Boost-n-Juice Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 I mean what are we dealing with here? Korea claims they can't stop their Nuke program because of the ever more aggressive US. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akula Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 North Korea has ICBM equipped submarines. IRAN probably doesn't have ICBM equipped subs, but that doesn't mean they cannot get here. But they can set one off abroad and effect us (remember Marine Barracks in Beruit). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casper Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 nukes are bad where ever they go off. hope it doesn't happen. better yet, hope china isn't helping them. remember clinton giving china technology to send missles here? yeah, that could suck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathan Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 fallout=bad Even if the bomb doesn't go off in the US it will still affect weather, and could potentially drift clouds of radiation over our skies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRocket1647545505 Posted February 11, 2005 Report Share Posted February 11, 2005 Originally posted by nathan96: fallout=bad Even if the bomb doesn't go off in the US it will still affect weather, and could potentially drift clouds of radiation over our skiesDo the countries building these damn things not realize this too? If it can drift our direction, it can drift theirs too. If they're smart enough to figure out how to build them...I'd hope they're smart enough to figure out what they can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d3caps Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 Originally posted by satan: nukes are bad where ever they go off. hope it doesn't happen. better yet, hope china isn't helping them. remember clinton giving china technology to send missles here? yeah, that could suck. no, i dont remember that. why dont you link a credible source where that can be verified.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Harris92 Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 This shit is making me nervous... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug1647545489 Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 Niether country has an effective weapons delivery system capable of hitting the continental US with a nuclear warhead. Well as far as we know... Well I guess they could load one on a plane and try to drop it but I'm sure we would get to it way before it would get to us. North Koreas best subs are outdated Romeo class submarines that cannot launch sea-ground armament. I'd guess as of right now this is still true because we only suspect they have one of two missiles so they probably haven't retrofitted any of these subs yet. China does not want NK to have nuclear weapons. [ 17. February 2005, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: Doug ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orion Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 Niether country has an effective weapons delivery system capable of hitting the continental US with a nuclear warhead. Well as far as we know. Well I guess they could load one on a plane and try to drop it but I'm sure we would get to it way before it would get to us. North Koreas best subs are out dated Romeo class submarines that cannot launch sea-ground armament. I'd guess as of right now since we only suspect they have one of two missiles they haven't retrofitted any of these subs with one yet. thank you, doug. had i seen this thread before, thats what id have posted. why wont the chinese help the koreans? they want a nuclear kim even less than we do, because he can reach them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex1647545498 Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 We have "testing" sites for missle defense in Alaska and Cali. I think we have a couple of interceptor missles in Cali and like 8 in Alaska. They can be in live status if need to be. However, it's not perfect yet and the last test failed. Hopefully they'll get that up soon. It'll effect the world either way if they're using nukes. But at least if detonates off our shores the damage would be less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copperhead Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 Originally posted by d3caps: no, i dont remember that. why dont you link a credible source where that can be verified.... That was a HUGE scandal back in the KKKlinton days. http://www.artistmarket.com/writers/piraino/clintonchina.htm http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/9/29/25139.shtml http://www.bannerofliberty.com/OS5-00MQC/5-15-2000.1.html http://www.nci.org/l/l9497.htm http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1266.cfm Anyway, if you've never heard of this then my guess is that you aren't old enough to remember the Clinton days of old. I don't know that it was ever proven that he personally sold nuclear information to China, but at the very least he turned a blind eye to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d3caps Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 I remember that quite well. I also said "credible" sources, and not republican propoganda websites. What I find funny is that there are so many uses for nuclear (or nucular if your last name begins with a B) technology, yet everyone associates anything nuclear with being a WMD. especially anything dealing with nuclear technology during the clinton era. and you said it yourself, "I don't know that it was ever proven that he personally sold nuclear information to China." I think they would have had an easier time taking clinton down for this than for getting his dick sucked in office. Which one do YOU think would have been easier to cover up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest timmybgood Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 a loud mouth whure is not easy to cover up..ha! but from what i understand, neither iran nor north korea have the capability to deploy an ICBM. of course, who needs an ICBM when you can smuggle it in and throw it in the back of a truck? the world is scary nowadays... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d3caps Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 Kennedy covered up a loud mouth wh0re...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rperry74 Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 I certainly feel this idiot would think of at least threatening the use of such a weapon. The world already knows he is a loose cannon, yet there are still some countries willing to stand by him if only to spite us. I really don't get these idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d3caps Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 I agree, Bush is a loose cannon with plenty of idiots standing by him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest STi Guy Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 I have also read that Iran has some type of technology for an 800 mile radius missile. Meaning it could reach far distances. Has anyone seen the movie Dirty War? It's on HBO and terrorists let off a dirty bomb in downtown London, I believe. Shows effects on the people. I wouldn't be worried about nukes, but chemical warfare is another story once you start researching on how gases effect the body. Scary stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 Originally posted by d3caps: I agree, Bush is a loose cannon with plenty of idiots standing by him.i thought the partisan retards were gonna be quiet after the elections, i guess not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d3caps Posted February 17, 2005 Report Share Posted February 17, 2005 hrmmm, partisan.... nope. retard, definately not. and why you think his critics would stop after the elections is beyond me, especially since he is continuing to lie and make an ass out of himself and the people who support him... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desperado Posted February 18, 2005 Report Share Posted February 18, 2005 It's what happens when you are fresh out of school. They don't teach you to think in school any more, just to jump on a liberal bandwagon and spout things that you have no real idea about. Question, well two, First, why were the 12 men that flew planes into buildings here in the USA of Saudi descent. Second, EDIT: Me being a dick! Go figure, wasn't the first time will not be the last either I don't rekon I do NOT appericate your slander of the leader of this country, more over, are you even old enough to vote? [ 20. February 2005, 12:57 AM: Message edited by: desperado ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copperhead Posted February 18, 2005 Report Share Posted February 18, 2005 Originally posted by Car Enthusiast: i thought the partisan retards were gonna be quiet after the elections, i guess notNewb has no idea what's going on. Here's my surprised face http://www.truckinohio.net/phpBB2/images/smiles/sleepy1.gif I need access to the banhammer for just one day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d3caps Posted February 18, 2005 Report Share Posted February 18, 2005 Originally posted by desperado: It's what happens when you are fresh out of school. They don't teach you to think in school any more, just to jump on a liberal bandwagon and spout things that you have no real idea about. Question, well two, First, why were the 12 men that flew planes into buildings here in the USA of Saudi descent. Second, what would your opinion be if I walked into your shop and had you do work for me , and then told you I didn't bring any money to pay you? I do NOT appericate your slander of the leader of this country, more over, are you even old enough to vote? Ahhhh, I forgot that if the voice of dissent makes itself heard, you are automatically a terrorist. WHOOOOPPPss. Its that whole "you are either with us, or against us" mentality that the fv(k up administration has been harboring the past few years. I am sorry I am on the "liberal bandwagon" I will stop reading multiple news sources and start getting my news straight from Limbaugh or Hannity, since they are fine examples of unbiased reporting. in response to your "questions" 1. Their nationality or ethnicity has nothing to do with the fact that a select group of people attacked the world trade center. But of course, race was an issue here, so the Bush administration decides to invade a country(ies) in retaliation. 2. In reference to the "non-payment." You offered to do the work for free as a friendly gesture for a fellow forum member. Had you mentioned that you wanted a "cash payment" something would have been worked out. Now, as a friendly gesture in return, you were offered a case of your favorite beer for helping out. You declined, stating that you would rather have a case of Coke instead. Then after the work was performed, you inquired about audio equipment, and implied that we should give you a few amplifiers and 6.5" speakers. And who said no one had money to pay you? You never asked for payment in any form, and never mentioned the word "money" even in passing. Wow, the "conservative media" has obviously taught you how to present as little information as possible in order to invoke a response in your favor... Wow, its funny how there are always two sides to a story, ain't it? and just a quote from www.dictionary.com slan·der ( P ) Pronunciation Key (slndr) n. Law. Oral communication of false statements injurious to a person's reputation. A false and malicious statement or report about someone. so actually what I have said would be considered "Libel". Well, actually, no it wouldnt. Libel or slander must be UNTRUE statements before action can be taken. So its not my "libelous" statements that you dislike, it is the fact that someone does not harbor the same beliefs and or opinions as yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lilchaz16 Posted February 18, 2005 Report Share Posted February 18, 2005 Liberal bandwagons, religion, racism, loose cannon presidents, politics altogher, all this doesn't mean a damn thing when the shit hits the fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest d3caps Posted February 18, 2005 Report Share Posted February 18, 2005 actually, it means everything. these are the deciding factors leading up to WHEN the $hit hits the fan. When you have an administration who's agenda is not in the best interest of the people it represents, you have lots of problems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwishiwascool Posted February 18, 2005 Report Share Posted February 18, 2005 Dude. You can type curse words. It tends to hinder your credibility when you use teenspeak in a political arguement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.