using lighter chain mail on your children.
I hear the new Oskosh By Gosh carbon fiber armor is very good... [/b][/quote]
Nah, its brittle.... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

j2k4
05-17-2003, 07:45 PM
Holy BATSHIT (a little known WMD)&#33;

ShockAndAwe-

Will you drop the fucking hammer already?

As the famous locker-room philosopher Frank Robinson once said, "Boy, not only is you wrong, you is LOUD wrong.

You have rejected untold pearls of wisdom kindly offered by many hereabout, and insulted almost all, rejecting an invitation to reasonable discourse.

My colleague MagicNakor has not in any way impugned your hypotheses (I use that term very generously), he merely tried to put a finer point on your historical perspective. He has very graciously (and for you, luckily) maintained his position on the &#39;high road&#39;.

Your belligerence is becoming tiresome, as it has blinded you, and bored us, which limits your options for further participation.

We shall now begin to speak unkindly of you, behind your back and out of hearing.

Gentlemen? ;)

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-17-2003, 08:00 PM
:lol:
You have a point about WMD and the time you live in.
Today Man has power he&#39;s never had.
The FALLEN nature of Man with these weapons is very scary.
I&#39;m gonna take some heat here but here goes.
I believe the Bible.
I believe that the EU will eventually be the revived Roman Empire thats predicted in the book of revelation.
The EU will be the world power&#33;
The thing of it is my country is&#39;nt even mentioned in there and that scares me.(unless you consider the US to be a cub of the Merchants of Tarsus)
That combined with "our friends" the Europeans turning against us for no real reason the same friends we&#39;ve helped for years and years and all the anti Americanism in the world today causes me to think "it&#39;s that time"&#33;
For the 666 guy to come to power something major(ie the destruction of the US) will have to happen in the world for nations to give up there sovereinty and fall in line behind him.

There
now you can say "see I told you he was an idiot"

j2k4
05-17-2003, 08:24 PM
Nah-we&#39;re on the high road, here, remember?

C&#39;mon up&#33; ;)

clocker
05-17-2003, 11:38 PM
Originally posted by j2k4@17 May 2003 - 14:24
Nah-we&#39;re on the high road, here, remember?

C&#39;mon up&#33; ;)
http://galleries.vinyamar.com/ps/show.php?id=jypyxuVaLNlvM2MFoITdhrxV6&ext=.jpg

Yup, here is how high-roaders like to debate.

Please, have a seat.

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-18-2003, 01:23 AM
Excellent&#33;

j2k4
05-18-2003, 01:39 AM
Clocker-meet ShockAndAwe.
And vice-versa. B)

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-18-2003, 02:44 AM
I never realized there were so many political junkies here&#33;

clocker
05-18-2003, 04:26 AM
Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@17 May 2003 - 20:44
I never realized there were so many political junkies here&#33;
http://www.kennerly.com/current/images/pdj_republican.jpg

Oh, I don&#39;t think we&#39;re any more political than your average forum gang...

echidna
05-18-2003, 09:56 AM
RIGHTFUCKING@ShockAndAwe^i^

Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^+--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (ShockAndAwe^i^)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
FUCK YOU FRANCE you fuckin&#39; coward bastards&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;
Oh yeah ECHIDNA are you actually trying defend that "country"
You and Your fuckin&#39; "country"is a disgrace&#33;&#33;
CHEEZEFUCKINGWEASLE
I just re read your original post you fucking idiot
"why shoul we" "why should we"
Are you that fuckin&#39; stupid?&#33;
I think you should worry about the cowardness and backstabbing of your own country before you worry about anything else.
You FUCK&#33;
[/b]
Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@

Can you tell me where i&#39;m going wrong here?
Thats what liberals in this country do.
Attack the message by attacking the messenger.
The next thing you&#39;ll be saying is I don&#39;t know how to spell therefore I must not know what I&#39;m talking about.

& your mean attacks like this at MagicNakor [who tryed so hard to help you&#33;&#33; :o ];
<!--QuoteBegin--ShockAndAwe^i^

Oh man what a bunch of bull shit

Your a Condecending Asshole with Dillusions of Superior intellect&#33;
[/quote]
Yes I can tell you where you are going wrong ShockAndAwe^i^
You&#39;re obviously ignorant delusional and projecting your failings upon others
You are a perfect example of what the majority world finds objectionable about the USA
and why many of us feel that the USAs possession of WMD poses the greatest threat to long-term stability & peace
you and your nation are dangerously unstable and in possesion of the majority of these weapons.
why don&#39;t you do us all a favor and go play on the freeway
http://www.pineisland.net/images/wildli_i/0070/0001/0015.jpg
[& so presumptuous about my nationality - you don&#39;t know shit fool :: PS. YES this is a pesonal (counter-)attack and presumably it will end here]

@clocker&j2k4 - :blink: :o :( :huh: thankyou for preventing my opinion of northamericans who live south of canada from being defined entirely by the mindless ideological fundamentalist hate which ShockAndAwe^i^ peddles as political discorse ;) :lol:
[also thanx to MagicNator for some amazing historical precises [nice work there :: maybe hyperlinks would have helped ShockAndAwe^i^ face facts :lol: but i don&#39;t know if you live in the formerly described area :) ]

Rat Faced
05-18-2003, 10:41 AM
Echidna,

You are sometimes as fanatically anti-american as ShockAndAwe is pro-american.


ShockAndAwe has appologised for his behaviour and come in from the cold.

Are you man enough to do the same?


Rat Faced

echidna
05-18-2003, 10:53 AM
re.

Originally posted by echidna
YES this is a pesonal (counter-)attack and presumably it will end here
ie. point taken
but you know when you&#39;ve gotta have a bit of a sledge back <_<
i didn&#39;t start the expletives or personal mud slinging
[just a provocative pic :: worth a thousand words i guess] :P

j2k4
05-18-2003, 07:27 PM
In other words, your "Add Reply" button was momentarily mis-/non-functional, hence the timing of your last post was negatively affected?
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I can just see you pounding on it like we all do from time to time.

We will consider all boils to have been lanced, and vice versa. :D

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-19-2003, 08:23 AM
Hi there
I merely formed my opninion of you nationality by other posts I&#39;ve seen.
I apoligize for that and the mud slinging.
I think I see more clearly now.
Are you a hold over from the cold war?
I may have been wrong about your nationality but not your staunch anti Americanism.
I think it consumes your every waking moment.
As for magic nakors "historical facts" only politically correct anti American zealots would cherish because they leave out so much.
I never disputed his actual facts either.
I merely stated that much was being left out (umm the US except for anything derogatory)along with some definitions of WMD.
Besides that I think it was his member of the royal family attitude that got me in the end.
Counter attack accepted and I will end it there as well,but I think I like it here.
I just wish it would&#39;nt get so stuffy&#33;
http://www.chinkii.com/uploads/album/misc/cougarzxzasqwq.jpg
I&#39;ll try and be a little more cordial from now on. o:)

hehehe
Have you not seen the star trek movie where the klingons are the Russians and the federation is the US?
I think this movie puts it all into the right perspective ;)

clocker
05-19-2003, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by ShockAndAwe^i^@19 May 2003 - 02:23


I&#39;ll try and be a little more cordial from now on. o:)
http://www.drublair.com/images/listerine.jpg

Here, this would be a good start... :P

j2k4
05-19-2003, 05:45 PM
Originally posted by clocker+19 May 2003 - 12:28--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker @ 19 May 2003 - 12:28)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--ShockAndAwe^i^@19 May 2003 - 02:23


I&#39;ll try and be a little more cordial from now on. o:)
http://www.drublair.com/images/listerine.jpg

Here, this would be a good start... :P [/b][/quote]
Clocker and his new toys-

We may have to make your "speech rehab" our next subject.

Have you and myfiles been indulging in forbidden semiotics?

Remember-semiotics is the study of &#39;iconology&#39;; i.e.: the study of graphic symbolism, it&#39;s context, and the various societal implications arising therefrom.

So far, your feel for the contextual aspect is, shall we say, functional-but in need of slight polishing. Keep up the good work; I hope you don&#39;t run out of pictures&#33; :lol: :lol:

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-19-2003, 06:46 PM
hehehe
Point taken.
Btw
I hear that Russia is conducting thermo nuclear war games in which they specifically announced that the US and Britain are enemies. :o
Are they going to start another cold war in which the west(US) will spend them out of existance?
I was&#39;nt aware they could afford such operations.
I know the US has been pumping stagering amounts of food,money and technology into Russia for the past 13 years.
If the US announced it was conducting such operations against Russia and France or anyone for that matter... well I can just imagine the hue and cry over the whole thing.
Well I dought there will be anymore Bar B Q&#39;s down in Texas for Putin.
Clean out and stock up the fallout shelters everyone&#33;
Here we go again&#33;&#33;


One more thing
I think we need Politicalworld...don&#39;t you?

Rat Faced
05-19-2003, 07:53 PM
Erm.......We do still play war games with the Russians as enemies.

We&#39;re just diplomatic enough to change the names, and the names of the country who&#39;s map we&#39;re using...we make silly names up for these Countries like Geordonia ( a one that stuck in my mind for obvious reasons to those that know me, and where im from ;) )

I think you&#39;ll find that the Russians just have no imagination (and arent good at diplomacy)

Speaking of Diplomacy, that is WHY it gets stuffy in here.

Try criticising without upsetting people, just to try and make your point understood......its hard work.


Im not elequent like j2k4.


I know what i WANT to say, but by god he&#39;s better at word play than me.......it just ends up with me sounding an uneducated lout sometimes. ;)

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-19-2003, 08:13 PM
Yeah me too.
It is hard&#33;
I edited down my last post 3 times as to try and not offend anyone to much.
I was in the US Navy during the cold war and know what your talking about but we named the operations something like Readex82.
That is an actual name of a mock war game in 1982.
I could&#39;nt believe the sight I saw when I woke up on the first day.
3 carrier battle groups joined up in the middle of nowhere.
Thats alot of ships and quite a sight to see.
It was great.
The russians were usually aware of these ops and would find us a percentage the time.
We would see Russian bears and badgers(recon planes) all the time flying over head once they found us.
Or there subs would be following us
Looking back now it really was great fun playing cat and mouse out there.
I am not forgetting that it was a very dangerous time either.

Georgia?mmmm I think we have a state named after that fine place.
Is&#39;nt that the bread basket of Russia?

Rat Faced
05-19-2003, 08:46 PM
Geordonia, not Georgia................that would be very undiplomatic ;)

clocker
05-19-2003, 10:46 PM
Originally posted by j2k4@19 May 2003 - 11:45


So far, your feel for the contextual aspect is, shall we say, functional-but in need of slight polishing. Keep up the good work; I hope you don&#39;t run out of pictures&#33; :lol: :lol:
Thank you, I shall.

Of course I must still devote time to honing my sophisticratic debating skills so as not to disappoint JPaul.

ShockAndAwe^i^
05-20-2003, 12:10 AM
Rat Faced
I just heard on the radio that terrorists are training in Geordonia.
It was so quick that I don&#39;t remember all that they said&#33;
Plus I&#39;m on my second beer....I mean brewsky. hehe
Explain?

Damn
Did one of you nuke my web hosting site?
Does anyone use SigUp?
I&#39;m at a distinct disadvantage here without pics.
I really get a kick out of using this form of discourse.