First Korea, now Iran

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by davidpt40
Spelling is utlimately determined by usage.  If enough people misspell a word, that spelling changes.  This is why dictionaries are updated every year.

British- Colour
Americans- Color

British- Armour
Americans- Armor

This was changed in this country thanks to the "U tax of 1762."

Batz, do you have a source on the money owed by Iraq to France (and no, I'm not calling you out, I honestly want to know the details of the sales).

-Sik

[blitz]

Originally posted by Toad
Next, Blitz will explain to you why it is all the US's fault and that nothing can be done.

So rest easy. The right people will get the blame and no one will have to do anything.



"The world is in no way threatened by Iran, it's plain ridiculous."

No need to panic Toad, you still have about 20 000 ( in words twentythousand ) Nuclear Weapons, 44 000 Big-Eye-Bombs with binary Sarin, 1,2 Million shells with binary VX and some nice secrets more to defend yourself


Oh wait, pre-emtive strike times just arrived as a nice present to our hands!

Don't hesitate,just call Mr. Bush and ask him to pull the trigger and all the evil of the world is gone in 20 minutes (except the evil in everyone)


Regards Blitz



America is threatened  by Iraq in no way, it's just plain ridiculous

[Karnak]

I think it is reasonably likely that Iran and NK are pushing hard for nuclear deterant capability because they were listed on the idiotic "Axis of Evil" and are watching the US' unstoppable march to crushing Iraq.

Both Iran and NK may well feel that they need the security of being able to tell the US what to go do with itself, eg. if the US goes after Iran say byebye to Tel Aviv and if the US goes after NK say byebye to Tokyo.

By having the capability to do that they block the US' capabilty to utterly destroy them in a conventional invasion.

[Batz]

Sikboy I have no sources stating exactly what the money is owed for. The 60 billion has been quoted in numerous news reports internationally. I am sure a search will reveal more info.

[Toad]

Believe me Blix, I'm not in the least concerned about Iran.

You see, the UN Security Council is on the job, keeping us all safe from harm. Joschka Fischer will save us all from harm. Nukes for everyone is a good policy anyway, as all countries are benevolent and love each other completely, honestly, fully and openly.

Besides,

The world is in no way threatened by Iran, it's plain ridiculous."

[blitz]

Originally posted by Toad
Believe me Blix, I'm not in the least concerned about Iran.

You see, the UN Security Council is on the job, keeping us all safe from harm. Joschka Fischer will save us all from harm. Nukes for everyone is a good policy anyway, as all countries are benevolent and love each other completely, honestly, fully and openly.

Besides,

The world is in no way threatened by Iran, it's plain ridiculous."

Glad  ya feel safe at last , Toady


Regards Blitz


America is threatened by Iraq in no way, it's just plain ridiculous

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by Batz
 I am sure a search will reveal more info.

See, that's the problem. I spent a lot of time looking into it about 6 months ago, but came up empty. So I was hoping you had something for me.  

-Sik

[Toad]

I have never felt unsafe, "Blitzy".

Nor have I ever felt like pretending evil doesn't exist in our present world.

[blitz]

Originally posted by Toad
I have never felt unsafe, "Blitzy".

Nor have I ever felt like pretending evil doesn't exist in our present world.

If ya never felt unsafe why all that fuss about Iraq is a threat to the USA?


Regards Blitzy


America is threatened by Iraq in no way, it's just plain ridiculous

[GRUNHERZ]

Blitz was Osama Bin Laden a threat to the USA on September 10th 2001?

[Saurdaukar]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Blitz was Osama Bin Laden a threat to the USA on September 10th 2001?

In no way, its just plain rediculous.

[Karnak]

GRUNHERZ,

Yes.  He had it out for the USA.  I have yet to see any indication that Saddam actually has it out for the USA.

bin Laden also had the security of not being in  a fixed national power structure that we could easily respond to by anniliating him.

If Saddam were to attack us it would be his death sentence, and Saddam is a secular leader who lives for power, wine and women.  He isn't a religious nut who wants to sacrifice himself.

No matter how many times you guys inanely mock the postion that Saddam is not a threat to the US it doesn't generate actuall evidence that he is.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by kbman
I would venture that the word ridiculous is the most commonly misspelled word on this BBS. It comes from the Latin root ridere: to laugh. The number of times that I have seen it spelled correctly I could probably count on one hand. Except for Toad, of course, who couldn't even bring himself to misspell it when making a parody quote of Blitz's sigline.

kbman

Only thing wrong with blitz's sig line is the tense of the verb, should be "will be" in place of "is."

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

Originally posted by Karnak
No matter how many times you guys inanely mock the postion that Saddam is not a threat to the US it doesn't generate actuall evidence that he is.

However, he is a threat to world peace. Always has been, and always will be.

The fact that he is in utter violation of UN resolutions, and has been persistently for 12 years, guarantees he will always remain as the premier blockade in a world that wants peace.

Until people like Saddam are removed from power, world peace is a complete illusion. Never achievable, and not worth striving for if you can't get the completely diddlyin insane out of power in countries that hold weapons capable of killing thousands with only a single rocket.

The UN is supposedly an organization that is promoting world peace, how they can not be in favor of removing those who stand in the way of world peace is beyond me. Especially when he's explicity done so right in front of their faces for 12 years.

And that shows how completely ridiculous the UN is.
-SW

[GRUNHERZ]

How do we know Osama really had it for the USA until the planes slammed home?  So he did a few standard fare mideast style carbomb type attacks and the cole attack- nothing outlandish or particulasrly noteworthy  -  certainly nobody had an idea that an attack would actually take place on that scale as seen 911 from bin laden.  

And its funny how rational bin laden was in fact. After mogadishu, he percieved he could get away with 911 because he thought the usa were cowards and soft and would back down when hurt bad - or at worst launch a few clinton specials into an empty camp of his. I dont think he had any idea that we would invade afghanistan and kick his buddies out of power - no clue.

What does this have to do with saddam? Well like hitler before him he is a risk taker and like bin laden if he thinks he can get away with it he will go forward. The problem is not so much of him actually exploiding a nuclear weapon but the threat of him using it. You see a few hundred thousand dead wont care for a second if saddam just signed his death warrant by using nukes, their families wont get them back if saddam is killed afterwards, his death is less valuable than the lives of hundereds of thousands.  If he has these weapons he will threaten their use and blackmail people. He will pose the argument quites simply, yes i saddam understand i will be dead if i use nukes - but so will a few hundred thousand to a million of ur citizens. Thats your choice Israel, USA etc - gimme what I want.   How do you know a govermnent wouldnt refuse his "offer" if he somehow smugled a nuclear weapon into lets say an random city new york or chicago, or london or tel aviv?   These types are tremendous risk takers, dont underestimate them.