Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: SunTracker on September 30, 2004, 09:39:27 PM
-
...without nuclear bunker busting bombs.
Expect airstrikes/war with Iran and North Korea in the next 4 years.
-
100 years down the road, I honestly believe this presidency is going to be chalked up as a success in the history books.
-
Don't worry, John Kerry will ask the UN for help...
-
If an enemy is dug in so deep that you'd need a nuclear bunker buster bomb to get him, couldn't you just weld the doors shut?
If you got into a situation that called for nuclear weapons, wouldn't a device placed directly on top of this super deep macho bunker do just as good?
Sounds like a liberal fantasy weapon to me. Kinda like "assault weapons" being different from ordinary weapons because of the way they look.
-
F=MA?
-
Sounds like a liberal fantasy weapon to me.
Last time I checked the president is far from liberal, so where in the world did you get that it's a "liberal fantasy weapon"?
-
Kerry is talking about getting tough with Iran and North Korea for building nukes, yet he is cancelling Bush's bunker busting bomb (which happens to be nuclear).
-
Iran and N Korea are building nukes to defend themselves, from bush.
Rememberr the axis of evil drivel? Kerry promises to use the UN to negotiate a settlement with N korea and Iran that is satisfactory to both parties and the US. if the UN is involved, the bulk of the fatalities from a war, if it has to happen, wont be US troops.
You folks better teach your kids how to be a mechanic, because if there is one more war, the draft is comming back. Bush and Cheney will not bat an eyelid before sending your sons and daughters to the meatgrinder for thier oil, errr, terrorists hunting.
-
WhiteHawk, you have revealed the truth, but now you are in danger. Black helicopters are on the way to your location as we speak!
-
HAHA
you think iran or the cheekbones in Nk is going to listen to skerry if they do not listen to bush?
LOL
you think maybe cause he's a big bad arse "war hero", able to gather record number of medals in a whole 4 months in country tour we be the pivot point??? Had to laugh everytime he ref that "I know what combat is cause ..." "I defended my country then..." what a ****..
LOL LOL LOL
gotta laugh at his plan to "secure" russian nuke material too ... specially after calling putin a monster during the debate ...
didn't say why his hero slick willie didn't gather up the same missing materials in the 8 years he had in the oral office ....
LOL LOL LOL
yeah, skerry "Won" last night ... that is why more "undecided" read dumbarse voters, stated that though they believe skerry won the "debate", they'd vote Bush as prez....
LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL
LOL LOL LOL
LANDSLIDE BUSH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Originally posted by WhiteHawk
Iran and N Korea are building nukes to defend themselves, from bush.
Rememberr the axis of evil drivel? Kerry promises to use the UN to negotiate a settlement with N korea and Iran that is satisfactory to both parties and the US. if the UN is involved, the bulk of the fatalities from a war, if it has to happen, wont be US troops.
You folks better teach your kids how to be a mechanic, because if there is one more war, the draft is comming back. Bush and Cheney will not bat an eyelid before sending your sons and daughters to the meatgrinder for thier oil, errr, terrorists hunting.
Whush whoosh whop whop whoosh whaaap whooop
-
Last time I checked the president is far from liberal, so where in the world did you get that it's a "liberal fantasy weapon"?
Kerry mentioned this weapon (nuclear bunker buster bomb) as if it could or would be used in conventional or guerrilla style warfare.
If such a thing actually exists, I got news for ya. It can't. It's a lie. A fallacy. Fantasy. It's a name thrown out by a liberal to create fear. Nothing more. You could no more use such a weapon in the fight against terrorism than you could using regular nukes.
So why did he mention it?
Liberals did the same thing with "assault weapons", "cop killer" bullets,"street sweepers", "hanging chad", etc. Give it a dark sounding name and it becomes a threat.
If a war broke out in which such a weapon would be used there wouldn't be anyone left to see if the thing actually worked.
I wouldn't worry though. If Kerry becomes President he'll shut down the nuclear bunker buster bomb program and give that money to the terrorists as protection money to not attack us.
Yeah...that'll work.
-
Originally posted by WhiteHawk
if the UN is involved, the bulk of the fatalities from a war, if it has to happen, wont be US troops.
welcome to the real world;
the Korean War was a war "run" and supported by the UN, the USA provided 90% of the troops and 85% of the money.
the UN is a weak sister when it comes to fighting.
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
Kerry is talking about getting tough with Iran and North Korea for building nukes, yet he is cancelling Bush's bunker busting bomb (which happens to be nuclear).
Heck, Kerry was talking about giving nuclear material to Iran to see if they could be trusted.
That's how NK got there nukes.
What a great plan.
-
Originally posted by moot
F=MA?
Don't forget F=MA x F x P
I think P will be in there heavily.
-
John, Korea is a completely different Scenario.
The US provided the bulk of the troops because it was the only nation that could. US had bases in japan and all throught the pacific. Euro nations were struggling to recover from WW2 both militarily and economically.
However, UN nations DID send troops to FIGHT. The UN took ACTION in Korea.
Korea was the only time in UN's history that it's fulfilled its charter.
The first Gulf War was a shameful performance for the UN.. the 2nd gulf war put the first nail in the UN's coffin.
Iran and N. Korea are building nukes to protect themselves from the western world not just the USA. Those 2 are nations that have fruitcake dictators in power for a long time and who'se powerbase is too secure inside their countries.
The only threat to them comes from the outside. And the only way to prevent others from overthrowing them is to have nuclear weapons, for they know their armed forces dont stand a chance against any of the big powers in the planet.
Kerry wants to talk to them? Welcome to 40 years ago. Talks with N. Korea have only benefited N. Korea. Kim rattles his saber and the international community begs him to talk and throw money and heating oil his way. The international community demands something of him in the negotation tables and Kim always has brought up something and walked out on the talks.
Talks dont work when the other side only uses them to buy time.
Iran is a dictatorship based not on one's person's power, but on religious extremism that benefits a large portion of those in positions of power (bussinessmen, most males, military officers, etc). If their system of gov. falls, all those people fall with it, so its in their best interest to keep the extremists in power to keep themselves in the priviledged positions of power. And again, the only thing that can threaten them can only come from the outside.
Iran has seen what happened to 2 'fellow' arab nations, they now find themselves surrounded by potential enemies (US, NATO and Israel). Only thing that will guarantee they dont get invaded to kick the extremists out of power is nukes.
Kerry wants to talk to them? What could he possibly talk them into? All he will achieve is Iran pulling a 'Korean Kim' on him until Iran has working nukes and their powerbase is safe from threats from the outside.
Imo Bush has done the right thing. He knew N. Korea and Iran have working nuke programs, and now he has isolated these volatile nations and has put inmense pressure on them, a pressure not based on sanctions or sanctions composed of toothless words, but by actions.
Lybia abandoned its nuke program... that one I did not expect at all. But when you think about it, Lybia is the most isolated of the arab nations right now and the most vulnerable militarily since its got all the western powers practically next door and a rather pro-west gov (egypt) cutting off their connection with the arab world. They had no choice but to comply or be next on the menu.
The biggest threat to the world right now is not terrorrism or WMD proliferation. Its the proliferation of WMD terrorrism.
And in dealing with that threat, 2 nations with known WMD programs have been knocked out , 2 remain.