Australia a Nuclear threat, according to Harold Ford (D-TN)

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by bowens, Nov 2, 2006.

  1. bowens macrumors 6502a

    bowens

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2006
    Location:
    Trenton, FL
    #1
    http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,20659192-5006003,00.html
    http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20657896-2703,00.html
    http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2006/10/australias_a_nu.php

    According to Harold Ford, we better watch out for Australia or they'll drop a nuke on us. Hey, there are a lot of Australians on this board, we better keep an eye on them. ;)

     
  2. MalcolmJID macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Location:
    England
  3. bowens thread starter macrumors 6502a

    bowens

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2006
    Location:
    Trenton, FL
    #4
    Exactly
     
  4. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    Don't care much for Harold Ford. He's right-winger in Democratic clothing.
     
  5. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #6
    I somehow don't see John Howard and Co. joining the Axis of Evil, more's the pity. The Aussies could have a Serbian-style mass uprising and kick him out of office :D
     
  6. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #7
    "...when he left college in 1992 he thought the nuclear age had come to an end..."

    With a degree in naivete?

    Ah, the accumulated wisdom of those under 40...

    :D:D:D

    'Rat
     
  7. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #8
    lol, I totally agree with him, like I proposed before, all countries should destroy theri nuke bombs. US doesn' need nuke bombs to win the war, so who really need it? NK! Nuke is the thing that can elevate this smallest country to a world power, do you really like it?
     
  8. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    Reality
    #9
    It seems clear to me from the context that Ford was not calling Australia a nuclear threat. Among the "nuclear nine" he mentioned are France and the U.K.

    What he was obviously referring to is that the proliferation of nuclear weapons around the world makes it that much harder to keep nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists -- which is perfectly true.

    So this is a non-issue...unless someone's trying to swiftboat Ford, hoping that the "controversy" will carry over to the United States media.
     
  9. bowens thread starter macrumors 6502a

    bowens

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2006
    Location:
    Trenton, FL
    #10
    I know he didn't mean to say that Australia is really a nuclear threat, but it kind of came out that way. Nobody thought he was serious, it's just kind of funny.
     
  10. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #11
    LOL, even you don't think he meant that, so why are you using the title? do you really mean what you are saying?
     
  11. bowens thread starter macrumors 6502a

    bowens

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2006
    Location:
    Trenton, FL
    #12
    It was a joke. I guess nobody notices sarcasm. I thought it was a funny story.
     
  12. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #13
    well, your joke is no better than John Kerry's, :D
     
  13. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #14
    Y'all better watch out...

    Um, yeah, that guy's a moron.

    Just so people know, we have 70% of the world's Uranium supplies - Canada is the biggest exporter but we've got the most.

    It's reported that the guys up at ANSTO actually did build a bomb just to see if we could, they then took it apart.

    There's one thing this guy - whoever he is - is forgetting: We're one of the most peaceful, "couldn't give a stuff" nations in the world. It's hardly within our character to want to be dropping nukes on people. The closest we came was in the very early 80's when the Chappell brothers launched a cowardly attack on New Zealand which nearly brought the nations to war. The attack, ordered by the older brother and carried out by the younger, was a ball delivered underarm (then within the rules but against the spirit of the game) to the Kiwi batsman requiring 6 runs off the last ball the win. It was a bad decision and still mars relationships between our two nations to this day. And I'm not kidding about the Kiwis wanting to go to war over it - back then they actually had a military...

    So yeah, watch out mo-fo's cause we're bringing da-bomb to the party. By "da-bomb" I of course mean "the beer."
     
  14. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #15
    man the flak !! ... if the USA goes after australia, we will receive at least half of the bombs.... better fill up those sand bags

    edit: i wished we had sams .. but obviously they are more expensive than 35 mm guns
     
  15. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #16
    I agree, again words are taken out of context and then put on the Spin cycle. He didnt say Australia is a nuclear threat. More desperation by the party of Spin.( Republican) why talk issues when you can make up stuff? Bowens title is more spin, a little twist here, a small lie here and off we go.
     
  16. OnceUGoMac macrumors 6502a

    OnceUGoMac

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    #17
    While I agree with your point, I disagree with your sentiment. Harold Ford tends to be right-of-center on many issues that the Republicans adopted, i.e. Gun Rights. However, that doesn't mean he's not a Democrat. If the Democrats are going to be nothing but a party of hard-line-liberals, you're going to find several things happen: There will be an exodus of members leaving the party, the Democratic stronghold will only be in major cities, etc. I would rather be in a party of robust strength and various values than be pigeon-holed into a litmus-test organization. Then again, Del Miller turned on us. Bastard.
     
  17. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #18
    A better solution is to eliminate Partys period. we dont need them.
     
  18. OnceUGoMac macrumors 6502a

    OnceUGoMac

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    #19
    I think we all wish that were true. Or at least have the parties break up into smaller parties that represent the people and not the lobbyists.
     
  19. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
    That's true. But tell me, what Democratic values does the man hold?
     
  20. AP_piano295 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2005
    #21
    idk australians love their beer who knows what happens if you get roudy around the button :rolleyes: .
     
  21. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #22
    Hey, Austria only has two less letters so it's close enough. Well, Arnie might set the Pentagon straight if anyone asks him but he's just a pseudo republican so maybe not.
     
  22. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
  23. OnceUGoMac macrumors 6502a

    OnceUGoMac

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    #24
    That's a tough questions because there's really two sets of thought, Party and Social. The Party issues (Democrat vs. Republican) tend to be geared toward the truly important National agenda. Whereas social issues (liberal vs. conservative) tends to be geared to wedge issues, which frankly I feel are not that important and only affect certain demographics, i.e. abortion, gay rights, gun rights, etc.
    I think the old school of thought in which one can be fiscally conservative, but socially liberal is gone. Both parties claim to be fiscally conservative, but neither are.

    On Party issues, he is spot on. He's for better education, universal health care, a more active role of the government in technology (oversight), non-oil based energy, the protection of worker's pensions, etc. On Social issues, he tends to be conservative, i.e. gun rights and gay marriage. He tends to be in the middle on the abortion issues. he wants to prevent abortions, but doesn't want to criminalize it.
     
  24. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #25
    Those wedge issues you mention are only unimportant if they don't affect you. Please keep that in mind. ;)
     

Share This Page