Members andrew_face Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 There's a general concern that since the Taliban is fighting the Pakistani government (which possesses nuclear weapons) that if the Taliban takes over . . . you get it. well then why the {censored} are we wasting out time in iraq when the real threat is right infront of out eyes....bush is a {censored}...the us government is a {censored}...! i hope we get nuked to {censored} for being so stupid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TheBumRush Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 I personally would like to veto the proposed nuking "to {censored}" of us. Any seconds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lonely Tourist Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 well then why the {censored} are we wasting out time in iraq when the real threat is right infront of out eyes....bush is a {censored}...the us government is a {censored}...! i hope we get nuked to {censored} for being so stupid! Right. Because if America gets nuked, it'll only kill Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Let It Burn... Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 Argh, so glad I don't live in the US. At least you guys get it first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted May 5, 2009 Share Posted May 5, 2009 Argh, so glad I don't live in the US. At least you guys get it first I wouldn't bet on that - to me, Tel Aviv would be an even more tempting target for the Taliban or Al Qaeda if they were ever to obtain a nuclear weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TheBumRush Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 So Phil, have many connections in that sort of field? Seem to have the right attitude about you... Just kidding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andre XXX Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 I wouldn't bet on that - to me, Tel Aviv would be an even more tempting target for the Taliban or Al Qaeda if they were ever to obtain a nuclear weapon. good point, i bet Israel is monitoring this situation very closely. They won't wait until it's too late to " control " the situation I'm sure.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Taylor. Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 If the Taliban DOES manage to get their hands on a nuke, I wonder if it would be Israel or India who hits them first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted May 5, 2009 Share Posted May 5, 2009 good point, i bet Israel is monitoring this situation very closely. They won't wait until it's too late to " control " the situation I'm sure.... Not with Benjamin Netanyahu in office as Prime Minister. But India wouldn't be overly enthralled with the idea of Taliban controlled nukes either... As far as which would take action first, my guess would be Israel, but I wouldn't be willing to bet on it either way. India and Pakistan have not exactly had the most neighborly of relationships over the years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rushfan Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 George Bush would have already told the UN 'They've got nukes, they're aimed at us, and they're probably in the air just as I speak'.And that probably would be the best approach. Kill em before they kill us. Cus it's common knowledge that killing everyone that is non-Muslim is all that drives these fanatics, and they won't stop until either they or we are all dead.Offense is the best defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rushfan Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 good point, i bet Israel is monitoring this situation very closely. They won't wait until it's too late to " control " the situation I'm sure....Dude, is your avatar what I think it is? Seriously, she looks like he's already finished... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members onyxrhino Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 Not with Benjamin Netanyahu in office as Prime Minister. But India wouldn't be overly enthralled with the idea of Taliban controlled nukes either...As far as which would take action first, my guess would be Israel, but I wouldn't be willing to bet on it either way. India and Pakistan have not exactly had the most neighborly of relationships over the years... eh, Israel has never admitted that they have nuclear weapons for a reason. I can't see them engaging in a preemptive nuclear strike unless they're absolutely backed into a corner. I think Israel believes that if they're going to nuke one Arab country, they would have to nuke them all, or the resulting backlash would engender their own destruction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sethlover Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 On the bright side they would not have the arsenal that the US and USSR had during the cold war era. A few cities would be bye bye and most of those mountain ranges between Pakistan and Afghanistan would be turned to dust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andre XXX Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 Dude, is your avatar what I think it is? Seriously, she looks like he's already finished... I dont know man, i just found it on the interweb and thought it looked.....ummmm , shocking......maybe i should change it up a bit, heh ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rushfan Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 I dont know man, i just found it on the interweb and thought it looked.....ummmm , shocking......maybe i should change it up a bit, heh ?? Nah leave it. I just wanted to know if it was what I thought it is, and it certainly appears to be that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HeartfeltDawn Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 And that probably would be the best approach. Kill em before they kill us. Cus it's common knowledge that killing everyone that is non-Muslim is all that drives these fanatics, and they won't stop until either they or we are all dead. Actually you'll find the Taliban's human rights record with female Muslims is pretty {censored}ing hideous so that kinda ruins any sort of 'The fanatics only hate non-Muslims' argument. And hey, Osama was a US friend back in the past. It's funny how people America have used (bin Laden and Saddam springing immediately to mind) end up biting your ass in the future after you drop them like stones once they've been used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members matterday Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 I'm more worried about suitcase nukes showing up on our own soil. Launching a missile from one side of the planet to the other isn't an easy task and not every country has the capability. Also, they are easier to detect and we have more time to shoot them down either over the Pacific or Atlantic which ever way they're coming from. Don't be stupid, use your brain. Think of the Red scare and how pointless that was. "ZoMG the C:ommyZ R CuMMinG". You want to be scared of nukes? Ask the government how many nukes we have and start counting. See if the numbers match up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rushfan Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 Actually you'll find the Taliban's human rights record with female Muslims is pretty {censored}ing hideous so that kinda ruins any sort of 'The fanatics only hate non-Muslims' argument. And hey, Osama was a US friend back in the past. It's funny how people America have used (bin Laden and Saddam springing immediately to mind) end up biting your ass in the future after you drop them like stones once they've been used. Noone said they ONLY hate non-Muslims, but we're 1st on their list. When it comes to Osama and Saddam, don't even open up that box of worms. Every decade the power shifts in that region of the world. THAT is why they hate us. We back the horse that needs the most help, and that changes all the time. All the US has been doing is trying to keep the balance in check. We can't help it that George reeeeeaaallly felt like he had to clean up his dad's mistake. Osama was a friend only to keep Russia in check. Saddam was a friend only to keep the Iotola (sp) in check. Were they good moves? Not gonna judge, but that's the WHY that we helped those 2 faggots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andre XXX Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 eh, Israel has never admitted that they have nuclear weapons for a reason. I can't see them engaging in a preemptive nuclear strike unless they're absolutely backed into a corner. I think Israel believes that if they're going to nuke one Arab country, they would have to nuke them all, or the resulting backlash would engender their own destruction. They have the toughest army , pound for pound in the world. They will do what it takes to ensure their continued existence..... some of their actions would be very covert I think. also, I'm convinced we have some hi tech spy/military systems that are more advanced than we realize. Thats how we are taking out all these taliban and al queda leaders with these drone planes.... maybe some sort of satelite, face recognition type of thing is my guess. when we eventually find out what this technology it will be very impressive indeed... A reporter was going to leak the story actually in his last book ( bob woodward, the guy that broke the watergate story years ago )....and was convinced by military leaders not to do so because it would risk american lives, and he agreed and didnt spill the beans Bob Woodward stated ( I'm paraphrasing here ) in the press ...." when americans find out how technologically advanced this science is that the military is using they will be amazed....it's invention is the equivilant to the Philidelphia expiriment or putting the first man on the moon...." If you google you can find more things he said about it , interesting stuff for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rushfan Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 I'm more worried about suitcase nukes showing up on our own soil. Launching a missile from one side of the planet to the other isn't an easy task and not every country has the capability. Also, they are easier to detect and we have more time to shoot them down either over the Pacific or Atlantic which ever way they're coming from. Don't be stupid, use your brain. Think of the Red scare and how pointless that was. "ZoMG the C:ommyZ R CuMMinG".You want to be scared of nukes? Ask the government how many nukes we have and start counting. See if the numbers match up. I'm with you. One of my profs made the observation one time that it doesn't even take a nuke to take out NYC. Just drop a ball of plutonium the size of a softball into it's water supply. Takes a few more days, but still kills 90% of the city... I'm not even so scared of the briefcase nuke, more scared of some kind of biological agent that will go unchecked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members tape Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 And that probably would be the best approach. Kill em before they kill us. Cus it's common knowledge that killing everyone that is non-Muslim is all that drives these fanatics, and they won't stop until either they or we are all dead. Offense is the best defense. That doesn't work in practice, because by killing the extremists, you usually end up killing many many moderates as well, or maybe the extremists had many family members who weren't so extreme. This creates more fanatics out of the moderates and the whole thing starts up again.This is what's been going on in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. It's well documented.Yes, there are many extremists who only want to see the eradicatio nof us infidels, but remember that these extremists have many moderate allies. In fact the moderates hugely outnumber the violent extremists. If we're blowing up both the fanatics and the moderates/civilians, then we get no sympathy from any of them. On the other hand if we actually cater to some of what they want (stopping the occupation, pullign out of their countries, etc), we might not get the sympathy of the extremists, but we probably will for the moderates. I think that would be a really good start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andre XXX Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 That doesn't work in practice, because by killing the extremists, you usually end up killing many many moderates as well, or maybe the extremists had many family members who weren't so extreme. This creates more fanatics out of the moderates and the whole thing starts up again.This is what's been going on in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. It's well documented.Yes, there are many extremists who only want to see the eradicatio nof us infidels, but remember that these extremists have many moderate allies. In fact the moderates hugely outnumber the violent extremists. If we're blowing up both the fanatics and the moderates/civilians, then we get no sympathy from any of them. On the other hand if we actually cater to some of what they want (stopping the occupation, pullign out of their countries, etc), we might not get the sympathy of the extremists, but we probably will for the moderates. I think that would be a really good start. I dont buy this argument. Why didn't this happen with the japanese then ?? They are our friends now..... And we killed scores of their civilians to save US service men lives.... I just don't buy it.... A certain part of the Radical muslim world ( I'm not talking the muslim world as a whole, there are many, many good muslims ) needs a reformation or enlightenment to get their mentalities out of the dark ages....they are facist evil pricks... Where are the muslim leaders from other countries that should stand up and say " we cant put our woman in burques and beat them and stone them to death and it's time to stop acting like barbarians " ???? If it didnt happen in japan after we dropped several nuclear weapons on them ( more japanese being radicalized ) why does/would it happen in the muslim world...??? Why do they teach in madras's ( schools ) in saudi arabia still to this day that we ( the western world ) the infidels are the devils ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HeartfeltDawn Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 Noone said they ONLY hate non-Muslims, but we're 1st on their list.When it comes to Osama and Saddam, don't even open up that box of worms. Every decade the power shifts in that region of the world. THAT is why they hate us. We back the horse that needs the most help, and that changes all the time. All the US has been doing is trying to keep the balance in check. We can't help it that George reeeeeaaallly felt like he had to clean up his dad's mistake.Osama was a friend only to keep Russia in check.Saddam was a friend only to keep the Iotola (sp) in check.Were they good moves? Not gonna judge, but that's the WHY that we helped those 2 faggots. Actually you said "Cus it's common knowledge that killing everyone that is non-Muslim is all that drives these fanatics". Pretty {censored}ing simplistic argument. The idea that the US involvement in Afghanistan over the years is purely because the US backs the weaker horse is ridiculous. It was quite clear why America backed Afghanistan. It was even clearer to see how badly America reneged on its promises to help Afghanistan once the USSR had left the region, thus leaving Afghanistan free for the Taliban to claim. America picked its targets in the 80's and manipulated people, some of who bit America back in the ass years later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andre XXX Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 Actually you said "Cus it's common knowledge that killing everyone that is non-Muslim is all that drives these fanatics". Pretty {censored}ing simplistic argument. The idea that the US involvement in Afghanistan over the years is purely because the US backs the weaker horse is ridiculous. It was quite clear why America backed Afghanistan. It was even clearer to see how badly America reneged on its promises to help Afghanistan once the USSR had left the region, thus leaving Afghanistan free for the Taliban to claim. America picked its targets in the 80's and manipulated people, some of who bit America back in the ass years later. I agree, the usa has made mistakes over the years and these may be some of them....but we are still the most generous nation on earth and the free'est nation on earth... Still a beacon of freedom after all these years. Not to pull the WWII card....but if it wasn't for the usa much of europe would be very different now.... But to a certain extent you have a valid point..and hindsight is always 20/20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HeartfeltDawn Posted May 5, 2009 Members Share Posted May 5, 2009 I dont buy this argument. Why didn't this happen with the japanese then ?? They are our friends now..... And we killed scores of their civilians to save US service men lives....I just don't buy it....A certain part of the Radical muslim world ( I'm not talking the muslim world as a whole, there are many, many good muslims ) needs a reformation or enlightenment to get their mentalities out of the dark ages....they are facist evil pricks...Where are the muslim leaders from other countries that should stand up and say " we cant put our woman in burques and beat them and stone them to death and it's time to stop acting like barbarians " ???? If it didnt happen in japan after we dropped several nuclear weapons on them ( more japanese being radicalized ) why does/would it happen in the muslim world...???Why do they teach in madras's ( schools ) in saudi arabia still to this day that we ( the western world ) the infidels are the devils ??? The Japanese system has a certain sense of honour. A defeat is accepted. They were engaged in war and lost. Afghanistan is a different matter. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_CIA_Taliban.html Where are the Western leaders who say 'Maybe it's time we stopped sexualising 16 year old girls and promoting violence through our music and television?' Where's the outright ban on executions in the US? All cultures have different moral values. You think women covered up is ridiculous: they'd say likewise about giant billboards featuring tits and ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.