Pass it on! [even if you have seen it]

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by jcsaleen

Fun Fact for you all... The united states made 40 atomic bombs that were brief cased size 8 are missing.

More details,please?

[Tehvisseeus]

Originally Posted by T4 Primera

Oh he signed up for the no fly zones did he?

BULLSHIT!!

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbul...&postcount=232

Check your facts

Facts checked. I never said that he was enforcing a UN agreement. I said he was enforcing the cease fire agreement. http://www.historyguy.com/no-fly_zone_war.html

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

There are much more dangerous weapons now than there were say, 70 years ago, however, these weapons have ultimately led to much more efficient, less deadly wars.Instead of hundreds of thousands being killed, only thousands are. I do fail to see how the Iraq war could escalate into a global war without all of the people who keep complaining about it escalating world tensions. How else would you have suggested getting Saddam out of office? Perhaps another resolution? Maybe offer to pay the guy?
.

It's not Saddaam that scares me...he's not the one pouring depleted uranium and cluster bombs on other peoples' countries while using the blatant lies of WMD.

Bush has declared a .war on terrorism'.No countries specified, no timeframe, no support from the rest of the world.Now THAT'S scary.Saddam was willing but incapable of starting a major war.Bush is all too capable and grotesquely willing.

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

I'm sorry I was taking it in context. Sorry if I confused you. I meant marines, but I've still yet to see you praise even the aid missions going into Iraq...If you want to bring that up.

.

Again, your inability to absorb what you read means that you are incapable of sustaining a serious argument.You want me to bring up aid missions?I just did.

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

If Saddam shoots at our planes, which is contrary to the cease fire agreement which he signed, then he is breaking international law and we are able to retaliate.

There you go again, making up 'facts' that fit your argument.If you have to bullshit to make your case, you don't have a case.

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

Sorry prosecuting. Yes I agree anyone that has committed a war crime should stand for prosecution, just like what is happening to the people who committed the atrocities at Abu Grab. Bush did not break international law however, because he was merely enforcing enforcing the UN's resolutions, which they were too cowardly to do.

the word is prudent, not cowardly.Bush started this war in the face of VERY up to date information from the UN that told him there had been no evidence of WMD or their manufacture.The only yellow bastard in this tale sits in the White House....frightened of a tinpot dictator with no weapons, and a country pacified by 10 years of UN sanctions.

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by Tehvisseeus

Facts checked. I never said that he was enforcing a UN agreement. I said he was enforcing the cease fire agreement. http://www.historyguy.com/no-fly_zone_war.html

Jesus,boy, if you insist on shooting yourself repeatedly in the foot,at least get some heavier guage ammo, this is getting tedious.

from your link

The roots of this conflict are quite simple to trace: the inconclusive and vague cease-fire agreement ending the Gulf War of 1990-1991.

All three of the U.S.-led Coalition wars with Iraq (the 1990-1991 Gulf War, the 1991-2003 No-Fly Zone War, and the 2003 Gulf War 2) can really be seen as one long, extended conflict, but for classification purposes, are seen as separate conflicts. (written on March 22, 2003)

Show us a picture of Sadaam signing this ceasefire.You can't.

[jcsaleen]

Originally Posted by taranaki

More details,please?

Ill look for it been a while though.

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

Originally Posted by jcsaleen

Fun Fact for you all... The united states made 40 atomic bombs that were brief cased size 8 are missing.

Ummm, ok?

Well what about those nuclear materials and weapons from Russia could be possibly misplaced due to their lack of security?

http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/crs/IB98038.pdf

http://www.terrorismanswers.org/weap...kes_print.html

Heres your suitcase theory.

"Could terrorists steal the Russian “suitcase bombs” allegedly manufactured during the Cold War?

We don’t know—and we don’t know whether there even are any such devices. In 1997, Aleksandr Lebed, a former Russian general and political rival of then Russian President Boris Yeltsin, made the headline-grabbing announcement that several dozen Soviet-era nuclear “suitcase bombs” had gone missing. Reportedly built in the 1970s, these miniature devices were said to weigh less than 100 pounds and fit in a typical attaché case. But Russian authorities vigorously denied that any nuclear weapons had gone missing and insisted that no “suitcase bombs” had ever been built in the first place. Experts still don’t know the true story. Some suspect that the Russian government has not been completely candid about the existence of suitcase bombs; others say they never existed."

[jcsaleen]

Thanx that what I was lookin for.

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by jcsaleen

Thanx that what I was lookin for.

Fun fact for jcsaleen.......The United States of America and Russia are two different countries. If that much of your 'fact' is inaccurate, how much do you know about the rest of it?

[jcsaleen]

My bad wrong country O well I dont really care that much about politic Like most people say im 16!

[Rbraczyk]

The US is far more careful with their nuclear weapons, where the Russians really haven't given a shit. They are highly irresponsible, not their fault that lots of records were lost after the breakup of the soviet union, but Putin shouldn't be getting all hot headed over the stupid Ukrane election and focus on rounding up and destroying nuclear weapons.

We are so far off topic.

[jcsaleen]

Ok back to topic...

[fredjacksonsan]

What WAS the topic? In all the excitement......

Oh yeah there's pictures of good things then Naki posted his bad things link.

It's a long standing tradition extending back to the allies of WWII for the media not to show bad things, in order to keep the people behind the war.

I firmly believe that US citizens should be shown the reality of the situation, the good and the bad, so that they're honestly informed.

For those outside the US, it may be a surprise to know that they don't show the Sept 11 plane crashes anymore, and haven't since a couple of months after the date. Another filtration by the US media to keep things, I don't know, sanitized. Maybe I'll move to Australia, things seem saner and more reasonable there.