It's war time...

[joshpoints 10+ year member]

Boy, Albert Einstein sure was smart. He also believed that the world must have been designed. If something is designed then it must have been created. So he believed that all parts in the world worked together in too complex of a way to have just happened by itself.

 

[KAMAK 10+ year member]

Einstiens quote should be "the world is a dangerous place because i figured out how to destroy a little mass and get an enormouse energy output. Which leads to a very large bomb that japan didn't seem to like" thats what it should be.

 

[nswartley 5,000+ posts]

Originally posted by KAMAK Einstiens quote should be "the world is a dangerous place because i figured out how to destroy a little mass and get an enormouse energy output. Which leads to a very large bomb that japan didn't seem to like" thats what it should be.

dont mention that please...im doing my big *** research project on that as we speak...i hate research projects. bleh

-ntae //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/furious.gif.fc81ca146dbff91fede3ed290dbc4f4c.gif

 

[KAMAK 10+ year member]

ohhh that sux sorry man. I retract my previous post. but i will leave it there. Hey do you need any help with that i am smart with all that stuff.

 

[CarAudioAddict 10+ year member]

If Einstien knew the consequences of his discovery he would be spinning in his grave.

I don't think he intended it to be used as a weapon.

Unfortunatly if Einstien didn't discover it, someone else would've, so we'd still be at square one

 

[nswartley 5,000+ posts]

Originally posted by KAMAK ohhh that sux sorry man. I retract my previous post. but i will leave it there. Hey do you need any help with that i am smart with all that stuff.

heh no i was just kidding....well kinda //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

naw, i dont need help, i have a stack of 20 books to help me out //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

i just read this.... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85007,00.html what the hell? that is childish IMHO....

-nate

 

[nswartley 5,000+ posts]

Originally posted by CarAudioAddict If Einstien knew the consequences of his discovery he would be spinning in his grave.

 

I don't think he intended it to be used as a weapon.

 

Unfortunatly if Einstien didn't discover it, someone else would've, so we'd still be at square one

i think that he wanted it to be used as a weapon of intimidation to deter war....kind of like teddy roosevelt used his big stick policy which worked wonders...

i sure hope that the nuke never gets used again...

-nate

 

[CarAudioAddict 10+ year member]

Nukes are detonated every couple of years when some screwy govt makes modifications to one.

The detonations are typically done in uninhabited, isolated areas (like the US was doing on the Bikini Islands).

The big problem is, all it will take is one madman with access to these things to **** the world 10 times over.

Now during the cold war there was an unofficial policy called M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction), meaning that if one country launched a nuke, others would retaliate reulting in the death of virtually every living being on the planet (not even bacteria could survive, but there would be a few survivors from diff species). This is what prevent the US and the USSR from wiping eachother off the face of the planet. I believe the policy still holds today for most countries

 

[nswartley 5,000+ posts]

Originally posted by CarAudioAddict Nukes are detonated every couple of years when some screwy govt makes modifications to one.

 

The detonations are typically done in uninhabited, isolated areas (like the US was doing on the Bikini Islands).

 

The big problem is, all it will take is one madman with access to these things to **** the world 10 times over.

 

Now during the cold war there was an unofficial policy called M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction), meaning that if one country launched a nuke, others would retaliate reulting in the death of virtually every living being on the planet (not even bacteria could survive, but there would be a few survivors from diff species). This is what prevent the US and the USSR from wiping eachother off the face of the planet. I believe the policy still holds today for most countries

but all it would take for the world to be ****ed would be a breach in the SAC and the failsafe failing in and of itself....you read 'failsafe?'

-nate

 

[CarAudioAddict 10+ year member]

true.

The system used in the US is almost inpenetrable. Last I heard, in order to launch the US govt nukes, the president, vice president, head of security, and a few others must enter codes that are changed VERY often and never written down. Plus the sites are heavily guarded

The possibility of someone getting all the codes is very slim, plus they'd have to get past the guards. Not likely that the US nukes could ever be accidentaly launched.

Other countries, however, don't nessecarily have ANY safeguards in place. some may just require the push of a button to launch (i hope not, but it is a very real possibility).

Overall I prefer Canad's policy toward WOMD. We don't have any, we dopn't produce any, we don't have enough materials (like the plutonium) to produce them, and we don't allow these materials into Canada. Name a better system than not having them at all.

Failsafe, what a riduculous term. I know it means a system used for when the primary systems fail. I prefer the term backup system, or safeguard. sounds "safer"

 

[nswartley 5,000+ posts]

Originally posted by CarAudioAddict Overall I prefer Canad's policy toward WOMD. We don't have any, we dopn't produce any, we don't have enough materials (like the plutonium) to produce them, and we don't allow these materials into Canada. Name a better system than not having them at all.

 

Failsafe, what a riduculous term. I know it means a system used for when the primary systems fail. I prefer the term backup system, or safeguard. sounds "safer"

yes i whole-heartedly agree with Canada's policy on nukes...its the best, hands down.

failsafe was actually the term for the point where the planes flew up to before turning back while the SAC was more active...you kinda have to know about it to understand...b-52 bombers with h-bombs would fly up to a certain point during the cold war in case they got the signal to drop one on russia. it preserved MAD in case they used an SLBM on us...

-nate

 

[CarAudioAddict 10+ year member]

I see.

I thought you were talking about failsafe in the general sense. my bad.

That Idea has it's advantages. I'm guessing that the "turn-around" point was outside of USSR teritory so that the USSR had no reason to fire at possible threats. So chances are if the USSR launched something the bombers would be left alone so they could blow the USSR into 150 peices (wait a minute, all it took was time to do that).

ALL WOMD should be banned. Even those in countries sworn to protect the peace. There would also have to be an international agency/organization that locates any WOMD that are built/not-destoryed so as to maintain a WOMD free world.

just wondering: Has anyone else heard the rumour about the current US research for a weapon more powerful than the Nuke could ever be? It could be just a rumour, but it could be true, probably supposed to be top secret.

I heard that weapon is going to be orbit based, and have the capability of making even jupiter look more habitable than earth. As I said maybe its just a rumor.

 

[nswartley 5,000+ posts]

Originally posted by CarAudioAddict ALL WOMD should be banned. Even those in countries sworn to protect the peace. There would also have to be an international agency/organization that locates any WOMD that are built/not-destoryed so as to maintain a WOMD free world.

yes, but the USSR has kept such poor surveillance over their weapons that i highly doubt that they know where more than 90% of them are...they are spread out over a few nations also...i doubt that they can locate 100% of them. it would be a good idea tho, but it is a long shot.

Originally posted by CarAudioAddict just wondering: Has anyone else heard the rumour about the current US research for a weapon more powerful than the Nuke could ever be? It could be just a rumour, but it could be true, probably supposed to be top secret.

 

I heard that weapon is going to be orbit based, and have the capability of making even jupiter look more habitable than earth. As I said maybe its just a rumor.

i thought i heard something about that....the m-bomb i think it was? probably not, just a guess.

-nate

 

[joshpoints 10+ year member]

I haven't heard that we are developing something more powerful than nukes. I have only heard that our nuclear technology is a lot more powerful. Afterall we have regular bombs that are as powerful as what we dropped on Japan, they just lack the radiation.

As for Canada's failsafe plan, yes that would be the best in a perfect world. If the U.S. didn't have nukes right now there are various nations that would have taken us over. The two top countries would be China and North Korea. And saying that nukes could be banned throughout the world so they are not created is like saying that guns could be wiped off the face of the earth; impossible. Where there is money behind a will there is a way. People are evil and always will be.

 

[Savant 10+ year member]

Originally posted by joshpoints I haven't heard that we are developing something more powerful than nukes.

Cold Fusion.. Not that I'd expect you to understand that..

Anyway.. it's been MANY weeks now, the US PROMISED we KNEW about WMD, Chem/Bio weapons, but NOW our only response is "um. maybe they moved TONS of stuff across borders without our noticing".. nevermind that our spy sattelites can read liscens plates.. yeah, convoys of TONS of Chem/Bio weaps just toodled across borders AFTER the war started.. Course, there are reports that some of these caputred Iraqi's are saying Saddam ordered the destruction of Chem Plants days before the war.. yeah, that makes sense... some psycho decides days before he might die to lose all his destructive ability? More RIGHT pap.. though, you couldn't convince someone like LWW of that..

Here is the bottom line.. NO WEAPONS of MASS DESTRUCTION or CHEMICAL WEAPONS (or bio) have been found... Rumsfeld has openly stated that we NEED the locals to show us where they are... nice intel we had..

To even try to imply that oil isn't a concern is so fukked up it's not funny.. it's the ONLY resource of the country we cared about (look at the museums/zoos/etc that were left to ROT and be looted).. We made sure the oil wells were secured and fires put out, yet we let ANYONE that wanted to loot what ever they wanted to..

As far as Afganastan, we still have NOT done much to help them, though we HAVE started the oil pipe line from the mid-asian oil fields to the Arabian Sea.. Hmm.. a project that was on the books for years but the Afgani government was blocking.. we attacked them to 'liberate' them, then left once the pipeline was being started.. na, no correlation.. none at all..

Yeah, the Iraqi people wanted us there, that's why they are NOW telling us we better LEAVE before the average joe in the street picks up guns and attacks us.. Na, they really do want us 'there'..

For LWW.. to imply there is never a 'good' reason to 'dodge the draft' like Clinton did.. he was in an age where the average American KNEW we had NO business in Vietnam.. so he avoided fighting a WRONG CONFLICT.. so? Yet, you would make it seem that someone standing up for what they believe in is wrong in any sense if it's agasint what the 'corrupt' US gov wants.. Funny that our COUNTRY was FOUNDED by people that felt the government was WRONG.. While I agree that his actions in Office were attrocious, that has NOTHING to do with his 'protesting' the war he avoided.. Yet, being someone that sucks on the Right's spew, I don't expect you to understand that..

There was an interiew on CNN today.. some guy mentioned how the CURRENT government (your Bush/Cheney guys) gave $20 BILLION dollars to OIL, COAL, and GAS companies (the richest in the country) and wants to LOOSEN Environment laws INSTEAD of offering that money to ALTERNATIVE FUEL research.. Hmmm.. na, the Iraq war has NOTHING to do with oil.. or those industries.. Sorry, but when the GOV gives that kind of CASH to CORPERATIONS, the gov is NO LONGER WORKING FOR ME.. which, is against the Constitution.. "We the people, in order to form a more perfect union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America" do form a government "of the people, by the people, for the people", yet to NOT promote a plan that could RELEASE us from FOREIGN OIL is NOT in our best interest.. it's in the interest of CORPERATIONS... The US government has gotten so bloated and corrupted that the average American no longer has a clue..

You can keep trying to (ignorantly) belittle me and make associations that would make me look like a friend of Saddam, but when the day is done, your BS about my being 'liberal' and supporting Saddam are just more examples of how you don't have a reasonable leg to stand on..

Here is a clue for you.. American's have been lied to for DECADES by our government.. I noticed you had NOTHING to offer in response to the doctored photos and fabricated story by Bush - I's admin about the hospital and babies used to get us in the First Gulf War, yet you would try to convince the world that his kid didn't make up stuff to get his way, like his father did? Whatever.. moron.. Still NO PROOF of what Bush said was the BASIS for the war, and the 'secondary' idea of 'liberating' the people is blowing up in our face since they are telling us to get out of their country even though we don't have the gov in place that we want.. Now we are threatening Syria and Iran?? Na.. not about getting a foot-hold in the mid-east either.. not a chance.. And if this was really about Terrorism, why not attack Saudi Aribia?? WE KNOW there are people there that DIRECTLY SUPPORTED bin Laden financially.. yet, no confict, just attacks on the next biggest oil reserve in the world (which migh turn out to be the biggest).. Hmm..

Anyway..

I am pretty tired of being lumped into the 'left' or 'liberals' despite my MANY points of how that isn't pertinant.. But, when some stupid pathetic little bag-o-crap can't even walk away from the 'bear' connection, I shouldn't expect much..

Here is the bottom (and as of yet, NOT DISPUTED BY PROOF) line.. we ILLEGALLY invaded Iraq... the UN said they didn't think we had 'substantiation' for invasion based on the weapons thing, so we decided to invade to 'liberate' the people (which, without a direct request, is ILLEGAL).. Now, they want us out.. Hmm.. and the religous leaders are 'rejecting' the guy we sent in to try and take over.. Hmm.. So, now what? we force ourselves on the Iraq people? we 'force' a government? what?

I said from the beginning that I felt we had no 'legal' right to invade, and Bush was doing this for alternative motives.. LWW (and his mindless minions) insisted it was based on our 'reliable' US intelligence that KNEW where Chem/Bio weaps were.. yet, over a month+ into the issue and NO PROOF that our intel was even close.. *sigh*

K.. I guess you were right LWW.. I am just some dillhole spewing Liberal 'pap' despite my not liking liberals either.. there is NO chance that what I have stated from Day ONE could be accurate, nor is it possible that your INSISTANCE OF PROOF from ~30 days ago is STILL NOT SUBSTANTIATED..

Facts:

No chem weapons found..

No facilities to make chem weaps found

No bio weaps found

No WMD (forgiving NON-MOVABLE OIL RIGS) found, mostlikely on a global community considered NUKES..

Iraqi people want us to LEAVE (sure, liberated, but not happy about us being there)

So, in the light of $20 Billion given to oil, gas, coal companies and now not needing Saudi Ariba (our #1 supplier of oil), what are the odds that I was totally wrong?

oh, and someone cried about the sanctions on Iraq.. guess who is ready to tell the UN that all sanctions are lifted since Saddam is out of power? the US.. Hmm.. so the oil can flow now. Hmm.. and we want to fase out the Oil for Food program.. Hmm.. you are correct sir, not about oil at all //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/rolleyes.gif.c1fef805e9d1464d377451cd5bc18bfb.gif