| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
George W. Bush Resume Past work experience: Ran for congress and lost Produced a Hollywood slasher B movie. Bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil in Texas, company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock. Bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using tax-payer money. Biggest move: Traded Sammy Sosa to the Chicago Cubs. With fathers help (and his name) was elected Governor of Texas. Accomplishments as Governor- Changed pollution laws for power and oil companies and made Texas the most polluted state in the Union. Replaced Los Angeles with Houston as the most smog ridden city in America. Cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas government to the tune of billions in borrowed money. Set record for most executions by any Governor in American history. Became president after losing the popular vote by over 500,000 votes, with the help of my fathers appointments to the Supreme Court. Accomplishments as president-- Attacked and took over two countries. Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury. Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history. Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period. Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market. First president in decades to execute a federal prisoner. First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record. First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history. After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, presided over the worst security failure in US history. Set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips than any other president in US history. In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job. Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history. Set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12 month period. Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history. Set the record for the least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television. Signed more laws and executive orders amending the Constitution than any president in US history. Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed. Presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have. Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans. Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind. http://www.hyperreal.org/~dana/marches/ Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history. My presidency is the most secretive and un-accountable of any in US history. Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (the 'poorest' multi-millionaire, Condoleeza Rice has an Exxon oil tanker named after her). First president in US history to have all 50 states of the Union simultaneously go bankrupt. Presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud of any market in any country in the history of the world. First president in US history to order a US attack and military occupation of a sovereign nation. Created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States. Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history. First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the human rights commission. First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the elections monitoring board. Removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history. Rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant. Withdrew from the World Court of Law. Refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions. First president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 US elections). All-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations. My biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation). Spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history. First president in US history to unilaterally attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations and the world community. First president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied saying the enemy had the code to Air Force 1) First US president to establish a secret shadow government. Took the biggest world sympathy for the US after 911, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history). With a policy of 'dis-engagement' created the most hostile Israeli-Palestine relations in at least 30 years. Fist US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability. First US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than their immediate neighbor, North Korea. Changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts. Set all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts. Failed to fulfill my pledge to get Osama Bin Laden 'dead or alive'. Failed to capture the anthrax killer who tried to murder the leaders of our country at the United States Capital building. After 18 months I have no leads and zero suspects. In the 18 months following the 911 attacks I have successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States. Removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history. In a little over two years created the most divided country in decades, possibly the most divided the US has ever been since the civil war. Entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down. Records and References At least one conviction for drunk driving in Maine (Texas driving record has been erased and is not available) AWOL from National Guard and Deserted the military during a time of war. Refuse to take drug test or even answer any questions about drug use. \ All records of my tenure as governor of Texas have been spirited away to my fathers library, sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view. All records of any SEC investigations into my insider trading or bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view. All minutes of meetings for any public corporation I served on the board are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view. Any records or minutes from meetings I (or my VP) attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public review. For personal references please speak to my daddy or uncle James Baker (They can be reached at their offices of the Carlyle Group for war-profiteering.) |
|
|
It's not worth it. |
the problem with bullshit is that eventually the truth shakes out. (the problem with the liberal media is that it doesn't always get reported.) |
You have to see this. |
another for spunkstar. |
say, that last link....from the Aussie press...i notice they link Fox Sports...is that a Rupret Murdoch owned site? I wonder...cause if it is...that flushes that source right down the toilet. god damn liberal media. no spunk....i dont want to go "there". i realize some of the shit in this "resume" is enough to make most conservative fucksticks like yourself puke your on your monitor....but most of the items in this document have merit. Im sure you could come up with a similar style item for Clinton....fine whatever. I think its hilarious no less. If you feel the need to dispute any of the items go ahead. That doesnt detract from its entertainment value. |
tactic? oh christ on a crutch its a funny mass email i got...no "tactics" involved. |
Especially when that article quotes people from Downing Street, who months ago were completely PROVEN to have manufactured evidence and plagiarized information, passing it along as fact? If the media was liberal, and I dont mean to dwell but it proves it to me more than anything, those plagiarized documents would have been front page news everywhere, and it would have been a huge blow to Bush's case for war. But it never was. Hmmmmm... But it was in Britain, where the media actually IS rather liberal, even the tabloids. Go figure. However this new evidence which 'destroys the left', which the liberal media doesnt want you to know about or something is already on CNN, yahoo, everywhere... Where does this 'liberal media' stuff come from? It drives me nuts wondering how this idea gets passed around, when the contrary keeps slapping me in the face like a mighty cock of death. |
the baby is asleep and i got my beer on...somebody dance a fucking jig already. |
thank you pez :) *thumbs up* anyhoo.... not to jump sides but: "Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people)" WHOA there! those crazy kids (and i was one of them) were protesting war, patty, WAR. i'll just remind you that it takes hundreds and thousands of people to make a war. Sure, one guy ordered it, but thousands still have to obey. I dunno who you were protesting, but i was protesting against every single one of these people. You could protest just Bush if you wanted to, there's plenty of reason to. i'm sure he had more than one protestor for when he personaly, as Governor, okay-ed the murders of over 100 people by the state of Texas, some of whom were mentally disabled, later found innocent, etc.... But anyway, i'm just saying, 15 million people were never protesting just him. Never ever. That's silly and un-fair. |
|
like i wrote this? lets try not to get too serious about this. |
I dont even know where to begin. I understand the entertainment value, patrick. I hate to disappoint you, but my stomach can take more bs then was crapped all over that piece of trash that showed up on several left wing bush bashing sites, like bushandcheneysuck.com, www.talkleft.com, www.bushisamoron.org, and www.radioleft.com So what? Wisper, I respect you for your post. I don't agree with you, but that is not news. You stand up for exactly the way you feel. I'm not going to re-hash the old question why not protest the Ba'ath Pary, or the Mujahadeen, Hezbollah, HAMAS, Palestine Islamic Jihad, Gama’at al-Islamiyya, Harakat ul-Mujahidin , Saudi Hizbollah, Mujahedine Khalq Organization, etc. whom have killed far more innocent civilians then Gulf War 2, but anyway.... As far as Rowlf goes, did I not say I expected a lot of "it was planted" charges when the evidence I have cited as exising for months is disclosed? The "news" that Hussien was working with Al-Queda is not new. There was no question of that fact durring Clinton's last term, let alone the current administration. Because we have had proof all along. So have all the other perm members of the UN Security Council. What you see is not what is real. Get used to it. You wil see things and hear things that make no sense what so ever. In 1993 the FBI had a plan to replace the powder in the bombs in the WTC with harmless powder. It was called off at the last minute. I do not know why. But we had operatives inside Al-Queda up until the Cole. |
speaking as American I can tell you why...those people don't answer to us. as far as the rest of the world protesting the Administration up to and during the war...I would guess they view Bush as far more a threat to world stability than any of those orgs you mention. the "killed more innocents than Gulf War 2" is a bit questionable, i have no idea where you could get such a fact. In the Palestinian/Israeli matter....the Israeli Army has slaughtered more Palestians...freedom fighters and civilians a like than the Palestinians have. last i checked, and its been a while...the death toll was nearly 3 Palestinians for every dead Israeli, in the last 3 years,...military and otherwise. So...making such a claim aint so easy. |
Pretty goddamned easy. |
I am still up because I am tyring to kick the Tylenol PM habit |
This is NOT the world this country was founded in. Our open society has brought the terrorists to our jobs, our schools, our neighborhoods. If you write this off as paranoia, then you are a fool. It is a fact. TWA 800, WTC 93, OKC, etc prove it. My opinion has changed considerably since 11/01. That was when I started working in a new section at Whiteman. I saw more of what was going on then I ever wanted to. I know what we face. There is only 2 things that will end this crap. 1. Complete isolation. 2. Fight to the death if necessary, because the terrorists will. We cannot continue along the course we have followed for the past 50 years. NK only shows what a failed policy "appeasement" is. It is crystal clear now more then ever that the only thing they want is more money, and oil. They have said, in no uncertain terms, that only signing a "non-agression treaty" that included cash payments and oil shipments would stop them from further manufacture of nukes. Clinton signed that when he was in office. They started it right up again, and started looking for a launch and guidance system. They got that from China. Guess where China got it? They already have complete nuclear weapon systems, and I suspect within the next 3 months they will test one for all the world to see. There is no more time for negotiations. We have tried for 25 years. They have failed. Each of these radical groups wants something different, and contradictory to one another. There will be no peacefull solution that all groups will accept. Now we must fight all of them. Or lose. |
in 92 clinton took 43% of the popular vote. among washington bureau chiefs and reporters he took 89% of the vote (in the same demographic bush took 3%.) jeez, i'm sure they're all fair and balanced in their reporting. clinton himself refered to the media as "the knee-jerk liberal press." investigate it with an open mind. it is pretty fucking obvious. |
|
|
wait....so the NYT endorsement is a standard for an entire industry? dude.....sometime your throw your standards right out the window. Clinton was the first Democrat to win 2 terms since FDR...do you think that says much more than the the NYT endorsements? |
you don't see a liberal bias in the media? do you think bill o'reilly is a hard right conservative? |
i see some liberal bias you bet. i see more conservative bias. what about entertainment news? CNN, MSNBC, FOX...all entertainment companies first, they are, to me, inherently biased to the right because of the fact that their primary goal is to keep viewers, not report the news objectively. if they reported the news objectively and fairly, they'd have every corn-eating midwestern like trace bitching about how unAmerican they are. you don't keep viewers with posing potentially unpopular stories. |
Except for talk radio, which is already undoubtedly conservative across the board, and that dates back long ago, and it has a lot to do with the fact that AM radio has always been where the Christians rule the world. Then theres the newspapers. I hear the LA Times is pretty liberal, but I dont read it. But do you think thats representative of all newspapers? Have you ever READ Midwest/South newspapers? The internet is so big I dont know if its liberal or conservative, and noone probably ever will. As for Clinton, he ran on the Democrat ticket, but look at his political record while he was in office. He was pretty Republican when you look at what he actually did rather than what his supposed beliefs are. The media protected his fuel standards eliminating ass right up till when everyone got cheesed about blowjobs. And they took it out on Gore, who is moderately liberal (but not in practice)... look at all the election coverage, FOXNews being run by Bush's FUCKING COUSIN, the media overlooking the conflicts of interest in the Supreme Court, the justices relatives/sons being part of Bush's team. How Bush's past never seemed to be brought up, but everything Gore said was held to incredible scrutiny in the televised media. Which I liked, Gore WAS lying, but think about it. Bush got off with his remarks, Gore was made into Mr. Liar, and made to look like HE was the one holding up the process with recounts... if the media was so liberal, wouldnt Bush have been made into the joke, and the media would have apologized for everything Gore said, instead of the other way around? If the media was liberal, wouldnt it have been after Bush's head for getting selected by the Supreme Court? If that had happened anywhere else in the world, the media would have assaulted him into resigning in disgrace within weeks. Cable news TV? Lately they are leaning to the right, and FOXNews is definitely the most right wing, and their 'fair and balanced' tag is probably the biggest lie on TV. O'Reilly is no liberal as far as I can tell (and if he's meant to be, he's there to make other liberals look bad), the NYT since 9/11 have not been dovish at all, Rolling Stone is liberal but they support various Republicans like McCain. I suppose you could mention Adbusters, the Nation and Mother Jones, but these few underground magazines/papers as examples dont represent whats really out there. When you divide up the pie its not liberal. At all. Presidential nominations? Whatever, they're the same party, spouting the same lines and funded by the same people, nominations dont mean for shit. If the paper were to say 'fuck both of these people', then I'd say they were more liberal, because thats what liberals have shifted to in the past 10 years. Republicans vote for Republicans, everyone else is voting for the lesser of two evils, if for any of them at all. Unless of course you think the US Democratic Party are actually liberals, and that people are actually voting FOR them rather than AGAINST Republicans. Well, maybe they're voting for Democrats in California. The people in your state are fucked up. Maybe its the heat, those freaky lizard people. "you don't see a liberal bias in the media?" what the hell is this liberal bias towards? Are you telling me the media is clearly anti-war, pro-choice, anti-death penalty, anti-SUV, for social programs, for gun control, against monopoly in big business? You're telling me they're suspicious of politicians, ask hard questions of them, and run stories about scandals within corporations that are owned by the media company? That they run stories about the environment? Jesus Christ, I watched the news for a couple hours on Earth Day and they didnt even mention it once! I went off on several tangents here, but trust me, it didnt take as long to spew this out as it looks... |
Our open society has brought the terrorists to our jobs, our schools, our neighborhoods. If you write this off as paranoia, then you are a fool. It is a fact. " you're insane. Who in your neighborhood is a terrorist? Can you tell? Do they have kids? Do they look at you funny? "2. Fight to the death if necessary, because the terrorists will." I thought all those "terrorists" ran away and surrendered? This is moronic. You can never run out of terrorists, it will never end if the US doesnt want it to. You kill one terrorist you piss off someone else and they become one. You can conceivably create less places for them to be (by bombing their countries to pieces) but you can't get rid of them. Ever. EVER. The only think you can do to create less 'fights' is to STOP PARTICIPATING IN THEM. "As far as Rowlf goes, did I not say I expected a lot of "it was planted" charges when the evidence I have cited as exising for months is disclosed?" You've seen Wag the Dog havent you? Not that I trust polls that much, but its been clear that people since the war began are believing less that there ever was a link, that there ever was any WMDs. Bush needed to "prove" it. It may or may not be planted, however the circumstances, timing, and coincidences here suggest to me that is is a very very real possibility. Are you telling me that governments DONT lie during wartime to suit their own political agenda? Are you telling me that there have NOT been any lies? That the fake UN dossier WASNT plagiarized? You yourself suggested to all of us that the information about the plane over Pennsylvania was a lie... You think these "it was planted" thing is just us being assholes, being anti-American or some shit. Its not. The distrust is well founded, and if noones questioning what the government says is true, what will they do next? Don't you see how vital it is to question this? |
I dont mind shows or networks having a slant at all. I dont mind editorials taking one side. I dont expect the news to be objective right down the middle. What I do have a problem with is when for example, one person owns a giant chain of newspapers around the country and mandates his/her political views to the staff, and instead of spinning news that might harm their point of view, they ignore it completely. Thats the problem these days. Huge stories are being ignored, you can present any sort of opinion on the air, people will make up their own minds - however if you neglect to report important news at all, then whatever the bias is becomes dangerous. To me, the only thing I need to prove my case that the media is leaning right these past few years is that they arent properly acknowledging, if acknowledging at all, a large amount of newsworthy events that have happened that would harm the right wing. |
around 5 other newspapers, including the Toronto Star, are arguing with each other, each claiming that they and they alone were the ones who found them. Doesnt that strike you as odd? or that the CIA had already been through these same buildings with a fine tooth comb and found nothing, but these journalists did? and now they're going to trot Saddam as the man behind 9/11 since bin Laden cant be found? from the Telegraph: "President George W Bush confided to colleagues that he believed that Saddam was directly involved in the attacks. "He probably was behind this in the end," he said." |
Im ashamed. FYI Rowlfy the LA Times is fairly liberal, but they have a way of completely dropping the ball when it comes to local and state politics....like just not even reporting certain matters. |
where are you from and how old are you? |
The only thing about SoCal that I miss. Well, one of the only things. |
I miss these guys |
As far as i'm concerned, if you paste something rather than wording it out yourself, it's like you're saying it anyway. It seems to be the cause of many arguments around here. thank you spunky :) "each claiming that they and they alone were the ones who found them. Doesnt that strike you as odd?" all the reporters in there can read Arabic? Or was this shit typed in english. I bet it had TOP SECRET stamped on the front and everything. And it was at the end of a trail of chocolate eggs. I'm telling you boys... there's nothing better to put your mind back on what's really important than spending 7 hours straight puking. For no reason. That's when you realize that Iraq, Bush, oil, NK, Syria, can all go fuck right off. Me and my tummy and mr.toilet, that's what truly matters. What a fresh new perspective i have. |
Im ashamed." supposedly the freest media in the world, and nobody there wants it. spunky, I'm just west of SARSville, in Soviet Canuckistan, in those long dark twenties. why do you ask? Its quite a ride, getting every American channel, nightly news reports from the UK, and a very varied Canadian media to sort of filter all this information through to everyones own idea of the truth is... Its very frustrating watching the local Buffalo news, how its the Bills football game as the top story, then the highschool football game, followed by weather/traffic, then a little bit of "the real news". Thats no joke. Noone learns a damn thing, conspiracy theories about the media working with the government to keep people stupid? Watching your news from here, sometimes it seems so... probable. Its like watching the horror movie with the guy who should realize Leatherface is in the next room, and you're screaming for him to do something, but he goes and takes a shower anyway... so frustrating... |
Actually, we have had at least one, from Turkey, in our apartment complex. |
and tell me about how that would be indicative of everywhere else? |
The groups are coming across the borders from canada and mexico. His wife told us about it. Not to mention where I work. And it really is not public information. |
Don't worry, The Smoking Gun is actaully pretty balanced. They blow the wistle on all sides. |
|
The groups are coming across the borders from canada and mexico. " considering the 9/11 terrorists were supposedly trained at secure US military bases (source: Newsweek, Washington Post, etc), I find it amazing you'd blame border cops for terrorists... If these people can get into military bases, they would get past any border, no matter how secure... "His wife told us about it. Not to mention where I work. And it really is not public information" So in other words, its a secret... you sure you never make anything up and then tell us all its classified just to prove a point? Arent there people where you work who would be keeping you from hinting at this stuff it was true? Because if anyone wanted to, with the personal information you have put on here, they could pass on your hinting at these secret arrests, that stuff about the plane over Pennsylvania, on to Alex Jones or Gary Bell... if you dont know who they are, all you need to know is that would be very bad for your job security, and you'd be getting a lot of phonecalls. |
|
I am not as dumb as you evidently think. |
|
we probably have some muslim extremists and a few tim mcveigh wannabes, too. i really don't care about them. |
not any longer. |
wisper. its a conversation. are you asking anyone who posts something they didnt write to doctor the document up so it suits your anal intricacies? Since when did you apply journalistic decency to this site? have some coedine and get back to bad you. |
Two nights and no Tylenol PM! WooHoo! |
|
not any longer." "terrorist" is a subjective term. so the gov't deems someone a "terrorists", and you, like the perfect gov't stooge accepts their hogshit as fact without a trial of any sort trial SO you, SIR, mister civilian network security Gomer Pile on the base guy know for GOD DAMN FACT they arrested a bonafide terrorists. you're a problem trace. odds would in my favor to bet this guy probably violated his visa while trying to attend school or support his family who happened to be brown, and all you good ole boys in TX went on a hootenany about the terrorist they nabbed. fucking ridiculous. |
I looked something up in the dictionary last night and my eye fell on "Argy-bargy." 1920s British slang for an argument. Is that not the lamest word you've ever heard? |
I'm sorry. You are incorrect. His wife and his brother and best friend were all suspicious. Large sums of cash (tens of thousands) hidden from wife. No job what so ever. Lots of time on phone back to Turkey. |
|
kind of like descartes did with god. |
His wife and his brother and best friend were all suspicious. Large sums of cash (tens of thousands) hidden from wife. No job what so ever. Lots of time on phone back to Turkey." Since when spunk, was any of this illegal or even grounds for arrest or detainment? You're really scary spunk. |
His wife and his brother and best friend were all suspicious. Large sums of cash (tens of thousands) hidden from wife. No job what so ever. Lots of time on phone back to Turkey" so is this person being detained indefinitely without a trial? without being charged of anything? because if you're going on rumors, and he isnt being given a chance to defend himself, I question why you've drawn your conclusions... my uncles a cop, everyone around his office talks about who's guilty and who isn't. They think they're all guilty, after all, THEY arrested them. They're not always right. Don't people from Turkey phone people from Turkey? Was he ever phoning Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia? Large sums of cash? You know how many husbands keep large sums of cash from their wives? My dad pulls that shit (mom sometimes thinks he's going to leave her and move to Barbados or something with his hidden money), my granddad does that shit (allegedly sends his secret dough to televangelists and missionaries), a couple of my uncles do that shit (allegedly secret stock investments, as well as religious groups) . They're assholes but I highly doubt my dad is part of an international terrorist organization. So what else makes them suspicious? What IS your definition of terrorist anyway, how wide is your verbal net here trace? Are they terrorists even before they actually do anything, before they ever even use threat of force to coerce or kill? Does having Osama's 'terrorist bible' make them a terrorist any more than reading Mein Kampf makes one a Nazi? For all you know he's just a suspicious guy from Turkey. Could be a mob member, organized crime. Mobs are everywhere, some small, some big.... could be lots of things, why are you saying so clearly that this guy is a terrorist? I'm paranoid about cops coming to the door. Thats what cops are for. Thats why COPS is on 3 times a night. Deterrence, yo. patrick: "Since when did you apply journalistic decency to this site?" you do it to trace when he posts as someone else, and you do hold him accountable for what he cuts/pastes patty... |
tricky language Nate, explain "thin opinions"... and example? And tell us all of the basic fundamentals... |
i just said it got old, as i recall. further....my post clearly had no journalistic integrity and was OBVIOUSLY for entertainment purposes only. Have I made any series of claims based on the Bushg resume I posted? When spunk makes a claim, then cites a source, i take issue of the source. you people have taken this Bush resume post of mine way too fuckin seriously. |
http://www.positiveatheism.org/faq/descartes.htm |
He believed that his downstairs neighbor was tapping their house somehow and was reporting him to the police (there was no one in that apartment and it is still empty). He DID have a job. He worked as a valet for one of his friends from Turkey. Made $7 per hour under the table. Worked odd hours that didn't make sense, but whatever. When his wife started to catch on that things weren't quite right she was pregnant. He wrote a letter to her OBGYN telling the doctor that he was afraid she would do something to the baby to hurt it and that he wanted the doctor to lock her up until the baby was born and then take the baby away from her and give it to him. I saw the letter. He didn't write it, someone else did and he signed it. It was really weird. About 3 months after he went back to Turkey (if it was even that long) he completely disappeared. Totally off of the radar. Apparently his family can't even find him now, though I don't really buy that. After he left his friends played emotional games with the wife (G) and used their culture and the games they played as a way to completely remove themselves from her life (the did genuinely like her, so I think it was their way of taking her off of the groups radar and leaving her alone). It's all wierd and a bit complicated. A lot of it you had to see to believe. It was quite scary towards the end when he thought of my daughter as a threat to him and wanted to hurt her. Was he just a nut job? No. The doctors had proven that to themselves when he was in the hospital and they didn't keep him in the hospital because there was nothing wrong with him mentally (other than being a total fuckhead). He was as sane as can be, but paranoid as fuck, and now who knows where he is? There were tens of thousands floating around hidden from his wife. She did find one account with about $16,000 in it at the end, though his brother took a good chunk of it. She found close to ten grand hidden in things in the apartment. One second they are flat broke and then she finds $3000 in small bills hidden inside her mattress. You may have had to live it to truly understand it, but I guarantee you that he was a terrorist, and when I became friends with his wife, we became a threat to him. Within 4 months he was gone. |
considering this 'joke' has many elements of truth, yet several exaggerations of the truth, I can see why spunk would get upset. Seeing as you now seem to be upset that they took it seriously, it suggests that you took the 'joke' seriously... did you post it to make me or anyone else laugh, or to instead directly or indirectly poke at trace? |
rowlf i posted it thinking others would get a similar cheeky grin from it that id. *sigh* any issues with the integrity or content within, please see the management. I am not responsible for the content, nor do i cite it as any credible source of which i base my personal opinions on. there. does that relieve me of any reponsibility other than being the sole reason this shitter of a thread exists? i'll gladly take responsibility for that. |
besides the fact that you and trace say the opposite about him holding a job.... look at the post again and pretend you are talking about Dale Gribble from King of the Hill. its the same. These people are everywhere. He could very well just be paranoid, and paranoia and insanity arent so far apart, it makes people do crazy things. Him having a knife, some hidden money doesnt mean much... you are jumping to conclusions... |
Then again, I think you would concider any person threatening your child a threat. I think it would cause anyone who is a parent of who loves that child to worry themselves. The only thing I can guarantee you is that this man was not insane, by any stretch of the imagination. |
And someone who is that paranoid is not sane. You gotta watch that paranoia thing, it's not healthy at all. I suppose he could have been a terrorist, but an Atta-level terrorist? i doubt it. More like one of those dudes on the extreme right in our nation who can't go five minutes without getting worked up over Waco and Ruby Ridge. |
...but it doesnt make them a terrorist "The only thing I can guarantee you is that this man was not insane, by any stretch of the imagination" by any stretch of the imagination? paranoia \Par`a*noi"a, n. (Med.) A chronic form of insanity characterized by very gradual impairment of the intellect, systematized delusion, and usually by delusious of persecution or mandatory delusions producing homicidal tendency. In its mild form paranoia may consist in the well-marked crotchetiness exhibited in persons commonly called ``cranks.'' Paranoiacs usually show evidences of bodily and nervous degeneration, and many have hallucinations, esp. of sight and hearing. |
granted their two individual opinions don't mean much but i instinctively take their views as the norm in America. |
i don't know the basic fundementals. i'm trying to arrive at them. i'm trying to take on wildly divergent views and vigorously prove them, and by doing so remove the wheat from the chaff and extract tiny threads of truth from giant tapistries of confused bullshit. and i agree with that guy. my lower level philosophy prof called me a moron for trying to point out that descrates wasn't making logical conclusions. yeah for good teachers! |
|
I think a terrorist would find a better place to fit in... |
"i don't know the basic fundementals. i'm trying to arrive at them. i'm trying to take on wildly divergent views and vigorously prove them, and by doing so remove the wheat from the chaff and extract tiny threads of truth from giant tapistries of confused bullshit." My 12th grade law teacher was just like that, best teacher I ever had. Spent a week debating the class that the earth was flat, that there was a portal to another dimension that appears whenever we close the cupboard door, and that the Moon Landing was a hoax. Of course now I believe the landing was a hoax anyways... The only danger in proving these views is, like skeptics of psychics, religion, global warming, etc - they aim at making it common knowledge that they do not exist, rather than what they set out to do, make it common knowledge its possible they do not exist. I think its better to insist that noone knows rather than insist that its definitely not. |
If there was one thing I could change or improve upon, that would be critical thinking. |
Not coming from you Patrick. You have made no secret of your hate for the man. You see conspiracy in everything he does. And as far as the neighbour upstairs not being a threat, that again proves to me the only thing that will ever convince you that something is a threat is a mushroom cloud. And i beleive it would ahve to be in your front yard even at that. |
LOL They are all over the place out here and very common. Tons of muslims in San Antonio. Most of them are very nice people (at least the ones that I have met). |
How do you in Canuksville know what it is like in Texas? |
IT WAS A FUCKING JOKE love Rowlf |
As far as your former neighbor goes...everything you and your wife have described depicts a wacky neighbor that i wouldnt leave my kids around for a split second. no one is denying THAT threat. The problem is the "terrorist" aspect of the label which you so easily handed over because he was a mentally unstable, had money that he kept from his wife and made phone calls to Turkey where he was from. If this is your sole basis of deeming someone a terrorist, your a fucking idiot and as I have repeatedly said armed with this mentality present more of a threat to the well being of this country than any real terrorist could. |
What is it that will make you decide someone is one? I am not playing spy here. I am not talking about Mcarthyism. I am talking about a fucking scary individual whom his family, not me, but family labeled as such. Keep your god damn judgements about me, my "parinioa", and my intelligence in check. They are not valid and not welcome. |
Your opinion of my intelligence, my ethics, my judgement, my values really are not very important to me, but you do not hesitate to label me with what ever comes to your mind. You are quick to label anyone who is honestly working to keep this country safe, but what alternatives have you suggested? Newsflash: All attacks on American Soil generated from terrorist cells in the United States. Is there anyone who honestly beleives there are no such cells here? Rowlf, and anyone else who has made the suggestion that this man we have been talking about here has been judged or held without trial: He is now back in Turkey with his group. Never arrested or detained. Never charged with anything. His family and us by default have regarded him as a terrorist due to suspicious behavior and actions. And some things that came directly from his mouth. Yes. We have to have a little paranioa. There will be innocents accused. You bet your ass. Yes, that is tragic. I wish we had done something on September 10, 2001 to stop these guys. It would have required paranioa, and pre-emptive action. I advocate such things, because the alternative is to wait for another 3,000 deaths within seconds. Next time, I doubt the numbers will be so small. |
But you get the point. |
theres being suspicious trace, and then theres jumping to conclusions. I can see why you'd be suspicious, but what made you make the jump that he was a terrorist rather than in the mob, or a drug dealer, counterfeiter or something? You think a bomb dropping on your town will prove us wrong, yet its your brand of speculation based on flimsy evidence and rumor that gets bombs dropped on other people. |
|
jumping to conclusions such you have re not "safe". They threaten a very core foundation of this nation. a foundation you are so quick to regard and too dense to understand said disregard. And while you are going on and on about threats, crazy middle eastern men with cash and the occasional innocent wrongly detained, deported etc....just you remember that up until 9/11, the largest terrorist act committed on US soil was committed by a former US military man, white with sandy blond hair who carried on a seemingly normal, functional life. |
No, you're not talking about McCarthyism, but you are talking McCarthyism "I advocate such things, because the alternative is to wait for another 3,000 deaths within seconds. Next time, I doubt the numbers will be so small." actually, I doubt you'll see something as grand or symbolic as 9/11 again... if a mushroom cloud drops, it will be an act of war, not terrorism... ..and lets not fool ourselves hear people, there were a lot of people on 9/11 who were doomed, but 3000 people didnt have to die. The other building could have been evacuated completely, and was going to be, and the people apparently wanted to leave, but they sent everyone back to their offices... I dont think you'll see such a huge intelligence failure again (unless of course the government wants something to happen, which is conspiracy crap, but the Northwoods Project proves its not out of the question), both from the people disregarding the many warnings that came beforehand, and from the people guarding one of the most heavily protected airspaces in the world. "We have to have a little paranioa." Yes, but not about terrorism. You specifically do not have to 'be ready' - live your damn life, theres many more imporant things to worry about that are a threat to your daily life... everything from outside threats like drunk drivers all the way down to your own diet. Grow some priorities. |
Could be. I know more than one person who had been hospitalized, told they are not insane but turned out to be schizophrenic |
Patrick just beat me to the OKC example of paranoia being very dangerous... Because of the US being paranoid of war with Russia, we have enough nuclear weapons to destroy the entire world over and over and over again. What happens when other nations get paranoid? They invade other nations, go on the brink of nuclear war (india/pakistan for example)... To many terrorists, 9/11 was a pre-emptive attack because there were clear plans spelled out to go into Afghanistan well beforehand.. gee, that sure worked well for the Middle East, didn't it? What is needed is clear headed, logical thinking of what works and what doesnt work. You need to not train and fund dangerous extremists to suit a common cause (ie helping Iraq against Iran, showing hypocrisy in Middle East foreign policy by vetoing dozens of UN resolutions against Israel, etc. etc. etc.)... that paranoia only causes more trouble down the line, its stupid, shortsighted, all to get that (i'm saying this again to you trace) bottom line, get those immediate results for the short term, rather than actually making any goddamn progress for the world in the longterm... ...and its because its all just for political and economic reasons, and not much for the actual purpose of making the world a better place... |
Nate, better not try that. It's a tactic commonly employed by liberals. You may taint yourself. |
He was one scary motherfucker. No doubt about that. You would not have known it at first and the only reason Spunky and I know as much as we do is because I was his wife's best friend. Otherwise, to the outside world, he just looked like anyone else trying to make a life here. "in the mob, or a drug dealer, counterfeiter or something" Looked into it. No drugs, no dealing, no alcohol even. No counterfit money (his wife found the records from where he was getting it from in Turkey, he was being funded by an unnamed group in Turkey), she had him watched, and did all kinds of things to figure out what was going on with him. No Turkish mafia, no drug dealing, he was out here doing research work for an "unnamed" group and 3 months after he is returned to Turkey, he dissappeared. There is a lot there, but there was a lot of research done before the label of "terrorist" was put on him. I realize your skepticism, and I don't blame you. I know you often disagree with almost everything my husband has to say. I just hoped you would know me well enough to know that I don't jump to put labels on someone without trying to understand their situation and culture and beliefs to the best of my ability. I don't like to judge people. I never have. It is a part of myself that I have been working on for years. I try to reason things through as much as possible hoping to find some easy or logical answers to my questions. I look for facts as often as possible. I truly believe this man was a terrorist doing research work, and that his cover was blown, so he tried the insane card to get out of here and though he was quickly released from the hospital and they said nothing was wrong with him, it was still enough to get his brother to come here and bring him home. |
im still failing to understand what qualified him as a terrorist. |
How quickly you decide it was only the US that had some paranoia happening. |
Spunk, where in his statement do you see an exemption of any other paranoia? Wasnt it revealed after the cold war that russia didnt have no where near the arsenal that we thought all along and that in fact, they posed no where near the threat they were hyoped up to be? |
They still have most of it. |
yeah right. liberals are so hopped up on their own bullshit that not only do they not see the forest for the trees, they can't see the trees for their hallucinations of a vast right-wing conspiracy. trace, you're going to have your intelligence questioned. like a six year old, when a liberal can't engage the issue he will resort to name calling. just like they all called reagan a moron (the man who ended the cold war.) just like they call our current president dumb (with his degrees from yale and harvard, who has been called "bright" by the people who have actually talked to him, yet can't seem to shake the image of being a dunce because of the vast right-wing conspiracy, er, the conservative controlled media, er.. uh. who's dumb?) |
i wasnt speaking of the weapons the do possess, but rather that their technology was grossly hyped to aide the outspending them into total collapse. |
I guess terming him a terrorist, is part process of elimination, part his actions, part what we saw with our own eyes and the end is a little bit of a gut feeling and information we have recieved since then. I looked for every possible thing I could to prove he was not a terrorist. Who wants to tell their pregnant friend that they unwittingly married a terrorist in times like these? We did all we could to disprove it and in the end we could not disprove it. It was the only thing we found that we could not disprove. It is very complicated and there is a lot that I don't even remember now that he has been gone. A lot of it was "you have to see it to believe it" kinda things that don't make sense if I tell you, cuz you had to see it with your own eyes. I look at your different posts going back and forth about Bush and politics in general and I realize that a lot of what I have believed and do believe is based on what I was taught, and that many of us here choose to believe different things. I don't want to argue these things with any of you. It would be based on feelings and things I have been told, vs. being based in fact I can prove. I won't enter this part of the argument. I will say that the thing Patrick posted that started this thread, well, I knew it was a joke. I found some of it funny and some of it just plain stupid, but that is what happens with a joke. I didn't take it to be a total reflection of Patricks beliefs, because I see things in there that I know he doesn't necessarily believe himself. |
I 'd like to see how the Pentagon will reason that the use of tactical nukes as bunker busters will not be seen as justification by the "other side" for suitcase nukes |
"like it took a genius to outspend russia to end the cold war." history, much? you should be careful, lest you be seen to be that which you rant so oft against. |
And, so do we now. Ah, the joys of justification! Don't you love feeling justified? Makes you all tingly inside, knowing in your heart of hearts that you're better than the other guy. |
Nate, you took the words out of my mouth. 1945-1989. |
|
|
I do agree about the domino effect when it comes to Russia and Germany, but I don't really know any details and at that time I was very young and impressionable, so who knows. I don't have any of the details. |
I didnt decide shit, its pretty obvious that Russia was also paranoid, or else the Cold War wouldnt have lasted so long... however... "no, in fact it was not. They still have most of it" and they do now because... (Drumroll) Gorbachev went to the US TWICE to get a mutual disarmament going, but the US turned it down... TWICE... so they didnt go for it. in that case, yes, I do blame the US... fully completely. Nate: "yet can't seem to shake the image of being a dunce because of the vast right-wing conspiracy, er, the conservative controlled media" have you managed to take a look at the politics of who runs the networks? conservatives, except for Ted Turner, but he hasnt been in control of his company for years now... take a look at this, you'll probably brush if off based on the name of the site... but... take a look at the holdings here... http://www.liberalslant.com/mediaownership.htm Bush is seen as a dunce because of his own mistakes with language (which is lowbrow, but its humorous), but moreso because of his inability to speak whenever he is not reading others' words. This is his own fault. Note around ten years ago when Quayle had the potatoe thing he was made out to be a much bigger idiot in the media, and that was one word, and Bush has messed up countless phrases... Bush has gotten away with it, Gore was made to look much, much, much much worse. The media spun Bush's words to an advantage actually, saying he was 'an average guy' with an average upbringing - "one of us" - HUUUUUUUGE lie. I think Bush is an idiot, if only for one quote: "America goes to war to win a war, thus causing no more war" Yes, thats right, he said that starting a fight ends fighting, and thats not out of context.... thats enough, shows over, he's an idiot. If the media is liberal, why did it push to get Canadian MPs fired for comments BEHIND CLOSED DOORS about George Bush? CNN hounded Francoise Ducros until she was forced to resign from the pressure... Robert Novak had a little victory party for it on Crossfire even... |
ps. Rowlf, the liberal media just WANTS you to think it's conservative. All the LIBERAL stuff is subconsciously implanted. It's in the "blank" spaces around the letters in the news tickers at the bottoms of the screens, you know... |
terrorist, whack-job, psycho or not (and not that it matters guys, because either way IT DOESNT MATTER), that's one hell of an interesting story. as for Bush, i think part of his problem is the southern accent. If i was southern and was going for president, i'd get my ass to a dialogue coach and get rid of it. This would cut the cowboy jokes in half, at least. |
If he ditched the accent he'd be some yankee traitor |
|
"Fow-ah suppah I er-ah, wahnt a pahdy plahta!" |
How long did it take you to swallow that horsecrap? We PAID THEM MILLIONS to help them destroy their weapons. Only to find out they did not do it. Or have you forgotten history? Or just not pay attention, because it pointed out flaws in another country, not the US? |
"Reagan? Aw, hell no, patrick! How could he do anything? He was a conservative American!" Sem, you along with Tiggy, of all the guys I regularly argue with on this site, upset me the least, and I find your arguments much easier to understand then most. I just found rewording that funny. |
Only to find out they did not do it" About Russias part in slowing things down since: why would I spend 3 paragraphs trying to beat something into your head that you already probably believed anyways? After all, its putting blame on another country which history has proven to me you dont need evidence for... I suppose maybe I should have just blamed Clinton for turning disarmament issues into corruption allegations against Yeltsin in '99 as my example instead of when a Republican was in the White House. Something tells me you would have let that one go. how do you explain the US pulling out of the ABM treaty trace? Are you going to blame Russia for that somehow as well? I suppose you actually believe Star Wars will ever happen? But notice you bring up an example of the US paying THEM to disarm, meanwhile the US keeps all of their own. And then say they didnt do it? One, thats not the same example I presented (mutual disarmament) Besides, you're not even exactly telling the truth. What about downsizing Russia's nuclear weapons complex? deactivate and eliminating WMD? protecting and blending down stocks of weapons-usable fissile material? And will you deny the 2002 G8 treaty, something Bush is actually working with, one of the few times he's actually worked with the international community for something good? According to the US government's Defense Threat Reduction Agency "as of 31 December 2002 CTR had deactivated 6,032 nuclear warheads and put beyond use various nuclear-capable delivery systems" thats nowheres near all of them, but its a start, and more than the US has done with its own WMDs. If only the US had listened around 15 years ago, things would already be a lot further along.. |
Unless it could be said that Clinton did not feel it was necessary to keep an eye on Russia to ensure they are holding thier end of the bargain. I am not arguing the ABM issue with you, because my argument would be about National Defense. That is clearly not a priority to you. |
Reductions in U.S. Strategic Nuclear Arsenal Force Levels FY 1990 Through 2007 Source ICBMs FY 1990 1,000 FY 1999 550 Attributed Warheads on ICBMs 1990 2450 1999 2000 SLBMs 1990 568 (Excludes five decommissioned submarines (and their associated missiles and warheads) that were still START accountable.) 1999 432 Excludes two Benjamin Franklin-class (Poseidon missile) (SSBNs) converted to Special Operations Forces that are still START accountable. Ballistic Missile Submarines 1990 31 (Excludes five decommissioned submarines (and their associated missiles and warheads) that were still START accountable.) 1999 18 Excludes two Benjamin Franklin-class (Poseidon missile) (SSBNs) converted to Special Operations Forces that are still START accountable. Attributed Warheads on Ballistic Missiles 1990 7314 1999 5456 Heavy Bombers 1990 324 1999 115 Source of a lot of very good information. |
"I am not arguing the ABM issue with you, because my argument would be about National Defense. That is clearly not a priority to you." Okay then, explain to us how Star Wars works, and why its a better option then the ABM treaty... |
|
The Federation of American Scientists is a nonprofit, tax-exempt, 501c3 organization founded in 1945 as the Federation of Atomic Scientists. The founders were members of the Manhattan Project, creators of the atom bomb and deeply concerned about the implications of its use for the future of humankind. |
...still waiting for the Star Wars explanation... is it an invisible field made of magic, held in place by pixies? |
Hmmm, Paper Treaties or physical defense? North Korea mean anything to you? You do the math. As far as how it works, we track a balistic missile, and knock it out in space. |
Paper Treaties mean nothing? but the US uses them to hold other countries to their word whenever its convenient? which is it? |
Look at North Korea. They got paper treaty, and lots of money and oil. Meant nothing. We would be fools to hinge security on a paper treaty. |
They got paper treaty, and lots of money and oil. Meant nothing. We would be fools to hinge security on a paper treaty." okay, first of all, still waiting on how Star Wars WORKS... 20 years trace, noone knows anything... how is anyone to trust something is being done? Secondly, quickly, here is why paper treaties, even if they fail, are better than your 'Star Wars' pipe dream: You sign a treaty with other nations, you are working together and trusting each other. You are being neighbors, and you work to make the world a better place, you acknowledge them and they're happy... if someone breaks it, oh well, you try again, and at least you now know who you can trust... Missle Defense Shield. Oh boy howdy. Imagine if your next door neighbor put up a 20 foot fence and had a gun tower that watched over everybody. It shows the entire neighborhood that they dont trust you, and likewise, with that setup, you will never trust them, even if you walk by every day and he goes "HI NEIGHBOR"... the trust is gone.. are you telling me you would ever trust THAT? whether or not its actually 'national defense' the missle defense shield is the biggest fence, the ultimate fuck you to everyone else, and if you want to be completely isolated in that sense from working with everyone else like a good little boy, you better go full throttle, you better go to your room... if you're going to move forward and put up your fucking fence you get your corporations and all your other military out of EVERYWHERE around the world, and just 'defend', because you have broken the rules... you want isolation, you get isolation, we don't want to play with you anymore... ..and I know you could never conceive of this but you're halfway there.. what if America goes totally insane and spreads war everywhere, a real bonafide dictator takes over? Its not impossible. That technology prevents any attack what would try and stop it... so not only would the US not be just a bad neighbor and untrustworthy, they become potentially dangerous, fatal to the rest of the world... NO country should have that system, if any other country had it already and the US didn't you'd feel the exact same way. Exactly the same as how you feel about an untrustworthy country with even the remote possibility has WMD's. thousands, THOUSANDS times more than Iraq or even North Korea are or were... I'm fucking serious trace, Star Wars, if its not just a lie to rob the people blind, is THE biggest mistake the United States could EVER make... |
|
The fallacy with this analogy is that the fence would have to have large holes in it, the machine gun would have to not work more than 50% of the time (to be generous), and you didn't mention how the guy wnet into serious debt to develop, erect and maintain his security system, and now his kids can't afford to even attend vocational school. Treaties are valuable Trace. But they have to be enforcable. We just have to look at the US historical record to see that. Personally, I think we're shooting ourselves in the foot by just focusing on national security, without any thought to WORLD security. If we work to increase security worldwide, then we by default are increasing our own security. And a good part of that is working to raise standards of living while keeping that standard sustainable. I'm not saying everyone should have a 3000 sq ft house and a car, but a living wage, health care and education will do more for our security than a proven faulty missle shield (which is going ahead and being installed even though it doesn't work). If you think about the current nations that are serious threats to us, none of them have decent standards of living for their citizens, and if you look at the unstable regions of the world, where the next problems to affect us are brewing, the same applies. Bush's attempt to address the AIDS crisis in Africa is going to work better for us than Star Wars. |
we havent had a good arms race in...what...15 years? c'mon.....defense industry is bored and needing fun hapless shit to do. lets have an arms race. you guys forgot how much fun that was? |
the argument against the effectiveness is ridiculous. if north korea manages to lob two missles towards the US we could lose 2 million people. if we can knock one out of the sky, we could save a million lives. uh, hello? isn't some protection better than none? and as for the arms race with china or russia, give me a fucking break. the effectiveness of the shield is no deterant to overwhelming force. if russia or china launch their missles and we knock down half of them, the US is still fucked. mankind is still effectively destroyed. |
we have many many more years of research to be anywhere near 50% effective with this system. north korea could be armed in a matter of months. there's no damn way in hell this missle defence system could be a 50% successful and operational system in a matter of months. wrong solution to the CURRENT problem. The goal is disarmament right? no WMDs? |
I'm saying, if you're going to use this, make sure it works before you deploy. You wouldn't give a soldier a gun that doesn't really fire, would you? Plus, the world is fucked missle defence or no missle defence. ANyone who fires on us gets utterly annihilated. plus their neighbors. plus our neighbors. then what if our allies retaliate against their allies? and so on. You can't defend against nuclear war. that's why the acronym is MAD. |
that north korea could be armed in a matter of months has no bearing on this argument. 'wrong solution to the CURRENT problem' let's try not to be short sighted. the goal is protection of the USA. technology is only going to get easier. cheaper. that's why we were the only ones with nukes in 1945, and why they are in the grasp of north korea today. |
if the goal is protection of the USA then itfurther bolsters the anti-missle defense argument because no missle defens is going to protect us from N. Korea anytime soon. Working o disarm N.Korea is more proactive to protecting the USA than missle defense. |
Why, because we are sending more money again? Instead of intesifying research to find a cure? Treaties AND self defense are the best policies. Go with the treaties, as long as they allow us to defend ourselves. |
one doesn't exclude the other. one isn't even depend on the other. you have no argument here. |
are you even suggesting that a missle defense could actually disarm N.Korea? Missle defense would most likely lead to the exact opposite. Unless im totally misunderstanding you.... |
STAR WARS WAS SCRAPPED, NEVER PUT IN SPACE. If setting up a self defense system is seen as a hostile act by any country, then who is to be blamed for that? Is the US at fault, or the one who views those actions as hostile? |
Is the US at fault, or the one who views those actions as hostile?" if i slap your mother upside the head. Its not my fault if she views it as a hostile action. thats airtight logic there buddy. try applying that logic to Iraq. wasn't Iraq's problem we viewed the WMDs (the ones we cant find) as a hostile act. |
Missiles/Lasers/Etc. that have been created for the sole purpose of knocking missiles out of the sky is not hostile, unless you are A. A Missile. B. A State/Nation/Group that plans to fire a missile. Airtight logic indeed. |
C. A Nation in which the balance of power would unfairly be offset A missle defence is a weapon regardless of its specific use. When you develop a new weapon, your allies and enemies alike will seek to maintain or outdo you. The cold war demonstrated this. Missle defense will not solve the problem of N.Korea's weapons which threaten American security and no one seems capable of providing any sound argument as to how it would. Missle defense protects America..MAYBE. MAYBE! Talk about shortsighted, trees forest etc etc. The problem is two-fold. Weapons and the threat they pose to American safety. You solve the former you solve the latter. |
missle defense is not an offensive weapon. it can't be used against another country. we can have a missle defense and continue our talks with north korea. that's what i mean when i say one does not exclude the other. they both should be pursued. bitchesbegone! |
|
If you think we have, please back it up. |
nate. a weapon system, be it defensive or offensive, that upsets a balance of power between two rivals is ineffect a weapon because it makes the enemies weapons less effective. this logic is not lost on you because ive seen you use it when you speak against SUVs and how they ineffect lower the safety rating of other vehicles on the road. the offset the balance of power. the only goof is you semingly playing devils advocate. bitches be gone for sure. where's my pipe and brandy. |
|
Or are you doing that on purpose? |
missile DEFENSE system. Why do you so oppose defense? |
You feel we need to protect a balance of power by not protecting ourselves from missile attacks. Right? |
there's no way north korea in their not so right mind would go for that. arms reduction with Russia? would they go for it when we clearly arent willing to reduce arms. china? china like wise would have further incentive to get up to speed as not to be left behind. how missle defense could not cause an arms race, no one seems to be able to address. building such a system has more implications than you or spunk are willing to admit. you guys act like we're just changing curtains on the windows rather than putting up bars and an iron gate. |
|
what about bitchesbegone dont you understand? |
|
I was talking about a missile defense system in regards to NK, and how a treaty and a self defense system is possibile. If they view a non-agression treaty being signed while a self defense system being developed and deployed as hostile, then it can be assumed that they were planning on breaching the treaty in the first place. |
to claim we shouldn't work towards better defence of our country because it undermines the balance of power is a ridiculous argument. you might as well argue that we shouldn't work towards economic prosperity, because that does exactly the same thing. the proliferation of democracy is a threat to facism, communism, socialism everywhere. it is a non-violent weapon we use against dictators everywhere. perhaps we should stop? hell, the internet itself is causing information to reach the people of china. perhaps we should stop the internet? it is upsetting the balance of power, afterall. or perhaps your problem isn't actually with the balance of power? and don't talk to spider that way. you liberals and your insensitivity to the equality of women is a thorn in my brain. |
What country would actually believe that we are creating a purely DEFENSIVE weapons system. |
im not necessarily suggest a weopons system would upset the peace either. Im saying it would spawn an arms race and be counterproductive to your desire goal, which is disarmament. With disarmanent comes security. Why just bolster the security? lets go for the whole enchilada. both the idea of spreading democracy and internet are non-violent. they upset a balance, but its a thinking balance....if this makes sense. Man is able to make his own mind if he wants one or the other. weapons don't have brains. they are non-discriminate. anyway....we've reached a couple of critical and philosophical impasses and im taking a half day to look after milkbreath while nico entertains fucking frenchy. i may hit you up over a beer later. |
the missle defense is non-violent. harm is not part of its intent. north korea has proven unreliable at keeping treaties. a back up plan that does not involve trusting ill kim seems rather prudent, doesn't it? |
And my point is that i don't thiunk missle defense should be a priority in our spending when social programs are being flushed down the shitter. And who said that finally addressing the AIDS crisis in Africa equates not intensifying a search for a cure? doesn't follow. Here's a statistic that I am more sure of: Out of 40 million people with AIDS worldwide, 28 Million are in SubSaharan Africa. Source |
does the security of the american people come before the AIDS crisis in africa? "For me, the bottom line on this decision is this: Because the emerging missile threat is real, we have an obligation to pursue a missile defense system that could enhance our security." -Bill Clinton |
doesnt this deterrence thing assume that Kim Jong-Il or any other dictator doenst want to die? If its not perfect, it don't mean shit... and by the time it would be perfect, the country would be bankrupt... is that worth it to you? spunk: so you say Star Wars was scrapped huh? The only difference was that Star Wars was according to Rumsfeld, supposed to look over the entire globe. If this one is for national defense only, expect even more allies to be pissed off... Nate: Obviously other countries do not see it as a defensive act, passive. China has already clearly stated that if there is a missle defense system put in place it will immediately accelerate its nuclear program. how is a missle defense system deterrence? Fuck North Korea, we're talking CHINA. you know the US could never defeat China in a ground war to do anything about THAT.. and unlike Russia, China has the money to back up its claim. India and Pakistan have made cryptic remarks about doing the same. treaties, talking, working it out is the ONLY way to reduce WMDs. Having this in place is the opposite of Bush's so-called desire for non-proliferation of WMDs... and... lets not forget what everyone is saying, that the REAL threat is someone smuggling in a nuclear or biological weapon by boat or car.. doesnt this missle defense system distract the US, as well as give them a false sense of security? The US government has said over and over again that launching a weapon is not what they see would be the preferred method... Having this system is like locking all your windows but leaving the front door open. Stupid stupid stupid. |
According to the DMCA I'm going to have to arrest you for criticising a faulty security policy. Sorry. |
thats why you find a new method and get involved instead of throwing invisible money around... "does the security of the american people come before the AIDS crisis in africa? " missle defense wont secure the American people. you might as well buy Lisa's rock that keeps tigers away. Curing AIDS helps everybody. |
|
I think you're doing okay, defence-wise. Nothing to lose sleep over, kids. Seriously, you're FINE. *thumbs up* wait, i got it. fuck my car, i'll buy a tank. And i'll go without food to afford it. Yes, that's it. That's REAL safety. What's so hostile about that? Then, one day, when i go really apeshit and learn to work the guns, i'll just blowup anyone i think who's driving drunk. Anyone who cuts me off. and if anyone else doesn't like it, well, too bad because i've got a tank and they've just got a puny little car. I'll drive where ever the fuck i want and no one can stop me. it's defence, motherfuck. i can't believe you guys trust your government so much, so much that you'll let them become so powerful that they can never be stopped from the outside, ever. Even if they were wrong. Even if they needed to be stopped. Must be nice. |
Because power corrupts. And then everyone is fucked. |
Yes. No one is denying that. We have nothing that will stop ICBM's. Nothing. The only response we would have is launching a counter strike. When has any country done to demonstrate that they intend to keep thier end of the bargain? We did our part with North Korea. We are not the ones who renigged. We withdrew from the Test Ban Treaty. We announced it. We said why we were doing it. We did not proceed with tests before we withdrew. |
Thats not the way the world works. Somebody's going to have it. Period. You all are soft, spoiled. The last 30 years have pampered your baby asses. I am glad the military has not forgotten the horrors of world war one and two. It's a very fucking dangerous world out there. There are hundreds like Hussein, Hitler, The Khmer Rouge, Bin Laden, Stalin and Ivan the Terrible in the world. Just waiting. |
besides if it was fun when Russia had nukes (and the political will/control) why wouldnt it be fun now, with more people playing the game? MAD - Mutual Assured Destruction - kept the world safe once before... why wont it work now? dont quit the game just cause you thought you won and dont wanna play anymore, there's all these new kids that got the right toys and now they wanna play too. INternational treaties dont mean shit... sign it or dont, afterwards anyone does what they want anyway. And the idea that America wants to cure AIDS is laughable (especially in Africa) the american government created it! They unleased it on the world!! Its just like fucking 12 monkeys (except it was a government not a single psycho) And The Stand (except it didn't 'escape' it was released) |
|
|
But I do not think we should not try to develope a defense system. |
Yes. No one is denying that. " im not denying the best in weapons and probably training as well.. but i dont think its the biggest (read most service personel) here are some numbers i found... 'The PLA laid off around 500,000 soldiers and staff between 1997 and 1999.' source Their population in 2002 was 1,279,160,885 (source if you look at the same (current) numbers for the american military you can draw your own conclusions as to the personel that china retains in active duty... keeping in mind of course, that under equiped armies have (historically) had higher numbers of personel (infantry is cheap compared to tanks etc.) 1,414,454 Active Duty Military Strength by Service Rank/Grade - current month source US Population 290,853,578 source which is .0048% of the population (i think, my math skills are worse than a third grader's) I couldnt find estimates on the size of the PRC's serving armed personel, but if you use the same percentages its fairly obvious whos army is larger. The US numbers include all 4 branches of service. So, all that to say... I'm denying 'that' but dont actually have any proof, just some reasoning and conjecture... can you tell that i dont have a job? |
|
I will admit that most of my fears are because I don't know their culture or what they believe, but because I don't know that I can't trust their intentions, cuz I don't know what their intentions are. I am tired of people believing that all who have WMD and other weapons are all inherently good. As human beings we have both good and evil qualities within us. Our choice is which part of us do we allow into our lives and how it effects our decisions. Not knowing this about the other side causes fear. Not knowing this about our leaders causes me to fear. People oversimplify things thinking that the other side is so good at heart when in fact we don't know WTF they are at heart and assuming good may just fuck us over, just as we may fuck others over by not knowing what they think and believe. Knowledge can go a long way, but we don't have the neccesary knowledge. |
|
do you then believe its safe for the US to hold these weapons, that the US will always be good.. spunky, I'm going to read from the book you wrote, and ask you respond to my points about how China will up their stockpile if the US goes through with a shield. How does knowing that, clearly, NOT work against the supposed goal from this administration, disarmament of countries with WMDs. I don't want to be a dick about it, but I really think thats fucking checkmate, dude. Speak up or knock over your king. |
Umm, Eri, do I really have to point it out here? |
http://slate.msn.com/id/2082320/ has links in it to missle defence. |
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/05/01/ED268040.DTL |
Like I said before, I fear for us as well. I can't say that the US will always be good. I can't predict the future. Umm, Eri, do I really have to point it out here? Yes, actually. I mean, how do we know that whoever decides to use weapons on us aren't willing to die for what they believe in? Again, I can't predict the future, so I do need to see a concrete reason to believe that they aren't going to hurt us and we aren't going to hurt them. There are people out there who just don't give a fuck about our retalitory actions. What is to say that they won't do this? When it comes to hoarding weapons I am very confused and torn. I fear. I fear the future and what it will hold as far as this goes, not only for me but for my children and my grandchildren, and what the world will be like. I understand now why (when my mom got pregnant with me and my aunt was pregnant with my cousin) my grandfather completely broke down and cried and asked my grandmother what kind of world we would live in and grow up in and what kind of life would we have? I understand his fears and I share them. |
Nagasaki. Hiroshima. Germany was next on the list. Nixon wanted to use nukes in Vietnam. We're the only country in the world that has used nuclear weapons. And we used them on civilian populations, not on a military target such as in Japan's case, a fleet. that's what i meant. |
rowlf. forget it. this is a point i have asked for a rationale repeatedly on and never get. If the goal is disarmament, missle defense cannot and will not attain said goal. Shortsided, trees forest DEFENSE INDUSTRY CONTRACTS OH MY! |
DUE TO ACTIONS TAKEN BY OUR GOVERNMENT 60+ YEARS AGO THAT ENDED WORLD WAR 2, THE UNITED STATES MILITARY WILL NOW STAND DOWN. WE ADMIT THAT THERE ARE NO COUNTRIES NOR ORGANIZATIONS MORE CORRUPT AND EVIL ON THIS PLANET THEN OURSELVES. WE DO NOT DESERVE ANY SELF DEFENSE. WE SQUANDERED ALL THE GOOD WILL WE HAD AFTER 9/11. WE SHOULD HAVE JUST ALL SAT AROUND AND CRIED, OR BRUSHED IT OFF AND WHEN ON AS IF NOTHING HAPPENED. THANK YOU. THAT IS ALL |
1) the missle shield does nothing against china. MAD is MAD. if they send nukes our way, plently will get through and we'll destroy the world anyway. 2) the missle shield is intended to protect against countries that don't care about MAD. north korea, for example. china knows this. 3) even if china does boost their stockpile, MAD. they're not going to randomly launch missles at us. china will enage in reasonable diplomacy with the US. posturing before something happens has nothing to do with reality after something happnens (this should either 1) be obvious or 2) be obvious.) |
Using the same mode of thinking, someone gets pissed off at us and uses some WMD on us. We (being the US) aren't just going to sit there and say "We deserved it". We will fight back. Other countries might too. I didn't realize that we hit a civilian target back then. That sucks. I am not saying I am for total disarmament. That seems ludicrous, especially coming from me, who owns a gun, and hypocritical. I am just saying the ramifications of this "biggest bad ass on the block" game we are playing could have worse ramifications that we know of, and that scares me. |
oh, wait, nevermind. FUCKING HIPPIES DON'T FLOSS DO THEY. |
|
|
no one is arguing the right defend ourselves. please, stop being so silly. we are well defended. the problem is the inability to see the other implications of missle defense. "3) even if china does boost their stockpile, MAD. they're not going to randomly launch missles at us." talk about moronic points nate. wait....so we're ok with China boosting stockpiles so we can potentially open up a cold war front with them over mutual annihilation for 50 years of fear and uncertainty then eventually haggle to disarm. Didnt the cold war with Russia teach you anything...that proliferation of ANY KIND is NOT the desired result!!! I love the hippy jokes you backwoods pot smoking wino hippy...keep em coming. |
Patrick is right about one thing - even trying to discuss anything with you spunky is virtually pointless because you constantly miss the details in what people are saying and tend to make it all a black/white issue. That's how you can say I am against national defense when I criticize a faulty missle defense system. If I used your logic, i coudl say that you are in league with Christian Identity and paleoconservatives, because you voted for Bush and are a conservative in general. That woudl be black and white for you. You're the same as Tim McVeigh! You're both right wingers! |
Honey, calm down. I didn't say I was against defense, but I have worries about the right way to do it and the long term ramifications of anything we/they might do. I don't care what side of the fence you are on, you are bound to have fears of these things, even if you believe them to be right. I guess on this I am pretty much on the fence because I see both sides and both sides have points and thinking about all of the uncertainties scares me enough that working through it myself in my own mind makes me a hippie? |
the problem is the inability to see the other implications of missle defense." Patrick, I do not beleive that it would make any difference at all to China or North Korea what we do and do not build, and what treaties are and are not signed. On July 15, 1999 China proudly proclaimed they had a neutron bomb. They are going to go ahead anyway. Stepping back from any deffense platform will only embolden our enemies (North Korea has made no bones about the fact that they regaurd the US as such) to move forward. They will not see it as a gesture of good will, but rather a sign of weekness. This is history talking, not paranoia. |
We are in 100% agreement on that one, Sem. "I didn't realize that we hit a civilian target back then. That sucks." I was responding to that one honey. I had no idea you did not know about Nagasaki & Hiroshima is all... |
20th and 21st century HISTORY spunk also tells us that mutual efforts with Russia CAN be effective. Disarming of smaller countries like South Africa and the Ukraine CAN work if proceeding right with dialog and cooperation. We are the most defended, heavily armed, aggressive,technologically advanced nation on the planet by at least 20 years. Stopping missle defense for 5-10 years, rerouting the funds to more important matters and seeking diplomatic disarmament with N.Korea and others like them is NOT "Stepping back from any deffense platform". Thats DOD bullshit thats been crammed down your throat. When you say that, you forget that we deterred the mighty soviet union for 50 years. we can hold the N. koreans at bay for a little while, they can barely feed their people, muchless engage a super power that will result in their total annhilation. |
|
If we already had a system that had that capability, then I would agree with you. But we do not, so I do not. |
|
What was that thing that Clinton did again? Please remind me? Oh, it has been 5-10 years since he did that you say? We should do it again? How many more times? For ever? Keep appeasing, and all will be right with the world? Until money is not enough. They will need more land for their population. South Korea has so much land, why not just sign it over in a treaty as well. Where are you going to stop? Because I promise you that North Korea is not going to be satisified with the US standing down any missile defense system. Or disarming all nukes. Or reductions in our force to be equivilent with theirs. They will not stop there. How are you going to stop it? Where are you going to draw the line? When do you say "You took the money and the oil, and signed a treaty saying you would stop pursuing nukes, you did not stop, we are not going to give you more money and oil. We are setting up systems to make your weapons ineffective against the US and our allies." |
if you can't do that, you both should shut up. |
BTW I do floss my teeth, thank you. Honey, we were taught that Nagasaki and Hiroshima were military targets in AVHS. By that newscaster. Then again, I didn't pay too much attention to his boring ass and nearly flunked. |
Patrick ARE you talking ICBM or Air to Ground? If you meant that nk or china would send a bomber over here to DROP one, forget it. there is no need to add any defense against that threat. If you mean a Nuclear Tipped Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile launched from China or North Korea, self guided, that could land somewhere in the continental US, we do not have any defense against such a weapon. If you mean anything else, then damn I must be off my rocker |
They were chosen for their dense populations. |
|
As I understand it, Patrick and Sem and Antigone are of the mind that building some sort of system that can stop incoming missiles will not deter contries that are pursuing those weapons. I am saying that NOT developing/deploying such a capability will NOT deter those countries from devolping the missiles either. I am saying I would prefer to not leave us vulnerable. It is most likely an impasse that will never be changed. The only way to convince anyone is to stop devoloping the defense system, and wait for another country to say "we developed them anyway, and if you do not give us money, we are going to use them"... Problem with that is, I thought that was where we are. |
anyone care to illustrate spunky's argument? |
The same thing that Bush will end up doing. nate i think my argument has been articulated fairly well. i dont feel the need to flesh it out anymore. besides im tired, have a wine headache and really despise the french colleague of nico's that has run us ragged and is thankfully leaving town today. |
Wait. That would require thought. Forget it. |
|
wino, backwood, tea-head hippies like it bothways too you know. |
|
no patty, i want you to articulate spunky's argument. after all, how can you argue against something you don't understand? and yes, spunky, i'm fairly certain i can see both sides. |
thats easy. 1) defense of america #1 2) diplomacy has a window and its since been shut with N.Korea 2) quantify the threat, deal with ramifications of said defensive measures later. if its anything more you'd better articulate that. Who really believes N.Korea would launch an ICB at the US? Leaders like Kim Jong whatshisface want to preserve themselves, not ensure their annihlation. |
and no, neither one of you understands the arugments you're arguing against. |
i think i've addressed your counterpoints suitably. i admit to getting totally jumbly when going back and forth with spunk. with you its an easily read knife fight. with him, its like taking acid and attempting to bum-jump a drunk old man at 3am in a dark alley while seeing Care Bears and Puff the Magic Dragon. there are key philosophical differences that is essentially keeping us from being on the same page. |
a personality cult began by his father and perpetuated, through psychological pressures, by the son (Kim Jong Ill) that has the nation cowed and terrified, though while wearing happy faces so they dont end up in re-education centers. (remember he learned from the psychos in Lefortovo Prison {KGB headquarters}) said cult only feeds the ego and insanity.. he wants to play with the bigboys, and will not stop for any reason. The only upside to the situ. is he is fairly old and should kick off soon. although that maynot be good; like the old saying 'better the devil you know, then the demon you don't' AND REALLY, MAD and political wrangling will almost assuredly keep the situ. from getting out of control (remember that the US still has enough nuke capabilities to wipe out the earth 3 or 4 times over) The major concern with WMDs is not so much nation states using them, but nation states supplying them to terorists. You dont have to have an ICBM to use a Nuke (or a-bomb, or h-bomb). Hell, if you can get the weapons grade plutonium (even less concentrated uranium or plutonium will work) you can build a sufficently powerful device with the rest of the componants coming off the shelf at homedepot and your local farm supplies dealer. This should be the concern that is addressed first and formost... (and maybe it is, and ihave missed something) with in the national community, IF you have nukes (or other WMD) you must be held accountable for them. Although consipiracy buffs (and popular novelists) would have you belive that anyone with cash can buy the same said items from the disintegrated (former) USSR. the fact that airplanes were used for 9/11 leads me to belive that this is not the case, but what do i know? |
When I get going, especially about something I care about, I really get myself confused, going back and forth with Patrick, I cannot even keep myself on the road, let alone watch out for other cars. I loose track of my own points, and loose sight of patricks. Look. I am me. I work in an environment where the buildings are surrounded by 10 foot razor fences, cameras watch every move, the grounds are patrolled by Military Security with M-16's, I have to present my credentials every 15 feet, have to register my vehicle with the base every 30 days and go before a review pannel to discuss my personal relationships and finances once a year. I have been trained to be paranoid.One of our mottos is "in God we Trust, All Others We Watch". That is our mission, that is why it is called Department of Defense. We are not policy setters, we do not make political decisions. We may make recomendations, and look closely at something we have been requested to look at. Otherwise, under "normal" circumstances, we just watch for "suspicious activity". If I were a politician, I would probably have a different view. I would hope you could understand this. |
Should i be expecting a visit from bigbrother because i dont toe the party line? <shiver> maybe, the institutional paranoia in places like the DOD is half the problem? curious..... KNOCK. KNOCK. <oh shit the thought police are here> |
Well, you admit you have a VERY hefty bias to your view in that environment. Have you been working there since you started posting spunky? or did you start working there afterwards? I can't remember. But you tend to post like if we don't have this very missle defense system in place tomorrow, we're all doomed. I would like to argue that if we need the NMD in place tomorrow, we're all doomed anyway, so why bother? After all, the point has been made again and again that NMD won't stop a suitcase dirty nuke. |
yes spunk i've taken acid and mushrooms on many occassions. not in recent years, to the degree that i used to in high school and college. |
After all, the point has been made again and again that NMD won't stop a suitcase dirty nuke." Excellent points to chew on, Sem |
but Nate, you're neglecting what I said about how the government claims that terrorists or 'rogue nations' will sneak a weapon in and set it off, rather than launch it... its putting all the eggs into the wrong basket... its like putting iron bars in the windows of a house made of straw. Its idiotic, so fucking idiotic. its a completely illogical piece of shit that can only be defended by saying "but we need to defend ourselves!", which is why spunky wont address my points about how it ends up doing the exact opposite of what the government says our goal is. and if a weapon gets set off from within the country, there by then could be so many countries with WMDs the US might never know who did it.. |
then what do you do? invade every nation that made unkind comments towards the states? now that there is some agreement on cause and effect of WMD and NMD... how bout some ideas on how we could avoid more war and international mis-understandings? I myself haven't a clue, but I would certainly like to hear some well thoughtout options... |
makes perfect sense to me. if you want to sound less like a liberal gasbag, you might avoid statements like "it's idiotic, so fucking idiotic" and "its a completely illogical piece of shit". we're not all redneck morons on this side of the fence. just like you're not all media-brainwashed granola eating droids. or maybe you feel we should stop the gieger-counter sweeps of incoming cargo containers that we're doing at ports of entry to the US? because those might catch a suitcase nuke, but will never stop an ICBM. |
Exactly. You shouldn't have fire insurance that costs WAY too much money (and has a $20000 deductible, to boot) while neglecting to put much money into your flood insurance. "or maybe you feel we should stop the gieger-counter sweeps of incoming cargo containers that we're doing at ports of entry to the US?" You mean those sweeps that are only covering 2 percent of incoming traffic because the program is seriously underfunded? |
the analogy doesnt work for me because 1) other than moving somewhere else, you dont have other ways to get rid of floods. you cant negotiate with Mother Earth to reduce the amount of floods in the world, and getting insurance doesnt influence Mother Earth to create more floods. Since when did insurance deter floods? "we're not all redneck morons on this side of the fence" no, but the government is becoming so, more and more each term. The South has truly risen again. It isnt about whether or not you should protect yourself nate, its about how you do it. Missle defense wont do shit. If it saves some lives, it dont mean shit anyway because of MAD. If the US has it up to speed and they cant hit you, they'll hit one of your allies, or wait till the president is visiting another country, or hit the military somewhere, or an embassy, to send a message. Then its MAD. Missle defense at best only protects the survivors as long as it takes for everyone else to strike back, which wont be long... In three words: WASTE OF MONEY |
further, NMD is not intended for nations where diplomacy has worked. we had a treaty with north korea, they simply decided to drop it. we will never have a treaty with organizations like al qaeda. techology advances such that someday an ICBM will be in the hands of nationless revolutionaries. do you want to be ready? i know it isn't common for your side to look that far down the road, but think of the children! well, the ones you didn't kill as babies, you pro-choice godless heathens! and don't start me on the republicans are morons thing. you sound like a media washout. if you can't address the issue, question the intelligence of your opposition. |
.... i think i'm going to cry. |
NMD? you guys lost me here. "i know it isn't common for your side to look that far down the road, " like the right is known for its oustanding prudence. c'mon nates don't absurd. i think most of here are against the missle defense for the very fact that we ARE thinking about the future. Weapons proliferation needs to stop here and now, period, be they weapons of defensive or offensive nature. |
Sometimes they're stupid. Nate, you question the intelligence of the American people, women in general, and just about anyone else you don't like. Who the fuck are you to lecture people about that tactic? |
I question the intelligence of pretty much all politicans, regardless of political affiliation. I think I raised plenty of questions about the issue, and only used the insults as an exclamation point to express how strongly I feel about it. Just as you use the term "hippies" as an insult. I also recall you calling liberals 'sexist, racist', etc without going into any further detail in the post. I don't give a shit if you do or not, just practice what you preach. |
"Hiroshima - This is an important army depot and port of embarkation in the middle of an urban industrial area. It is a good radar target and it is such a size that a large part of the city could be extensively damaged. There are adjacent hills which are likely to produce a focussing effect which would considerably increase the blast damage. Due to rivers it is not a good incendiary target. (Classified as an AA Target)" taken from this site which has actual minutes of top secret meetings taken just before the weapon was used this gives an idea as to why Nagasaki was chosen. |
i love hippies, man. ask patty. i'm just occassionaly overcome by the inanity of this dialog. i don't see the point in talking any further about nagasaki and hiroshima when we did far worse to tokyo and dresden. i know where the differences of opinion lie. it is not in facts, but in the way each of us lines the facts up. prioritizes issues. global politics is a game where there is no black and white, and every action is going to have negative impacts. the argument here boils down to this: some people think that the downside of rogue missile attacks is greater than the downside of increased nuclear proliferation in the 'major nuclear players' (russia, china, etc.) some people flip that statement. spunky and i are of the former camp, rowlf and patty are of the latter camp. antigone just has a sharpened stick and likes to poke people with it. especially in soft, meaty regions. such as the buttocks. and i, i am almost to the bottom of this jug of wine and will be shortly smoking some hash and i couldn't give a flying fuck what anyone thinks because when it comes down to it tiggy is absolutely right: i am an arrogant, egotistical hypocrite who is terribly disappointed with everyone. |
Isnt it his bedtime? this is just getting ridiculous. |
|
This kills me guys. I realize that it is not your job to educate me, but damn. I am a product of the California education system (pay not Patrick, this is what Eva is facing). As far as Nagasaki and Hiroshima go, the little bit of information we got was extremely vague and no time was spent on it really. Just "look, this ended the war". I don't have a fucking clue what happened in Tokyo and Dresden. They didn't spend all that much time on WWII at all. They spent a lot of time on the civil rights movement and african history, but not much on WWII, nothing on WWI or the Korean war, and nothing on the Vietnam war other than a video of war footage. We did spend a great deal of time studying the history of Native Americans. Basically world history sucked ass and we didn't learn shit. The information we were given was so extremely limited in so many aspects, that there is a lot of important information they didn't take the time to deliver. I don't think I am making any sense, but hopefully you get my gist here. |
and, to maintain nateness, i would like to point out that this was done under a liberal, warmongering democrat president. |
I love you man! Where do I find info on firbombing Tokyo and Dresden? I know I sound totally ignorant, but when it comes to so many things in our history, I really am, at least in comparison to most here. I am trying to deal with the wrongness of history to learn from it personally. I am not saying how much this will change my previous "isolationist" views, but I want to learn more and come to grips with it. I guess I want to learn from history, because I am fucking scared right now. I am so scared that I am ready to give up and just do what I do, and dance naked in the trees singing songs and then let whatever happens happen. My biggest fear is my babies that I fought so hard to give birth to. I can't understand our times without learning about the past. I can't guide them with a deficiency of knowledge and I don't have the fucking money for a biased college class. I know Patrick is normally ready to help guide me to sites. I am asking all to do the same. I want to learn until my brain is full and then learn some more! Can you tell I am on my third margarita after quitting drinking? |
what i've done being nearly killing this jug of wine. which was not quite full this morning, but, shall i admit? close enough. hello. my name is nate, and i'm going to have a massive purple shit tomorrow morning. |
http://www.nausicaa.net/miyazaki/grave/ if it doesn't make you cry, you're an android. even if you don't find that "grave", get "my neighbor totoro" for the kiddies. that is an awesome movie. i guarantee it. |
wtf kind of wine you drinking? |
|
|
|
god damn i love this breakfast nook made office. despite getting hammered on zin last night hosting a bbq for nico's frenchy business colleague i think im headed to the acupulco down the street to put back a few margies. one reason i love this place....i grilled pork cutlets marinated in orange juice from my orange tree, grilled with a few rosemary sprigs from my rosemary bush we planted and had some tomatos on our salads from the cherry tomato vines that grow rampant along my driveway. wherewasI? oh yeah... shitting purple? id think it be coming out the other end. |
|
|
neither have i for that matter...at least not the night of. i've hurled the next morning but its usually more from an empty stomach combined with super endorphines because of a splitting headache and those are the worst....the empty stomach chucks. |
|
|
http://www.dannen.com/decision/ http://www.csi.ad.jp/ABOMB/ you have to scroll down a little to get to the A-Bomb WWW Museum headline. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo_in_World_War_II http://www.valourandhorror.com/BC/Raids/Dresden.htm Basically Firebombing consists of incendiary bombs (bombs that contain a flammable material as well as explosives) being dropped in the classic 'carpet bombing' technique. This causes major damage due to the explosions (like all bombings) but the added 'bonus' is that the flammable material is scattered wide afield causeing considerably more fire then conventional bombs. |
|
i know its possible. i can testify. |
Vonnegut's an old crank and I love him for it. I read an interview where they talked about his quote when he saw footage of Iraqi POWs: "Those are my brothers" when asked to elaborate, he said "All soldiers are my brothers." Nice. |
Thanks for the links and info guys. I appreciate it. I have this song stuck in my head again!!!! Spunky you know which one I am talking about. I want to get up and sing it and dance, but I can't do that with the kids around!!!! It was the closing song at this lesbian club I went to a week ago and it makes me laugh my ass off. |
I have heard that that is a fetish but NASTY!! |
|
:-P |
|
right on dave! that giant creepy cat-bus is the shit. Headlight eyes. Fucked up. I have an orange plush totoro purse. |
i wouldn't mind having totoro on dvd. cleo has that thing memorized. |
i'd been told it was depressing as all hell, and just haven't been in the mood for that recently :) |
|
So I put it in last night. Damn. Good call, dave. |
