Home | Community | Message Board

NorthSpore.com BOOMR Bag!
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!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds, High THC Strains, USA West Coast Strains   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
InvisibleBuddha5254
addict
Registered: 04/23/00
Posts: 532
Syria or Iran?
    #1449460 - 04/11/03 01:14 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

I think it was apparent that Iraq would fall quickly if attacked, so now what are all those soldiers going to do now, and what about the other100,000 called up a couple of weeks ago? Something tells me its not just for stabilizing and occupying Iraq. A lot of shit has been talked concerning Syria.... and Iran is in the Axis of Evil....so I wonder what we will see on the news this summer?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 17 years, 4 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Buddha5254]
    #1449464 - 04/11/03 01:17 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

They'll "liberate" syria first. :smirk:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineflow
outlaw immortal
Registered: 11/20/02
Posts: 496
Last seen: 7 years, 4 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Buddha5254]
    #1449802 - 04/11/03 03:00 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Something tells me its not just for stabilizing and occupying Iraq.



right, it's more about the middle east as a whole, and syria has been supporting iraq throughout this war by bussing in suicide bombers and weapons etc. this gives us a great excuse to take out another oppressive regime, and i think attacking syria will just bring iran into it, then maybe lebanon, pakistan......


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: Buddha5254]
    #1450003 - 04/11/03 04:00 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

The question should be which country will play the role of Poland in WW II. The world may let the Shrub have Iran and Syria; but there must come a point at which ppl begin to realize that nuclear annihilation is the preferrable alternative to the US global-corporate empire (the Fourth Reich by any other name). Amerikkka should not be overestimated either; since by the same token Schickelgruber should have won WW II.


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


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: flow]
    #1450050 - 04/11/03 04:13 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

pakistan

pakistan is an ally and has no oil.

you people don't know what the hell you're talking about. do you know how ridiculous you sound? are you serious?

"hmm... who's the damn US gonna go after next? syria? iran?"

christ people. iraq is all the US needs to fulfill its plan for the middle east. iraq boasts the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world. it is situated right in the middle of the middle east. it has two nice rivers running through it. it was run by a man whom they could make a very strong case for taking down. and still... it barely, barely happened.

now you're telling me that they're just gonna go take down another government over there, in some other country that has about 1/10 the strategic value of iraq? are you telling me that after millions and millions of people protested this war, and at least one nation gave military aid to the iraqis, that now, the US is going to do it again, this time without the WMDs, oppression, and broken-peace treaty as a reason? all for another piece of sand in the middle east that it has no use for?

no. they're gonna ride out this iraq thing, in the meantime, tighten "security" in the united states, and fight the dope menace. there won't be any new conquests. unless of course some nation actually does something to piss off the united states. i think there are only a couple nations in the world right now with the balls to do that, and they're not in the middle east.

the middle east is in washington's pocket now. we're there, we're running the show. we've got thousands of troops there, and a country that's pretty much ours to do with what we see fit. and america has proved to the world that it doesn't give a fuck about international opinion. even millions of protestors and no UN support will save you if the US decides they want to take you down. those nations in the middle east... they know they better not step out of line.

i don't think any of them are stupid enough to give the US the slightest reason to take them down.

ah... what a great country this is.  :smirk:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1450072 - 04/11/03 04:21 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

The question should be which country will play the role of Poland in WW II. The world may let the Shrub have Iran and Syria; but there must come a point at which ppl begin to realize that nuclear annihilation is the preferrable alternative to the US global-corporate empire (the Fourth Reich by any other name). Amerikkka should not be overestimated either; since by the same token Schickelgruber should have won WW II.

what the fuck?


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: ]
    #1450305 - 04/11/03 05:45 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org

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

WSWS : News & Analysis : Middle East : Iraq

US barbarism in Iraq
The way forward in the struggle against imperialist war
Statement of the World Socialist Web Site Editorial Board and the Socialist Equality Party
11 April 2003
Back to screen version | Send this link by email | Email the authorThe following statement is being distributed by supporters of the WSWS and the Socialist Equality Party at antiwar demonstrations taking place this weekend in Washington, San Francisco and Los Angeles. It has been posted on the WSWS as a PDF file. We urge all of our readers to download this statement and distribute it at antiwar rallies and meetings, as well as at work locations and other public venues.

Having watched in horror the slaughter of Iraqi soldiers and civilians alike, people around the world are demonstrating this weekend to express their revulsion over the US-British war of aggression. In Washington, San Francisco and Los Angeles large numbers will march on April 12-13 to disassociate themselves from the murderous policies of the Bush administration and express their solidarity with the Iraqi people.

Those who march today are well aware that global antiwar protests by millions earlier this year?the largest in the history of the world?failed to halt the US invasion. All who are determined to fight against this and future acts of imperialist barbarism confront the need for a new political strategy to carry forward this fight.

An effective struggle against war must find firmer political foundations than moral outrage alone. It requires an understanding of the underlying causes of militarism and the development of a program capable of mobilizing the social forces that can put an end to war and the system that creates it.

The US-British conquest of Iraq is an atrocity of world-historic proportions. Confirmed civilian casualties already number in the thousands. Hospitals are admitting 100 patients an hour. They are awash in the blood of women and children hit by tank fire, cluster bombs and shrapnel from cruise missiles. Overworked surgeons are performing amputations without anesthesia and lack even water to clean wounds. Corpses are stacked like cords of wood.

The roads to Baghdad are littered with the burnt-out hulks of civilian vehicles, their passengers lying dead in the road beside them. These killings are calculated and premeditated. Once the US military encountered unexpected resistance from both Iraqi soldiers and civilians in the opening days of the invasion, the order was given to implement a policy of mass slaughter.

So-called ?pockets of resistance??snipers bullets and small arms fire?are being answered with air strikes and devastating artillery barrages. The infamous prescription of the Vietnam War era??We had to destroy the village to save it??is being applied in heavily populated urban areas.

The number of Iraqi soldiers killed remains unknown. Most of them draftees as young as 17, these troops have been incinerated in carpet bombing by B-52s, artillery barrages and strafing by attack helicopters. Those who survived have launched heroic attempts to stop the US and British invaders, only to be mowed down by fire from tanks and armored vehicles that have proven largely immune to the light arms of the Iraqi defenders. In its first ?drive-by? assault on the streets of the Iraqi capital, the US military claimed to have killed some 3,000 Iraqis, while suffering only one American casualty.

An entire generation of Iraqi young men is being exterminated. Not since the European rape of Africa or the Indian wars in the US has there been such an unequal conflict. With a population more than 10 times as large as Iraq?s and a military budget that is nearly 3,000 times greater, Washington launched its cowardly invasion of the Middle Eastern country only after first subjecting it to continuous bombardment and economic sanctions that starved it of the most basic resources over the course of a decade.

Those waging this war in the name of ?freedom? and ?democracy? have deliberately targeted journalists who dare to report the carnage and fail to tow the line of the Pentagon censors. Nothing could make more explicit the depravity of the American media than the attempt of many US commentators to justify the bombing of Al-Jazeera and shelling of journalists? quarters.


The carnage continues

While the US military has seized control of Baghdad, no one should be under any illusion. The carnage will continue. There are not enough troops to police a city of 5 million, much less the rest of the country, and those who are there will resort to overwhelming force and terror as they settle into an open-ended occupation of Iraq.

It is only a matter of time before the US soldiers and marines are ordered to fire upon the same cheering crowds of impoverished looters that have inspired such repellent triumphalism among the media and the right-wing supporters of the war.

Even as fighting continued in Iraq, a report came from Afghanistan that US warplanes had bombed a house, massacring 11 civilians, most of them women and children. More than 8,000 American troops remain there 18 months after the US invaded.

The warmongers in the Bush administration have already threatened that Iran and Syria will be ?held accountable? for allegedly ?interfering? with the US invasion. American forces attacked a clearly marked convoy of Russian diplomats leaving Iraq. The logic of imperialist conquest means that the next war of aggression is already well beyond the planning stage.

It is increasingly apparent to people all over the world that the greatest threat facing mankind is the global eruption of American militarism.


A war of imperialist plunder

The US government?both the Republicans in the Bush administration and the Democrats in Congress?the major corporations and banks, the media and every other institution of the American establishment have blood on their hands. The war in Iraq is being waged for imperialist plunder. It is in flagrant violation of international law. Its aim is the seizure of the vast oil wealth of the country and its transformation into a colonial protectorate.

Behind the lies about Baghdad?s ?weapons of mass destruction? and alleged ties to terrorism, as well as the hypocritical denunciations of Saddam Hussein?s tyranny, the gangsters in the White House decided they could steal an entire country and nobody could stop them. They are guilty of war crimes, including the most serious under the standards of the Nuremberg Trials of Nazi leaders: the planning and execution of a war of aggression.

The war cabal in Washington attempts to implicate the entire American people in this atrocity. But the war is being fought in the interests of the American financial oligarchy. The violent subjugation and colonization of Iraq in no way expresses the interests of American working people. On the contrary, this war crime only strengthens those forces most rabidly hostile to the social conditions and democratic rights of the working class.

While the young American soldiers sent to kill or be killed in Iraq will return home to find that jobs, money for education and benefits for veterans are all being slashed, those who have promoted the war?the oil companies, arms contractors, construction firms and their political stooges?hope to reap a windfall from the shattered country.

Behind the jingoism and cynical calls to ?Support our troops,? the US war fever is driven by a profound social crisis within the US, whose most essential feature is an historically unprecedented level of social inequality between the vast majority of working people and a thin layer of multimillionaires and billionaires who control the government, the media and the Pentagon.


Crisis of American capitalism

The gangsterism in foreign policy, like the criminality in the corporate boardrooms and finance houses, is not simply the product of the twisted politics of the clique in Washington. Rather, their rise to power and their policies express the desperate attempt of America?s ruling elite to defend its economic interests under conditions of a deepening crisis of American capitalism.

Hand-in-hand with war abroad, the administration is embarked upon the destruction of democratic rights at home. Its aim is to create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation in which all political opposition to the policies of the ruling elite can be silenced. The roundup of Arab and Muslim immigrants and the gutting of Constitutional protections have now been joined with violent repression against opponents of the war.

The use of wooden and rubber bullets, concussion grenades and other paramilitary weapons against demonstrators and dockworkers in Oakland, California April 7, as well as the mass arrest the same day of over 100 people engaged in legal protest in New York City, constitute a grave warning. The administration in Washington would welcome its own Kent State-style massacre.

Backed by the corporate-run mass media, the administration is attempting to mobilize its ?base? among the police and the most backward and reactionary sections of the population. Contained within these dangerous developments are the seeds of a fascist movement.

Despite the campaign of government intimidation and the propaganda spewed out by the media, the majority of the American population does not share these views. No one should be fooled by the illusory claims of the opinion pollsters. Stunned by the eruption of violence and benumbed by the senseless cheerleading of the ?embedded? journalists, broad layers of working people remain deeply disturbed and repelled by the slaughter being carried out in their name.

The same administration that cynically promises the ?liberation? of Iraq and a new life of liberty and prosperity for its people pursues policies that condemn growing numbers of American working people to lives of privation. More than 2 million workers have lost their jobs since Bush took office, nearly half a million of them in the past two months alone.

Even an early end of the fighting in Iraq will not reverse the downward economic spiral, which is the product of a fundamental crisis within the capitalist economy, expressed most sharply in the protracted decline in the profit rates of manufacturing industries.


Complicity of the Democratic Party

Just as it has backed Bush on the war in Iraq, the Democratic Party provides the administration with the support it needs to carry out an oppressive social policy at home. On all essential questions, it stands with the Republicans in defending the profits and privileges of the American financial oligarchy.

Those who suggest that protest can push this party of big business into fighting the policies of Bush and claim that the election of a Democrat in 2004 will reverse the global rampage of American imperialism are engaging in either self-delusion or political charlatanry. The interests of the vast majority of the working people, those who depend upon a paycheck for their livelihood, can find no expression in the two-party system.

Similarly, the illusion that the United Nations or the European powers can serve as a bulwark against war has been thoroughly exposed. All of them are now seeking to make their accommodation with American imperialism, offering to legitimize the war and US occupation of Iraq in return for a share of the spoils.

The struggle against war requires the organization of the great mass of the American working population as an independent political force, fighting for its own interests against those of the financial oligarchy. It alone?allied with the working people internationally?has a potential power greater than that of the ruling elite with its smart bombs and cruise missiles.

The struggle against militarism and imperialist war can be carried forward only through the mobilization of the working class?independent of the Democrats and Republicans?against the entire capitalist system of class privilege and oppression.

Such a movement must be based on internationalism: the fundamental principle that working people in every country share common interests and a common oppressor and must unite in a struggle to harness the world economy to serve the interests of mankind as a whole.

The simultaneous eruption of antiwar mobilizations in every corner of the world foreshadows the emergence of an independent political movement of workers internationally on the basis of a common perspective of social equality, the defense of democratic rights, and peace.

The development of such a conscious world movement is the political goal of the World Socialist Web Site. Its aim, and that of the Socialist Equality Party, is not to organize more and bigger protests for their own sake. Rather, we strive to prepare working people all over the world to take political power and create the foundations of a socialist society that can put an end to war.

We call upon all those searching for a means to fight against this criminal war to participate in this historic task by actively working for the WSWS, building its readership, contributing articles and supporting it financially. We urge you to study the program and history of the Socialist Equality Party and make the decision to join and build it.



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


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblez@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1450309 - 04/11/03 05:46 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

World Socialist Web Site www.wsws.org



I love a nice unbiased source.


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinearabmobster
#1

Registered: 04/01/03
Posts: 317
Loc: Palestine
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: z@z.com]
    #1450313 - 04/11/03 05:49 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

i hope america does attck syria
the syrians will teach them a lesson
so they learn to mind their fucking bussiness


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,246
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1450316 - 04/11/03 05:50 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Sadly, people actually believe this crap.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,246
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1450320 - 04/11/03 05:51 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

i hope america does attck syria
the syrians will teach them a lesson
so they learn to mind their fucking bussiness



I hope we attack no-one. The Iraqis were going to teach us a lesson also. The syrians will not do any better.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinearabmobster
#1

Registered: 04/01/03
Posts: 317
Loc: Palestine
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1450323 - 04/11/03 05:53 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

oh yeay
they will you attavk them iran will get involved and lebanon


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,246
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1450325 - 04/11/03 05:56 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

I believe they are looking for a new Iraqi Information Minister.

Since you seem to have the same grasp of reality as the previous one, you'd do well.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinearabmobster
#1

Registered: 04/01/03
Posts: 317
Loc: Palestine
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1450331 - 04/11/03 05:59 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

i will be the next suddam
hopefully


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinearabmobster
#1

Registered: 04/01/03
Posts: 317
Loc: Palestine
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1450333 - 04/11/03 06:00 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

ill make sure that there isn't one american on our land
the land that you guys are trying to take away from us


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblez@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1450337 - 04/11/03 06:01 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Who is suddam?
And why would you want to opress an entire country?


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblez@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1450339 - 04/11/03 06:01 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Where does this hate come from?


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinearabmobster
#1

Registered: 04/01/03
Posts: 317
Loc: Palestine
Last seen: 13 years, 1 month
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: z@z.com]
    #1450344 - 04/11/03 06:03 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

i love my home land
but i cant watch a country lye and say they are liberating the people when they are after their wealth and and


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblez@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1450392 - 04/11/03 06:26 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

So you support Saddam? You want to be more like him?
I can see being against this war, but if you are truly for Saddam you are a madman.


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1450510 - 04/11/03 07:19 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

you should try to avoid propaganda, not seek it out.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1450611 - 04/11/03 08:18 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

i hope that we dont attack syria, but dont fool yourself we do. we'll wipe them off the map just like we're doing with ol saddam.

no one could hope to withstand the might of the american war machine. i think WE killed more of our own soldiers than the iraqis, and the causalty rate is probably 1:1000, in america's favor.

like i said. dont fool yourself.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: ]
    #1450630 - 04/11/03 08:28 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

yes, but do not forget. allah is with them.


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: ]
    #1450639 - 04/11/03 08:33 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Since when has that mattered?


--------------------
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
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Evolving]
    #1450652 - 04/11/03 08:44 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

better hope allah has a couple hundred thousand well armed mechanized infantry with air support and artillery if he's gonna do em any good, haha.


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: ]
    #1450654 - 04/11/03 08:45 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

no one could hope to withstand the might of the american war machine. i think WE killed more of our own soldiers than the iraqis, and the causalty rate is probably 1:1000, in america's favor.




Im not fooling myself; but Hitler's war machine was equally invincible in 1941.


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


"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: 3 years, 8 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1450669 - 04/11/03 08:52 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

We are at the cutting edge of EMP weapons and that is the only way I see to beat us at this point.


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 26,816
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 11 hours, 28 minutes
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1450672 - 04/11/03 08:54 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

*smacks arabmobster with his shoe*


--------------------
(•_•)
<) )~  ANTIFA
/ \
\(•_•)
( (>    SUPER
/ \
(•_•)
<) )>    SOLDIERS
  / \


LET'S GO, DARWIN!


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]
    #1450676 - 04/11/03 08:56 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

We are at the cutting edge of EMP weapons and that is the only way I see to beat us at this point.




No such weapons have as yet been deployed, AFAIK. And a few good old-fashioned low-tech nukes can work wonders, too. I hope "Dobby" Putin has enough sense to use them before the NMD is operational.


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


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


Edited by Annapurna1 (04/11/03 08:57 PM)


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

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 3 years, 8 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1450701 - 04/11/03 09:04 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

E-bombs are right around the corner. And those are the ones that can be used tacticly were our troops and equipment is near by. Raw EMP is available now. Those can be used against a nuke missile and would be even if it meant darkening NYC. Of course a mini nuke hand carried could get through but that would not win a war.


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: mntlfngrs]
    #1450711 - 04/11/03 09:09 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

i just came up with a conspiracy theory type thing.

during the cold war, both the americans and the soviets had spies operating in all of their enemy's major cities with nuclear weapons. just living there with a nuke in their apartment, blending in, waiting in case they were to strike... some of these networks are still maintained.


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

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 3 years, 8 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: ]
    #1450738 - 04/11/03 09:18 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

I don't think that is a conspiracy. I thought there were suitcase nukes missing from the Russian arsenal.


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePsiloKitten
Ganja Goddess

Registered: 02/13/99
Posts: 1,617
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: mntlfngrs]
    #1450747 - 04/11/03 09:22 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

I remember when they used to test the little suitcase emps at the the base I lived on.  People would have to spend weeks shuffling paperwork after returning to their vehicle that no longer ran because it had some fancy smancy onboard computer that had been knocked out :smile:  I got reimbursed for a radar detector that got "jammed".

I hope that more money is invested in this type of warfare..  I find it interesting that the UK was dropping cement bombs.. Id even be happier with that.  but this damn depleted uranium shit really pisses me the fuck off.  Since it costs so much to properly dispose of it.. lets make it into weaponry and leave it in our enemy lands.. great idea.

Anyway, I personally vote Syria... but Ive been giving some thought to Palestine lately.  Its really hot for syria right now, in more ways then one... so we may not see it until fall.  Its just really hard to say, because it would be smart for them to go right on in, plus we arent really fighting any groundwar, so the heat isnt that big of an issue and we are there anyway.  Not to mention the fact that they just sent the moab over to the persian gulf.  It all really depends on what the motives of this administration truly are.  I know Israel is gunning for Hezbollah and there is a pretty interesting Israel/ 9-11 link.

Also, why is pakistan that crazy:
http://www.rense.com/general37/islamnuke.htm  -- Israel or pakistan = bigger ally?


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


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]
    #1450749 - 04/11/03 09:23 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

. And a few good old-fashioned low-tech nukes can work wonders, too. I hope "Dobby" Putin has enough sense to use them before the NMD is operational.



So you think suicide is the proper goal for Russia? Putin is a lot more intelligent than that.


--------------------
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
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 3 years, 8 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: PsiloKitten]
    #1450758 - 04/11/03 09:26 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

They should drop the MOAB in an open unmaned area just to get it on TV so I can see it. I liked the cement bombs too. A plane is just a broke with a hole through it as it is blown up.


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1450763 - 04/11/03 09:27 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Hitler could have won the war, but he was a fool.


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]
    #1450779 - 04/11/03 09:32 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

E-bombs are right around the corner. And those are the ones that can be used tacticly were our troops and equipment is near by. Raw EMP is available now. Those can be used against a nuke missile and would be even if it meant darkening NYC. Of course a mini nuke hand carried could get through but that would not win a war.




Two things are certain: a) no such weapon exists; and b) the other nuclear powers dont believe that one is in the offing. If a) were false and there was such a thing, then the Shrub would have already launched a massive preemptive strike against the Russians (or at least issued an ultimatum). OTOH, if the Russians believed that we were on the brink of acquiring a true anti-missile defense (of whatever kind), then they would launch a preemptive strike against Amerikkka before it could be implemented (unless their as stupid as they appear to be).

Finally, a nuke deployed from a ballistic missile is grounded against EMPs, since the explosions themselves generate EMPs and several nukes must be allowed to explode near each other simultaneously.



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


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


Edited by Annapurna1 (04/11/03 09:35 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]
    #1450798 - 04/11/03 09:38 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

OTOH, if the Russians believed that we were on the brink of acquiring a true anti-missile defense (of whatever kind), then they would launch a preemptive strike against Amerikkka before it could be implemented (unless their as stupid as they appear to be).



THAT would be suicide. A preemptive strike against the U.S. would result in the obliteration of Russia. The U.S. has nuclear armed submarines and aircraft ready to strike at anytime. Ever heard of the concept of M.A.D.? It's a good thing you aren't in Putin's place, the world would be a lot more dangerous.


--------------------
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
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 3 years, 8 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1450803 - 04/11/03 09:39 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

What is the range of the EMP from a nuke blast. They might be far enough apart to be ok. We are still working on grounding techniqs ourselvs.

The stealth bomber was being tested in the 50's wasn't it? I can't imagine what we may have now.


--------------------
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: Evolving]
    #1450846 - 04/11/03 09:53 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Quote:

. And a few good old-fashioned low-tech nukes can work wonders, too. I hope "Dobby" Putin has enough sense to use them before the NMD is operational.



So you think suicide is the proper goal for Russia? Putin is a lot more intelligent than that.




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.

Quote:

THAT would be suicide. A preemptive strike against the U.S. would result in the obliteration of Russia. The U.S. has nuclear armed submarines and aircraft ready to strike at anytime. Ever heard of the concept of M.A.D.? It's a good thing you aren't in Putin's place, the world would be a lot more dangerous.




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.

Quote:

The stealth bomber was being tested in the 50's wasn't it? I can't imagine what we may have now.




The original stealth bomber was the Nazi Horten B220 (1944).




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


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


Edited by Annapurna1 (04/11/03 10:07 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]
    #1451011 - 04/11/03 10:55 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

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.

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.


--------------------
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
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Buddha5254]
    #1451025 - 04/11/03 11:05 PM (19 years, 1 month 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: 02/13/99
Posts: 1,617
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: infidelGOD]
    #1451406 - 04/12/03 01:12 AM (19 years, 1 month 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 02:08 AM (19 years, 1 month 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 12:54 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePsiloKitten
Ganja Goddess

Registered: 02/13/99
Posts: 1,617
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1451644 - 04/12/03 02:52 AM (19 years, 1 month 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 02:53 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 05:49 AM (19 years, 1 month 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: 13 years, 1 month
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: ]
    #1451924 - 04/12/03 09:58 AM (19 years, 1 month 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 12:26 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 01:17 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 02:09 PM (19 years, 1 month 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: 3 years, 8 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1452401 - 04/12/03 02:23 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 02:34 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 03:39 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 03:44 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 03:53 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 03:57 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 04:01 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 04:01 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 04:11 PM (19 years, 1 month 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: 3 years, 8 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1452721 - 04/12/03 04:14 PM (19 years, 1 month 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 05:55 PM (19 years, 1 month 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: 3 years, 8 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1453036 - 04/12/03 06:09 PM (19 years, 1 month 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
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1453050 - 04/12/03 06:20 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

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.

if its a 'first strike weapon', what are the small missiles and lasers firing at?


Edited by mushmaster (04/12/03 06:20 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1453069 - 04/12/03 06:35 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

ah, annapurna. you are a man of contradictions. (can i say that?) :wink:

you condemn the government of the US for pre-emtively attacking the government of iraq.

you criticize america's government for trying to develop a sheild from missile attacks, saying that again, this constitutes an aggressive act by the US.

and then you say, in that very same thread, that a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the united states by russia is a good idea, and that if you were president of russia, that's what you'd do.

i'm sure glad that of all the nations in possession of nukes, none of them are run by you.


Condemning america's pre-emptive attack against iraq's government.

then advocating that russia start nuclear war as part of a 'pre-emptive attack'?

and a SHEILD as an aggressive weapon?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1453070 - 04/12/03 06:35 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

"Shrub has attempted to antagonize the Russians at more than one point during the war. And unlike Saddam Hussein, the Russians have real bombs. Does the Shrub know that, or was he just snorting whiskey and drinking cocaine again?? Anyway, it might be better for America and world if we did get nuked..."

"[If EMP weapons existed] Shrub would have already launched a massive preemptive strike against the Russians (or at least issued an ultimatum). OTOH, if the Russians believed that we were on the brink of acquiring a true anti-missile defense (of whatever kind), then they would launch a preemptive strike against Amerikkka (sic) before it could be implemented (unless their as stupid as they appear to be)."

"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."

NUKE AMERICA!!!! NUKE AMERICA!!!! DOWN WITH THE EVIL CAPITALIST EMPIRE!!!!

come on anna, we'll go make some signs we can chant it in the street.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePsilocybeingzz
Male User Gallery

Registered: 12/15/02
Posts: 14,463
Loc: International waters
Last seen: 9 years, 6 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: ]
    #1453145 - 04/12/03 07:15 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

America has not right to
"change" the world they put most of the worlds most horrible leaders in power and "liberation"
is just to make thing easy for them (if you are the richest nation in the world you want and the markets open and cartering to your need ,excuse me .....(pucking sound )
anyway

is the US want to spread democracy around the world they could start byu not selling the most weapons in the world including torture weapons and those are used to
"keep people down"

america has a serious image problem and image that to some extent reflects reality quite well


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous

Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Psilocybeingzz]
    #1453179 - 04/12/03 07:31 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

when a nation surrenders in a war, and then for the next 13 years is in constant violation of the conditional surrender agreement it signed, it gets attacked.

is the US want to spread democracy around the world they could start byu not selling the most weapons in the world including torture weapons and those are used to

some people want to buy weapons. this means someone's going to make them for them. they'll buy the best weapons they can at the cheapest price they can afford. america builds good weapons, and sells them competitively.

or we could stop selling weapons and just let people buy arms from germany instead.

it's called capitalism, and it's DIRTY and EVIL.

weapons are not the reason people have been killing and warring all these years.

we should not be selling devices of torture. this should be illegal. we cannot ban selling weapons. we should not sell weapons to oppressive regimes, and try to prevent others from doing so when possible.


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: ]
    #1453271 - 04/12/03 08:12 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

ah, annapurna. you are a man of contradictions. (can i say that?)




How many guys named "Anna" do you know??


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


"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: 3 years, 8 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: Annapurna1]
    #1453273 - 04/12/03 08:12 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

That must be you in your avatar?


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblePsiloKitten
Ganja Goddess

Registered: 02/13/99
Posts: 1,617
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: PsiloKitten]
    #1454178 - 04/13/03 04:44 AM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:


Anyway, I personally vote Syria... but Ive been giving some thought to Palestine lately.  Its really hot for syria right now, in more ways then one... so we may not see it until fall.  Its just really hard to say, because it would be smart for them to go right on in, plus we arent really fighting any groundwar, so the heat isnt that big of an issue and we are there anyway.  Not to mention the fact that they just sent the moab over to the persian gulf.  It all really depends on what the motives of this administration truly are.  I know Israel is gunning for Hezbollah and there is a pretty interesting Israel/ 9-11 link.




So you want a war?  Ill show you a war.
Oh hell, I didnt know Hizbollah had offices in syria :smile:  One two punch.

Onward Christian Soldiers!
 


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


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblewingnutx

Registered: 09/25/00
Posts: 2,283
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: arabmobster]
    #1467886 - 04/17/03 06:11 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

the syrians will teach them a lesson




Heh, right. Syria couldn't even beat tiny Israel, much less the US or UK. Individually, Arab soldiers are fine. As armies, though, they are spectacularly ineffective.

Syria can continue to beat up on Lebanon, but that's about the limits of their capabilities.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineJohnnyRespect
Nomadic Wanderer
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 676
Loc: East Coast
Last seen: 18 years, 11 months
Re: Syria or Iran? [Re: ]
    #1471712 - 04/18/03 11:27 PM (19 years, 1 month ago)

Syria OR Iran? Heh, I think we should start in Iraq, work east until we reach Israel, South till the Arabian sea, West to India, and North to Georgia. Take their oil, take their terror funding money. I don't think that trading camels gives enough pocket cash to train 20 people to fly airplanes. (note, thats from those terror attacks on 9/11 that most people now seem to have conviently forgotten)

Pz
Johnny R


--------------------
As I felt the soft cool mud squish between my toes, I thought, Man, these are not very good shoes!


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

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds, High THC Strains, USA West Coast Strains   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   North Spore Cultivation Supplies


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Powell softens public for Syria, Iran Invasions EchoVortex 761 3 03/31/03 01:20 PM
by friartuck
* Wonder if Iran will comply. Iran 'violating nuclear treaty' Anonymous 955 10 05/09/03 03:26 PM
by tekramrepus
* the Project for a New American Century
( 1 2 all )
iglou 3,136 26 05/02/03 10:53 AM
by Madtowntripper
* American imperialism - for RailGun headphone 1,495 4 09/06/01 03:08 AM
by MrKurtz
* First Syria, Then Iran Zahid 375 0 10/24/03 02:12 AM
by Zahid
* To All Americans Who Hate America
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 all )
Anonymous 14,714 155 12/19/02 01:29 PM
by Evolving
* Bush threatens Iran and Syria, again. Zahid 785 6 07/30/03 04:58 AM
by soulflyer
* Why Does Washington Hate Saddam? Anonymous 656 1 03/22/03 03:57 PM
by rhizo

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,282 topic views. 1 members, 2 guests and 7 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2022 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.073 seconds spending 0.019 seconds on 18 queries.