Home | Community | Message Board

MagicBag Grow Bags
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

North Spore Shop: Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Buddha5254]
    #1451025 - 04/11/03 09:05 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

I say
On to Damascus!

it would be a waste to have all those aircraft carriers and troops and equipment there restoring peace! what a waste!

oh yeah, after Syria and Iran HAS to be Saudi Arabia! those fuckers are the ones who flew the planes into the WTC! lets fuck 'em up while we're there!!!




Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePsiloKitten
Ganja Goddess

Registered: 02/12/99
Posts: 1,617
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: infidelGOD]
    #1451406 - 04/11/03 11:12 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

http://www.afp.com/english/newsml/stories/030412033350.h692dkk9.html

Again, I say.. has Russia drawn a line in the sand? Lets link all these concerns together..



--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Evolving]
    #1451545 - 04/12/03 12:08 AM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

Quote:

If comitting suicide means stopping the Shrub, then its definitely the proper goal. The Russians face the same choice as someone who knows they will be killed anyway, but can opt to bring about their killers' death in the process.



How did you arrive at this conclusion? There is no reason for the U.S. to want to destroy Russia, not militarily nor economic. This idea is utter nonsense. I am glad Putin is in charge and not you.




The US isnt trying to specifically destroy Russia yet; but Shrub's bid for global domination threatens them as much as any other nation. If Shrub doesnt back down, then conflict with the Russians and other countries with real nukes is inevitable.

Quote:

Quote:

It would also result in the obliteration of the US, who are the agressors in the MAD scenario. Unfortunately for the Russians, however, they have to shoot first.



Okay, let me understand this. By your twisted lack of logic, a preemptive strike against the U.S. by the Russians would make the U.S. the agressors? This again, is utter nonsense.




You have it all backwards: Its US agression that would force the Russians into launching a preemptive nuclear strike. In the case above, a US anti-missile shield constitutes an offensive first-strike weapon. More generally, the Shrub has no moral authority to take over the world. All else being equal, how would we react if another country was trying to forcibly subjugate us under its global empire?? No, were not at that point with the Russians yet; but we will be unless theres a regime change in the US.


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Edited by Annapurna1 (04/12/03 10:54 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePsiloKitten
Ganja Goddess

Registered: 02/12/99
Posts: 1,617
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1451644 - 04/12/03 12:52 AM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Anapurna, true dat.


Altho you never know. I was unaware legislation against Iran was already on the Senate floor in committe.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=108_cong_bills&docid=f:sr82is.txt.pdf
You can look it up on the senate web page as well.

Which way did he go, george?
Which way did he go?


--------------------

Edited by PsiloKitten (04/12/03 12:53 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: PsiloKitten]
    #1451778 - 04/12/03 03:49 AM (20 years, 11 months ago)

has Russia drawn a line in the sand? Lets link all these concerns together..

Russia will never like anything we do. Period.





Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinearabmobster
#1

Registered: 04/01/03
Posts: 317
Loc: Palestine
Last seen: 14 years, 10 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: ]
    #1451924 - 04/12/03 07:58 AM (20 years, 11 months ago)

i don't believe anything on tv
and i dont support him
i support myself the next dictator in the middleeast
i will reunite all thos countries and make them one again

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1452099 - 04/12/03 10:26 AM (20 years, 11 months ago)

good luck dude.

it would be kind of fitting, the 'arabmobster' running the middle east.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1452230 - 04/12/03 11:17 AM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

You have it all backwards: Its US agression that would force the Russians into launching a preemptive nuclear strike.



Has the U.S. threatened Russia? Has the U.S. made an aggressive move against Russia. NO!

Quote:

In the case above, a US anti-missile shield constitues an offensive first-strike weapon.



Pure and utter BULLSHIT! Is a bullet proof vest a first strike weapon? Is bullet proof glass a first strike weapon? Since when is providing for the defense of yourself or your people a first strike weapon? Any government the does not take action to protect it's people is derelict in it's duty.

Quote:

More generally, the Shrub has no moral authority to take over the world.



That is a given.

Quote:

All else being equal, how would we react if another country was trying to forcibly subjugate us under its global empire??



Do you actually believe that George W. Bush would even contemplate trying to take over Russia, let alone TRY TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD?

"Cheney, are you thinking what I'm thinking?"
"Ahhh, I think so Bush and that dress will really bring out the color of Tony's eyes!"

George Bush is Brain and Dick Cheney is Pinky!!!!

ROFLMA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO
HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE
HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO
*** "I can't breathe *****
HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO
HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE
HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
*** Oh shit man, I'm cryin'" ***
HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE HEE
HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO HOO
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HO HO HO HO HO HO HO HO
*** "Jeez, my sides ache." ***


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Evolving]
    #1452353 - 04/12/03 12:09 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

Quote:

In the case above, a US anti-missile shield constitues an offensive first-strike weapon.



Pure and utter BULLSHIT! Is a bullet proof vest a first strike weapon? Is bullet proof glass a first strike weapon? Since when is providing for the defense of yourself or your people a first strike weapon? Any government the does not take action to protect it's people is derelict in it's duty.




The missile shield is a first-strike weapon because it would allow the US to launch the first strike without fear of reprisal: we could nuke anyone we wanted to and they cant shoot back. Bulletproof vests were used as first-strike weapons in the infamous Bank of America[sic] holdup; and this is the same idea.

Quote:

Quote:

All else being equal, how would we react if another country was trying to forcibly subjugate us under its global empire??




Do you actually believe that George W. Bush would even contemplate trying to take over Russia, let alone TRY TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD?




Without a doubt, although i agree that Shrub doesnt fll the role of "Brain" too well.


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 5 years, 6 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1452401 - 04/12/03 12:23 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

"The missile shield is a first-strike weapon because it would allow the US to launch the first strike without fear of reprisal: we could nuke anyone we wanted to and they cant shoot back."

That is total crap dude. by that reasoning any defensive weapon becomes first strike. That is a twisted view.


--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1452431 - 04/12/03 12:34 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

Bulletproof vests were used as first-strike weapons in the infamous Bank of America[sic] holdup; and this is the same idea.



This still makes no sense. Armor is not a weapon. You really need to learn the definition of a weapon versus the definition of armor. By your twisted use of the word, an armadillo would be in the possession of a first strike weapon by virtue of it's shell, likewise, a clam, etc.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Evolving]
    #1452607 - 04/12/03 01:39 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

Quote:

Bulletproof vests were used as first-strike weapons in the infamous Bank of America[sic] holdup; and this is the same idea.



This still makes no sense. Armor is not a weapon. You really need to learn the definition of a weapon versus the definition of armor. By your twisted use of the word, an armadillo would be in the possession of a first strike weapon by virtue of it's shell, likewise, a clam, etc.




The "star wars" systems are not armour!!! The systems under consideration are either small missiles or laser that are fired at incoming missiles. The fact that it can be fired means its a weapon.

link


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Edited by Annapurna1 (04/12/03 01:44 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1452655 - 04/12/03 01:53 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

The "star wars" systems are not armour!!!



I was referring to your assertion that bullet proof vests could be considered first strike weapons. But stategic defense systems could in fact be considered a form of armor. One definition of armor is, "figuratively, any protection or safeguard." (source Websters New Twentieth Century Dictionary, Unabridged, Second Edition)

Quote:

The systems under consideration are either small missiles or laser that are fired at incoming missiles.



You stated it yourself, "fired at incoming missiles," how is that a first strike weapon? Firing at incoming missiles is defensive.


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Evolving]
    #1452672 - 04/12/03 01:57 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Did you read the link??


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEvolving
Resident Cynic

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 5,385
Loc: Apt #6, The Village
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1452679 - 04/12/03 02:01 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Yes. So Robert M. Bowman is wrong as well as you, what does that prove?


--------------------
To call humans 'rational beings' does injustice to the term, 'rational.'  Humans are capable of rational thought, but it is not their essence.  Humans are animals, beasts with complex brains.  Humans, more often than not, utilize their cerebrum to rationalize what their primal instincts, their preconceived notions, and their emotional desires have presented as goals - humans are rationalizing beings.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Evolving]
    #1452680 - 04/12/03 02:01 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

George Bush is Brain and Dick Cheney is Pinky!!!!



I believe you have it backwords.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Evolving]
    #1452709 - 04/12/03 02:11 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

Yes. So Robert M. Bowman is wrong as well as you, what does that prove?




Based on what?


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 5 years, 6 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1452721 - 04/12/03 02:14 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

The whole thing hinges on this
"This "defense" would be totally useless to an innocent party waiting for an attack, because the weapons in it are essentially in enemy-controlled territory. They could easily be destroyed by an enemy launching a surprise attack against the United States."

show evidence of there intended placement and how they could be so easily destroyed.


--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: mntlfngrs]
    #1452988 - 04/12/03 03:55 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

Quote:

The whole thing hinges on this
"This "defense" would be totally useless to an innocent party waiting for an attack, because the weapons in it are essentially in enemy-controlled territory. They could easily be destroyed by an enemy launching a surprise attack against the United States."

show evidence of there intended placement and how they could be so easily destroyed.




I think that Bowman was trying to extoll the overall unreliability of the system and was too specific. He may well have been wrong about those specifics; but it doesnt matter in terms of an offensive vs. a defensive system. Read the paragraph in its entirety below:

Quote:

The ABM treaty was an attempt to outlaw a class of weapons which would reward an aggressor. The kind of ballistic missile defense envisioned by the Bush administration is exactly that kind of weapon. This "defense" would be totally useless to an innocent party waiting for an attack, because the weapons in it are essentially in enemy-controlled territory. They could easily be destroyed by an enemy launching a surprise attack against the United States. On the other hand, if the United States were to launch a surprise attack, these weapons could be useful for blunting retaliation.







--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 5 years, 6 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1453036 - 04/12/03 04:09 PM (20 years, 11 months ago)

I did and the whole justification for his position rests on "This "defense" would be totally useless to an innocent party waiting for an attack, because the weapons in it are essentially in enemy-controlled territory."

His whole position is shattered if those two sentences I first pointed out are not true.


--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]

North Spore Shop: Cultivation Supplies


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Powell softens public for Syria, Iran Invasions EchoVortex 767 3 03/31/03 11:20 AM
by friartuck
* Wonder if Iran will comply. Iran 'violating nuclear treaty' Anonymous 980 10 05/09/03 01:26 PM
by tekramrepus
* the Project for a New American Century
( 1 2 all )
iglou 3,299 26 05/02/03 08:53 AM
by Madtowntripper
* American imperialism - for RailGun headphone 1,518 4 09/06/01 01:08 AM
by MrKurtz
* First Syria, Then Iran Zahid 380 0 10/24/03 12:12 AM
by Zahid
* To All Americans Who Hate America
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Anonymous 15,412 155 12/19/02 11:29 AM
by Evolving
* Bush threatens Iran and Syria, again. Zahid 792 6 07/30/03 02:58 AM
by soulflyer
* Why Does Washington Hate Saddam? Anonymous 665 1 03/22/03 01:57 PM
by rhizo

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,422 topic views. 3 members, 8 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.034 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 15 queries.