Weapons In Space

Other video games, TV shows, movies, general chit-chat...this is an all-purpose off-topic board where you can talk about anything that doesn't have its own dedicated section.

Postby Riot on Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:45 pm

cyanide wrote:Most Iraqi civilians, eh? I'm sure there's a lot of Iraqi civilians are cursing the US for their irresponsible "accidential deaths" of 100 000+ innocent civilians. Of course they rather have Saddam ousted, but you think they're happy with the daily suicide bombers and living in constant fear? And what about the things the US don't want you to know, like torture and reckless behavior?


It's war. People die. But think of the millions of people that haven't even been born yet, generations are being saved too. Saddam was raping and killing innocent people for no reason. Those innocent lives dying, it's horrible yes but, are dying in a good cause. It's horrible that people have to die, but more people would have died under Saddam than this war. Mark my words.

cyanide wrote:If you think you're so brilliant, then why the hell did America leave Saddam in power for more than a decade? If it wasn't for 9/11, George W. Bush wouldn't have a sorry ass excuse to invade the middle east and use "terrorists" as scapegoats. As for the tsunami thing, that was overhyped, and they got way more money that can be invested in other world crisises that is sadly ignored, thanks to the media.


Well, America has had chances to take Saddam out before. Clinton refused to and let Saddam and Bin Laden go. Bush is just trying to make up for that. And why didn't America invade Iraq right away? Well, first they went to Afghanistan.

cyanide wrote:Seriously man, I think something should be done about the genocides that are going on in Africa. Too bad nobody gives a flying shiite. Mark my words, Iraq won't see any improvements for a long, long time, and may never see improvements at all because of $$$. If they do improve, it's for the US' benefit - and I mean business benefit. Think - oil. Like I said, the US was standing in the sidelines a little too long, a little too late.


Iraq won't be 100% free anytime soon. But does that mean we shouldn't try? Somethings take time. I think when you are dealing about people's future you have to take time. And of course it has some benefit to America, every move a country makes has to have some kind of benefit in return. It's how every nation works.

And to bring up the situation about Africa. Sorry you don't know this but America actually has troops stationed all over the place, including Africa. They have troops in South America dealing with drugs wars, and people all over the place in places like Germany and other England countries. America doesn't have any troops in North Korea but right next to North Korea in the Demilitarized Zone they have a bunch of Cav Scouts there. So saying America isn't doing anything about Africa is naive. They are, they have troops there and they are sending aid. It's just you never hear about it because of the war on Iraq and the stuff with North Korea.



cyanide wrote:I actually said in another post that the US should be more concerned about North Korea than Iraq, so don't make assumptions. And I never said anything about wanting North Korea to have nuclear weapons rather than the US. If the US spent billions and billions of dollars in bribes to assassinate Il-Jong, then that'd probably be a lot easier than worrying about Iraq's "WMDs" :roll:


America is talking with North Korea but it's hard to do anything because the Chinese Government wants to be in charge of the conflict. So America is really tied up, therefore they cut out all supplies and shipments to North Korea, which really pissed them off.

cyanide wrote:Yes, and ask the Kurds which country supplied the Iraqis with weapons so the Kurds could suffer. (hint: the good o' red white and blue)


Once again, that isn't Bush's fault. Bush has to try and correct the errors now. But also to defend America, you have no idea who will turn your back on you. Saddam hasn't always been power hungry and crazy.


Also, America has nukes. Canada has nukes. Australia has nukes. Pretty much EVERY country that has some kind of power has nukes. But Canada has them for defense just like America and Australia has them for defense. So don't get on America's ass because they have nukes when pretty much every nation has nukes of some kind. Nobody cares that America, Canada or Australia won't use them for harm.
User avatar
Riot
WHAT DA F?!?! CHEEZITS!?
 
Posts: 6870
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 10:23 am

Postby Ruff Ryder on Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:49 pm

Wow, Riot and Wisdom Kid making posts that I have to scroll down Firefox to read! :shock: (Y) (Y)
Image

'Retired'

"You can’t drive a knife into a man’s back nine inches, pull it out six inches, and call it progress."-Malcolm X
User avatar
Ruff Ryder
 
Posts: 5996
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 7:17 am
Location: VA RLY

Postby cyanide on Fri Feb 25, 2005 1:15 pm

Riot wrote:It's war. People die. But think of the millions of people that haven't even been born yet, generations are being saved too. Saddam was raping and killing innocent people for no reason. Those innocent lives dying, it's horrible yes but, are dying in a good cause. It's horrible that people have to die, but more people would have died under Saddam than this war. Mark my words..


Saddam didn't kill millions of people, btw. Actually, if you compare innocent Iraq civilians, more people were killed by the US-led war in that year than any other year by Saddam.

Riot wrote:Well, America has had chances to take Saddam out before. Clinton refused to and let Saddam and Bin Laden go. Bush is just trying to make up for that. And why didn't America invade Iraq right away? Well, first they went to Afghanistan..


And they didn't find bin Laden... interesting how the focus shifted from bin Laden to Iraq, suddenly.

Riot wrote:Iraq won't be 100% free anytime soon. But does that mean we shouldn't try? Somethings take time. I think when you are dealing about people's future you have to take time. And of course it has some benefit to America, every move a country makes has to have some kind of benefit in return. It's how every nation works.


We'll see how it goes. Of course, Iraq will be dependent on the US, so eventually, you'll be seeing US corporations and factories being incorporated on Iraqi soil. My point is, Iraq's going to lose its soverignty.

Riot wrote:And to bring up the situation about Africa. Sorry you don't know this but America actually has troops stationed all over the place, including Africa. They have troops in South America dealing with drugs wars, and people all over the place in places like Germany and other England countries. America doesn't have any troops in North Korea but right next to North Korea in the Demilitarized Zone they have a bunch of Cav Scouts there. So saying America isn't doing anything about Africa is naive. They are, they have troops there and they are sending aid. It's just you never hear about it because of the war on Iraq and the stuff with North Korea.


They could be doing more, simple as that. It'd be nice if the media could turn its attention to that for a chance, but of course, ratings will go down :|

Riot wrote:Once again, that isn't Bush's fault. Bush has to try and correct the errors now. But also to defend America, you have no idea who will turn your back on you. Saddam hasn't always been power hungry and crazy.


America could've invested in upgrading homeland security. There's no way Iraq could have any potential threat to the US.

Riot wrote:Also, America has nukes. Canada has nukes. Australia has nukes. Pretty much EVERY country that has some kind of power has nukes. But Canada has them for defense just like America and Australia has them for defense.


America, defense? It sounds more like offense these days.
if you were killed tomorrow, i WOULDNT GO 2 UR FUNERAL CUZ ID B N JAIL 4 KILLIN THE MOTHA FUCKER THAT KILLED U!
......|..___________________, ,
....../ `---______----|]
...../==o;;;;;;;;______.:/
.....), ---.(_(__) /
....// (..) ), ----"
...//___//
..//___//
.//___//
WE TRUE HOMIES
WE RIDE TOGETHER
WE DIE TOGETHER
User avatar
cyanide
Dat steatopygous
 
Posts: 9197
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:09 am
Location: US's toque

Postby Jowe on Fri Feb 25, 2005 1:21 pm

Australia has nukes?! :lol:

Our airforce has planes that we buy 2nd hand from other countries. And are basically obsolete.

Our submarines are noisy.

If we did produce nukes, we'd probably send them all to the US stockpile.
Image
Fee Nick's Uns [15-10] says:
i'd suck allen iverson's cock any day -
Fee Nick's Uns [15-10] says:
just so i could say i've met allen iverson
User avatar
Jowe
 
Posts: 3451
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 5:46 pm
Location: Paradise City

Postby PAMPERS on Fri Feb 25, 2005 1:32 pm

how i wish some nations with WMD allied themselves with america.then we will have more trusted countries with WMD. not relying on one country alone.extensive posting here with very deep thoughts from all you guys.good job (Y)
Image the diapers says it all!
User avatar
PAMPERS
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 6:18 pm
Location: Kyoto

Postby Riot on Fri Feb 25, 2005 1:32 pm

http://library.trinity.wa.edu.au/issues/weapons.htm
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/lcj/ ... /ch16.html

Don't try and act stupid, aussie's have nukes. Now, nukes don't just mean nuclear war-heads. WMD and nukes can mean thousands of things.
User avatar
Riot
WHAT DA F?!?! CHEEZITS!?
 
Posts: 6870
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 10:23 am

Postby cyanide on Fri Feb 25, 2005 1:38 pm

Riot wrote:WMD and nukes can mean thousands of things.


Like sticks and pebbles :mrgreen:
if you were killed tomorrow, i WOULDNT GO 2 UR FUNERAL CUZ ID B N JAIL 4 KILLIN THE MOTHA FUCKER THAT KILLED U!
......|..___________________, ,
....../ `---______----|]
...../==o;;;;;;;;______.:/
.....), ---.(_(__) /
....// (..) ), ----"
...//___//
..//___//
.//___//
WE TRUE HOMIES
WE RIDE TOGETHER
WE DIE TOGETHER
User avatar
cyanide
Dat steatopygous
 
Posts: 9197
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:09 am
Location: US's toque

Postby Riot on Fri Feb 25, 2005 1:40 pm

Why wouldnt they have Nukes is the question.I mean India, Pakistan, Iran, North Korea have them why wouldnt Australia who is close to Korea.

Lots of nations have Nukes.
User avatar
Riot
WHAT DA F?!?! CHEEZITS!?
 
Posts: 6870
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 10:23 am

Postby COOLmac© on Mon Feb 28, 2005 5:10 pm

Australia is far from Korea. in between them is the philippines.check the world map if you wont believe me. the closes to australia are singapore and indonesia. but hey those two dont have nukes. i believe australia have em nukes.they are rich and they keep a low profile. :|
Image
MY FORUMS [u pinoy? go here!]/YES COOLmac's WHITEmen DYNASTY!!!
coolmac's weekly random lyrics #23 I'm dumb she's a lesbian. i thought i have found the one
coolmac's law of plain logical events #479 use common sense, you need to sleep to live
User avatar
COOLmac©
 
Posts: 3710
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:48 pm
Location: NCR phil..>",<

Postby Riot on Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:00 pm

omg, I didn't mean they were physically close.
User avatar
Riot
WHAT DA F?!?! CHEEZITS!?
 
Posts: 6870
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 10:23 am

Previous

Return to Off-Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests