we will nuke you

[krossfyter]

Look what made the cover of the New York Post! ...

[krossfyter]

oh not another poly sci thread...



errr



lol

[Thanatoast]

Ha! That's great! This is gonna turn into a full-blown media circus! Can't wait to see the iternational reaction to THAT cover!:D

[jelloshotsrule]

ahhh

new york post is a joke it seems.

not based only on this. though i think that headline is a bit much.

[krossfyter]

yeah man tell me about it.

[jelloshotsrule]

while the statement worries me. it's not unprecedented...

it's just in the context of the US's current (and pretty much always) self view of "the man".... that's what makes it a bigger deal. the current threat of war.. but again. same was basically said many times...

[krossfyter]

its more or less a defensive measure. its to tell anyone thinking about using WMDs that they will be gone by way of a nuke.

[mkubal]

What's worse is that there are plenty of people on this board that would have no problem believing this story and would go to great lengths to propigate such B.S.

And when I say believe this story I mean that they would take that headline at face value.

Matt

[Mr. Anderson]

Typical sensationalizing of the facts by the media - idiots. This discussion has been going on in the current events forum. Truly sad :( I wish that the media would realize that they have a responsibility to present the stories in their correct context.

D

[wdlove]

President Bush is totally serious, the use of WMD's will have serious consequences. This is a message in particular to Saddam Hussein, but also to the world at large. The US will not tolerate the indisciminate use of WMD's, a tactical nuke would probably be all that would be needed. President Truman did it in 1945 for that reason, a stong message!

[krossfyter]

i just find it funny man...


"dont use your nukes because will use ours on you"





just a trip thats all

[BenderBot1138]

Originally posted by Thanatoast
Ha! That's great! This is gonna turn into a full-blown media circus! Can't wait to see the iternational reaction to THAT cover!:D

I'd say you could pretty much count on the world wiping us (the US) out. No more American Pie... we go BYEBYE...

:cool:

[BenderBot1138]

Originally posted by wdlove
President Bush is totally serious, the use of WMD's will have serious consequences. This is a message in particular to Saddam Hussein, but also to the world at large. The US will not tolerate the indisciminate use of WMD's, a tactical nuke would probably be all that would be needed. President Truman did it in 1945 for that reason, a stong message!

Are we actually contemplating bombing a country for cowardace? Just cause they (the Iraqis) are affraid to try to assassinate their dictator doesn't make me want to jump on Georgie Porgies YeeHaa Howdown.

I read an article in the British Press a few days ago that stated that Britian isn't the only country that has Nuclear Missiles aimed at the White House. Many Commonwealth Countries, including Canada, supposidely have got Bush lined up in case he gets out of line.

:cool:

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by BenderBot1138


I'd say you could pretty much count on the world wiping us (the US) out. No more American Pie... we go BYEBYE...

:cool:


how you figure?

[BenderBot1138]

Originally posted by krossfyter



how you figure?

The Commonwealth is already voting to stop Bush. Great Britian will have to go along with the vote. If Bush goes over the line... well, lets just say we ain't got the reserves by far to match the Combined forces of the Commonwealth's firepower.

I think another way to think of this is we constantly brag on the world stage. If you remember the schoolyard bully or the rich kid who pushed his way around, eventually a bunch of kids got together and pounded the snot out of him. Well, we're that bully - that rich kid who's opening his mouth once too many times. The other kids in the playground have had enough of this game, and pretty soon are going to want to go on with their playing (ie live peaceful lives free from the threats of the so-called Superpower that is us).

If you check with NATO and other such groups, you'll see that the US military machine isn't all that large in comparison to combined world forces. Plus, the military is depleting itself more and more in trying to put out all these fires.

I basically just want George Bush to shut his big fat Texas mouth before he gets us all killed.

:cool:

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by BenderBot1138


The Commonwealth is already voting to stop Bush. Great Britian will have to go along with the vote. If Bush goes over the line... well, lets just say we ain't got the reserves by far to match the Combined forces of the Commonwealth's firepower.

I think another way to think of this is we constantly brag on the world stage. If you remember the schoolyard bully or the rich kid who pushed his way around, eventually a bunch of kids got together and pounded the snot out of him. Well, we're that bully - that rich kid who's opening his mouth once too many times. The other kids in the playground have had enough of this game, and pretty soon are going to want to go on with their playing (ie live peaceful lives free from the threats of the so-called Superpower that is us).

If you check with NATO and other such groups, you'll see that the US military machine isn't all that large in comparison to combined world forces. Plus, the military is depleting itself more and more in trying to put out all these fires.

I basically just want George Bush to shut his big fat Texas mouth before he gets us all killed.

:cool:

Oh sweet Jesus. Look, bring it ok. Seriously, it would take about 5 hours to handle Canada. And no, you don't have nukes. As for Britian having missles targeted at the US, pure and total crap. I can't believe that people would spread such lies.

[springscansing]

Who the hell actually reads the post anyway?

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by springscansing
Who the hell actually reads the post anyway?

OMG, that was hillarious. I really did laugh outloud!

[wdlove]

Originally posted by BenderBot1138


Are we actually contemplating bombing a country for cowardace? Just cause they (the Iraqis) are affraid to try to assassinate their dictator doesn't make me want to jump on Georgie Porgies YeeHaa Howdown.

I read an article in the British Press a few days ago that stated that Britian isn't the only country that has Nuclear Missiles aimed at the White House. Many Commonwealth Countries, including Canada, supposidely have got Bush lined up in case he gets out of line.

:cool:

I would like to see the article that states our allies have targeted us. I think the premise of mutually assured destruction makes that unlikely. It worked with Russia, its Iraq, North Korea, India, & Pakistan that we need to be concerned.

[amnesiac1984]

Originally posted by wdlove
President Bush is totally serious, the use of WMD's will have serious consequences. This is a message in particular to Saddam Hussein, but also to the world at large. The US will not tolerate the indisciminate use of WMD's, a tactical nuke would probably be all that would be needed. President Truman did it in 1945 for that reason, a stong message!

President Truman did not do that. He intended to keep using the bomb over and over again. If Japan hadn't surrendered it would've have been very messy indeed.

"We shall continue to use it, until we completely destroy Japan's power to make war!" Truman 1945

[wwworry]

Originally posted by springscansing
Who the hell actually reads the post anyway?

The sports aren't bad and it's only 25 cents. Not bad after you've read the other ones.

[fleetwood]

Yep!
A new sport will arise, glass skating in Iraq.
Now that sounds like fun.

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by BenderBot1138


The Commonwealth is already voting to stop Bush. Great Britian will have to go along with the vote. If Bush goes over the line... well, lets just say we ain't got the reserves by far to match the Combined forces of the Commonwealth's firepower.

I think another way to think of this is we constantly brag on the world stage. If you remember the schoolyard bully or the rich kid who pushed his way around, eventually a bunch of kids got together and pounded the snot out of him. Well, we're that bully - that rich kid who's opening his mouth once too many times. The other kids in the playground have had enough of this game, and pretty soon are going to want to go on with their playing (ie live peaceful lives free from the threats of the so-called Superpower that is us).

If you check with NATO and other such groups, you'll see that the US military machine isn't all that large in comparison to combined world forces. Plus, the military is depleting itself more and more in trying to put out all these fires.

I basically just want George Bush to shut his big fat Texas mouth before he gets us all killed.

:cool:


you cant be serious.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by amnesiac1984


President Truman did not do that. He intended to keep using the bomb over and over again. If Japan hadn't surrendered it would've have been very messy indeed.

"We shall continue to use it, until we completely destroy Japan's power to make war!" Truman 1945

WHAT! That was propoganda. We were out of nukes after the second one was droped. Had Japan not surrendered, we would have had to invade the mainland.

[idkew]

i am amazed at the amount of idiots on this board.

• We only had TWO nukes in WWII. We played our cards, and they did not read our bluff. usa wins.

• We WILL nuke saddam, or anyone else, if they use WMD. We WILL NOT nuke for the hell of it. Basically what Bush said is that if you attack us with a WMD, there will be no more you.

• our allies are not targeting us. maybe france, but screw those dirty bastards anyway. "Lets elect a fascist for president"

• If the world did target us with WMD, there would be no more world. Remember the cold war? Mutually assured destruction is a pretty damn good deterrent, unless you have a crazy like saddam at the helm.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by idkew
i am amazed at the amount of idiots on this board.

• We only had TWO nukes in WWII. We played our cards, and they did not read our bluff. usa wins.

• We WILL nuke saddam, or anyone else, if they use WMD. We WILL NOT nuke for the hell of it. Basically what Bush said is that if you attack us with a WMD, there will be no more you.

• our allies are not targeting us. maybe france, but screw those dirty bastards anyway. "Lets elect a fascist for president"

• If the world did target us with WMD, there would be no more world. Remember the cold war? Mutually assured destruction is a pretty damn good deterrent, unless you have a crazy like saddam at the helm.

Perfectly worded. I especially like the part about France ;)

[amnesiac1984]

maybe it was propaganda but its exactly what he said. I even have a wav file of him saying it.

Anway, don't call me an idiot. I'm not the one being ******** racist about the french. I'd rather live in france under a facist president than the USA ANY DAY

[Kethoticus]

Who the hell actually reads the post anyway?
Ha, you'd be surprised. That paper is a joke and an embarassment to the NY area. It's a sophisticated version of the Enquirer or Sun. That's why they probably can't afford to charge more than a quarter for their paper.


"We shall continue to use it, until we completely destroy Japan's power to make war!" Truman 1945
Umm... even if we had the extra nukes, I have no problem with this statement, nor should anyone else who cares about their freedom in the US. The only thing I do have a problem with are the targets. Hit the gov't. Hit the military. Not Joe Blow leaving his home to go to work every day.


The Commonwealth is already voting to stop Bush. Great Britian will have to go along with the vote. If Bush goes over the line... well, lets just say we ain't got the reserves by far to match the Combined forces of the Commonwealth's firepower.
Ohhh... so Great Britain--not the US--is the world's sole superpower. Must be why the last vestige of their empire was surrendered to China recently.


I think another way to think of this is we constantly brag on the world stage. If you remember the schoolyard bully or the rich kid who pushed his way around, eventually a bunch of kids got together and pounded the snot out of him. Well, we're that bully - that rich kid who's opening his mouth once too many times. The other kids in the playground have had enough of this game, and pretty soon are going to want to go on with their playing (ie live peaceful lives free from the threats of the so-called Superpower that is us).
I do agree that a lot of people are miffed at us. Whether or not they're justified is open to debate, but I know there are times we push our weight around. But to hit us with everything they've got is MAD, and not just militarily.


I basically just want George Bush to shut his big fat Texas mouth before he gets us all killed.
As opposed to the terrorists he's fighting.


Had Japan not surrendered, we would have had to invade the mainland.
And the war would've gone on much longer and at a much greater toll to American lives.


• We only had TWO nukes in WWII. We played our cards, and they did not read our bluff. usa wins.
Are you sure about this? I thought we had three.


I'd rather live in france under a facist president than the USA ANY DAY
You're welcome to it.

[solvs]

Hopefully this just stays as a "Cold War" type situation. "If you try to blow me up, I'll blow you up". "No. I will blow you up".

All the while the people who make these decisions sit comfortably out of reach of even being hurt. Who does get hurt? The soldiers, yes. Those who fight to protect us (we hope, but of course that's what their soldiers are fighting for too), but also the innocent populace. Just trying to go about their lives, lives destroyed by a "my D*ck is bigger than your D*ck" contest.

Sometimes War is neccessary. Sometimes it is about fighting to protect (or in this case punish I suppose). But sometimes I think the more we flex our power, the more everyone else hates us. They're afraid, but are they afraid enough to back off, or are we scaring them right into a corner? I for one don't want to be blown up over greed and power struggles.

Why don't we get Sadam and Bush (or whoever is really in charge) in a ring, no holds barred, and just let 'em fight it out?

I guarantee there would be far fewer wars if the people who caused them actually had to fight them.

----------------------------------------------------

You're fighting over Holy Land fer God's sake!!! Think about it.

[Kethoticus]

You're fighting over Holy Land fer God's sake!!! Think about it.

I really like that quote.

[Geetar]

Originally posted by Kethoticus

Ohhh... so Great Britain--not the US--is the world's sole superpower. Must be why the last vestige of their empire was surrendered to China recently.


And there was me thinking you had a brain.

Just because some dumbf*ck mentions a wholly nonsensical conflated "news-piece" about British nukes pointed at the USA, you come out with this cr*p about Britain." Ye're as thick as *****", as we say in the UK.

Do try harder next time. By the way I live in Florida and like it here a lot. Most limeys are quite pro-USA you know.....:rolleyes:

[DarkNovaMatter]

Sorry here for correcting-

We only had 2 nukes for WW2- Wrong- we had only 2 completed bombs for use against Japan, the others were parts or nearly assembled. If I remember right the U.S. after the Trinity experiment was able to generate a nuke a week.

We will bomb them for no apparent reason- While I am more than sure that we won't (I think its more of a "cold war" situation) nuke without provication, if we did we would be in a very bad place -I.E. neighbors would be ticked and whoever was left in the "ticked at us" case would probably try or succeed at throwing a nuke at us.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by idkew
• our allies are not targeting us. maybe france, but screw those dirty bastards anyway. "Lets elect a fascist for president"

• If the world did target us with WMD, there would be no more world. Remember the cold war? Mutually assured destruction is a pretty damn good deterrent, unless you have a crazy like saddam at the helm.
When did France elect a fascist for president? If it's Le Pen you're talking about, he lost by a ****ing landslide.

I especially like the "screw the world" mentality. I think you're on to something there.

[amnesiac1984]

Originally posted by Kethoticus


Ohhh... so Great Britain--not the US--is the world's sole superpower. Must be why the last vestige of their empire was surrendered to China recently.



Did anyone suggest it was just Great Britain? Europe has elected to add another 10 countries to its market, making us the strongest market in the world, that could or could not mean we become the greatest power, depends only on a few decisions that need to be made about defence mechanisms.

Anyway, you yanks always have to bring up the ex empire don't you! Hong Kong was not surrendered, it was given back to its rightful owners. A far as the empire goes, it was built before the US even existed. Whereas the british empire was bulit up over years of conquest and fighting over already sort of civilised countries. The US was a just sort of unofficial conquest of several European countries together. It's built on people of different cultures going over and pillaging the simple indian villages instead trying to form trade alliances or something. The US was only a successful conquest because it was easy and brutal. I'm not saying the british empire was created in a peaceful manner, but at least it was honourable. (The indians loved the brits cos we built roads, trains bridges etc.) We built countries up and when the empire fell apart what was left was several countries that were a lot better off than they were before!!!

OK enough ranting, I don't even know what I was talking about in the first place, :p
"let off some steam, Bennet"

[idkew]

haha, you brits lost your empire to a bunch of farmers and little trained soldiers.

ever see Good Morning Vietnam? When Williams does the impression of the "camouflage expert"? maybe that is what the military brass were thinking when they issued red coats.

actually, i don't have anything against brits.



as for only two nukes- you call a pile of plutonium a bomb? while NEXT week there may have been another. when we said we would bomb again, we had nothing to back that up with.



oh- the screw the world mentality, you took that wrong. if the world wanted to screw the US, it would not take it sitting down.

if the world were more peaceful, everyone would profit. the us needs to sell its surplus grains somewhere. right now farmers are getting paid by the gov NOT to produce. if korea was in a better position, they could BUY our grain instead of getting it free... many markets would open. good for us, good for them.

[alex_ant]

Originally posted by idkew
if the world were more peaceful,
:D

[amnesiac1984]

Originally posted by idkew
haha, you brits lost your empire to a bunch of farmers and little trained soldiers.



when will you learn......

I know this is off topic and I'm not really bothered either way, but to all intents and purposes, we GAVE BACK OUR EMPIRE. The US couldn't be given back because most of the native americans were killed.....

[Backtothemac]

Let me say this first. I love Britain. Especially the accent. Great.

Now, that being said. How in the world can you say the empire was formed before the US. How? We were part of your friggin empire. We kicked your butts out of here remember. Secondly, you never gave back your empire. Nearly every country kicked you out. Remember Afganistan, say, what was 1 survivor from that little battle.

no country is better than the other, and believe me, I would love nothing more than to lock ours in a closet, close the boarders, and let EUROPE deal with EUROPES problems, instead of using OUR money, SOLDIERS, and TECH to do it with.

You are some pretty ingreatful people. You know were you would be if it wasn't for us, the smallest province in the German empire! Or maybe the Russian Empire.

stew on that for a while!

[krossfyter]

what the hell

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by krossfyter
what the hell

me, or him?

[e-coli]

Originally posted by idkew
maybe france, but screw those dirty bastards anyway.

amen brother. i have no idea why we even bother with those back-stabbing whiners.

;)

[BenderBot1138]

Originally posted by Kethoticus


Ohhh... so Great Britain--not the US--is the world's sole superpower. Must be why the last vestige of their empire was surrendered to China recently.



Actually you're mostly right when you say that... but you have to qualify it by saying that the Commonwealth, of which Britian is a member, is the most powerful force on earth... easily capable of laying enough firepower on the US military to create the next Afganistan, the Commonwealth overwhelmingly could make Sir Bush and Sir Chenny put their head between their legs and kiss their ...es auf weidersehn!

I just am damn proud to be an American when I realize that our mealy mouthed politicians want to get it on with the three-headed dog from Harry Potter that is the Commonwealth.

:cool:

[BenderBot1138]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


Perfectly worded. I especially like the part about France ;)

Even one "nuke" within 50 miles of Britain, and Canada will puke it's nukes on the US shortly after Britian unloads it's nuclear arsonal on the US.

Don't fool yourself, between the US and France, Britian loves France.

:cool:

[BenderBot1138]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


You [Brits] are some pretty ingreatful people. You [Brits] know were you would be if it wasn't for us, the smallest province in the German empire! Or maybe the Russian Empire.

stew on that for a while!

Bad History... and bad form... Canada and Australia (two other Commonwealth countries) did far more than the US did.

As an American, I'm kinda gumped to hear my fellow Americans boast so inaccurately.

:cool:

[BenderBot1138]

Originally posted by idkew
haha, you brits lost your empire to a bunch of farmers and little trained soldiers.



Wow, you'd think we American's didn't have our ass.s handed to us by the North Vietnamese or something...

:cool:

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by BenderBot1138


Even one "nuke" within 50 miles of Britain, and Canada will puke it's nukes on the US shortly after Britian unloads it's nuclear arsonal on the US.

Don't fool yourself, between the US and France, Britian loves France.

:cool:

Ok, first off, just to let you know, Britain and the US do not target each other. That is just stupid!

Secondly, in a hypothetical situation, they would never get a missle off the ground. See there is a thing called the Ohio Class Ballistic missile sub. Some argue it is the reason that WWIII was never fought with Russia. You see, it has never been tracked. Carries 24 Trident DII 5 missiles, and each missile has up to 12 MIRV's and each with a yield of 100 Kilotons. Oh, and we have 18 of them, so that is 5184 MIRV's each is more than 15X the blast on Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

so, just keep that in mind. That is why WWIII has never been fought, and why anyone with any sense would never launch a strike against us. We would take out missiles before they got off the ground.

[alex_ant]

You filthy Europeans forget that it's us AMERICANS who have the bigger *****es!

That's curious. I can say vaginas, but not *****es?

Yup... That's America for ya.

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by BenderBot1138


Bad History... and bad form... Canada and Australia (two other Commonwealth countries) did far more than the US did.

As an American, I'm kinda gumped to hear my fellow Americans boast so inaccurately.

:cool:

Ok, that makes it official. Pack up your stuff, they have a padded room waiting on you somewhere. How can you get off thowing such inaccuracies around? I am military historian, so you bring hard stats, which of course you never do. Gee, how did Canada and Australia do more in the European theather than the US.

Please, enlight me with you knowledge.

[Backtothemac]

Never mind Bender.


http://www.angelfire.com/ct/ww2europe/stats.html

These are accurate.


Now, explain how they did more?

[zarathustra]

Originally posted by BenderBot1138


Bad History... and bad form... Canada and Australia (two other Commonwealth countries) did far more than the US did.

As an American, I'm kinda gumped to hear my fellow Americans boast so inaccurately.

:cool:

I don't know about FAR more.... without the American supplies Britain would have fallen - whether Canadian and Australian forces were there or not. We (macrumors members) were not there to fight it out, so you can't say who was the "bestest fighting machine". It was hell, and to say that the US played a smaller role than Canada and Australia, I have to say, whatever.

It was more important what the Us did after the war. A little something called the Marshall plan. It was in the US' interest to rebuild Europe for it's market, but in the process billions were spent on each of the western countries economies. that's why there is now a strong Europe, with a strong consumer market that rivals the US'.

About the European union being the strongest market with the addition of the 10 countries; right, the 10 poorest countries in Europe. Remember when Portugal and Greece were picked on because they were dragging the rest of EU down? And I will really have a laugh observing all those nations agreeing on anything. All the national bickering will surface. Kind of why GB still hasn't adopted the Euro - maybe rightly so, but they don't want to sacrifice their strong currency. it will be a few decades before all the rough adges are filed off.

In the meantime let's agree on a few facts. Without the US, WW2 would have had a very different outcome, and without the US today, if it were to hermetically seal off its borders, the world's economy would faulter. It's us "stupid" americans paying $2.19 for a bottle of Evian and buying $55.000 Land Rovers in masse, etc, ad nauseam.

We finance humanitarian programs at home and abroad. It is still amazing to me that the Americans can be so generous when everybody seems to chewing them out.

If we could completely pull out of the mid-east, and cut all ties with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Yemen, etc. and just leave them alone, we should. But we can't because of how globalized everything is. It's a big giant pile of Jenga.

</rant>

[Backtothemac]

Bender, are you giving up, or looking for bogus data ;)

[DakotaGuy]

I think the best thing we can do to prevent war in the first place is to advertise our nuclear power and advertise it well. We WANT these people to know, we have nukes and a LOT of them. They are much less likely to try and send "a bomb" or some disease over here if they know they will be wiped out, poof, gone, in a hot blast, then if they think we will just give them the wrist slap which we are famous for. Even Saddam is not crazy enough to think he can make it through a nuclear war with the US. We have enough Nukes to blow about any place we want off the map...do we really want to do that...Oh HELL no....but we could if it was the last option...we need countries like that to know what we will do and what we are capable of.

[Choppaface]

Originally posted by alex_ant
You filthy Europeans forget that it's us AMERICANS who have the bigger *****es!

That's curious. I can say vaginas, but not *****es?

Yup... That's America for ya.

well, considering all the spam about ***** enlargement floating around here, I think that's a given :D :D

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


me, or him?


nah him

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by krossfyter



nah him

Was just wondering. Did you like the stuff about the Ohio sub/

[hvfsl]

Forget about nukes, surely the US as some much better WMD to use by now. How about a weapon with the same kind of power as a nuke, but without the left over radiation. Anyway this war is going to end two ways:

-End of US and rest of non muslim world
-End of Muslim world

The two worlds can no longer go on living together it seems. So the US and Israel will probably wipe out the middle east. In the end there will be too sides to this war, those with the US and those against. I hope the US wins!!!!!!

By the way, I am from the UK, not America.

[hvfsl]

What is all this US problem with Europe?

Europe is with the US if a war happens (especially UK). Secondary Europe has less crime than US who still allow people to have guns, so we have less problems. Thirdly only Islamic countries and Communist countires are still targetting the US, NOT FRANCE.

It is not US vs the rest of the world, it is Europe/Austrailia/High-tec far East and US vs the Islamic world. I dont know what the US media has been saying, but it is only Islamic world that hates you.

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


Was just wondering. Did you like the stuff about the Ohio sub/


ive never heard of that. sounds interesting. how are they able to use these on nukes that arent even off the ground yet?

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by krossfyter



ive never heard of that. sounds interesting. how are they able to use these on nukes that arent even off the ground yet?

We know where their silos are. hit the silo, then no more nuke ;)

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


We know where their silos are. hit the silo, then no more nuke ;)


yeah but how do they even know they are being used on us?

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by krossfyter



yeah but how do they even know they are being used on us?

Well, the Russian ones would have to be fueled before use as most are liquid fueled boosters. So spy sats would see that.

Britain, we know where they are, and can probably monitor their communications. Plus, it would never happen with Britain.

[krossfyter]

Originally posted by Backtothemac


Well, the Russian ones would have to be fueled before use as most are liquid fueled boosters. So spy sats would see that.

Britain, we know where they are, and can probably monitor their communications. Plus, it would never happen with Britain.


ah okay... makes sense.


makes one wonder what new crap papas got in the bag now that we dont know of... maybe you... but im sure you arent telling! ;)

[amnesiac1984]

hey everyone I'm back

Not with any more information that made up in my slightly stoned/drunk/exhausted state.

But I am intreagued as to what you like about the "british" accent backtomac?

Is it the RAF on used in those old WWII films?

If so, nobody talks like that. Great Britain probably has more accents than most other countries, especially considering how small we are geographically.

I hate them all anyway, Thats why I speak with a so called "non-accent"! ! lol

:p

I'm bored with war. I'm gonna find another nice music thread.

[Geetar]

Originally posted by hvfsl
What is all this US problem with Europe?

Europe is with the US if a war happens (especially UK). Only Islamic countries and Communist countires are still targetting the US, NOT FRANCE.

It is not US vs the rest of the world, it is Europe/Austrailia/High-tec far East and US vs the Islamic world. I dont know what the US media has been saying, but it is only Islamic world that hates you.


Basically, our friend is correct. What a bleedin' fuss.......it's like listening to feeding time at the village duck-pond.

[jholzner]

I don't think Bush will EVER get the international support he needs for that kind of action. I mean, look at how much trouble he had getting a UN resolution even passed to begin with. No one really supported him in the international community when he was just talking about invading Iraq...let alone using nukes.