Nuclear War?! Right now?

[2fast4u]

no, not at all. it means he is <b>PREPARED</B> to use them. not that he would. when you are the president of a country, with enemies across the world, who you know are currently <b>producing</b> weapons of mass destruction, it would be assinine not to have a plan on what course of action you should take if things escalate to that point.

stop! the protocoll that was revealed did not say that the usa would be prepared to use nukes, thats clear anyway. it specifically revealed a LIST OF NATIONS that should be attacked. so much for arrogance. plus, again: is the us the only nation authorized to have weapons of mass destruction (besides the obvious reason that its bullshit in general) ?? russia, china (they were on the list) is not -- or wot is ur point? sorry, this is simply blind. if u trust the usa blind, grow up.

 

[Derek]

"stop! the protocoll that was revealed did not say that the usa would be prepared to use nukes, thats clear anyway. it specifically revealed a LIST OF NATIONS that should be attacked. so much for arrogance. plus, again: is the us the only nation authorized to have weapons of mass destruction (besides the obvious reason that its bullshit in general) ?? russia, china (they were on the list) is not -- or wot is ur point? sorry, this is simply blind. if u trust the usa blind, grow up."

actually, maybe you need to go back and read up. the list of nations was a list of countries the united states had <b>plans</b> of ways nuclear weapons <b>could</b> be used. once again, contingency plans if things escalated to that point. never did it have a list of nations that <b>should</b> be attacked. not only are you incapable of reading my posts, but you are also incapable of comprehending what you read elsewhere.

and actually the 'rules' are that there should be no more producing of weapons of mass destruction, and that countries (specifically us and russia) should begin disposing of the weapons. not that nobody is allowed to have the previously made warheads.

you are blind to anti-us propoganda if you think the united states thinks it's in anyones best intent to use nuclear weapons. if you feel that way, you seriously need to get your head examined.

 

[Josep]

DUDE, just got done reading the rest Thank the lord there is someone else that agrees with me(2fast4u), read that little comic, its basically whats happening, the other evil thing behind it is that in not doing anything about it big businesses and bush admin. get extra money, cause hey, this is the loop, in basic terms: Bush Admin. kills the kyoto protocol--->Big businesses don't have to comply with any pollution standards=more money for them--->Who's going to help influence a second term?? well... B.B. and what does that stand for?

 

[Josep]

and actually the 'rules' are that there should be no more producing of weapons of mass destruction, and that countries (specifically us and russia) should begin disposing of the weapons. not that nobody is allowed to have the previously made warheads.

and you believe this? what 'rules' are you talking about? and no i haven't read any of your previous posts, explain yourself, because what your explaining is "lets make a 'rule' (as you said) that clearly makes us look defenseless" Please explain, i haven't heard of that rule

 

[Josep]

oh, and btw, i can't stand bush.

I like you already now i'm reading your previous posts

 

[Josep]

just making everyone sees this pic on this page ain't it the truth?

 

[Derek]

most of the nations in the un have signed a ban treaty on the production of weapons of mass destruction. i'm not sure what the exact name of the treaty is, but i know most developed countries have signed this.

and who knows who's following it and who isn't. it wouldn't shock me if the us, china or russia still produce them. that wasn't the point of what i said.

 

[2fast4u]

dabobs, concluding im about to conclude that u believe just about everything ur gov't sez. dont forget that war has no 'rules'. we see that on the way the us is handling the whole war on terror, they broke just about every international agreement. 'nuff said.

 

[Josep]

This thread is yet more proof that emutalk is a mental wasteland. I have nothing more to say about it.

I know i shouldn't be dignifying this with an answer, but you guys, we have one cool citizen that has just donated more than 2 cents

 

[Josep]

most of the nations in the un have signed a ban treaty on the production of weapons of mass destruction. i'm not sure what the exact name of the treaty is, but i know most developed countries have signed this.

and who knows who's following it and who isn't. it wouldn't shock me if the us, china or russia still produce them. that wasn't the point of what i said.

And you believe this? btw, what was your point? i don't see it other than some treaty...

 

[Derek]

"dabobs, concluding im about to conclude that u believe just about everything ur gov't sez"

actually you're the one who it seems like believes every bit of anti-american propoganda you hear. even sy is on my side, and he's a brit. i'm telling you what has been reported, by the united states and national media, about what was in those statements. i can't believe your hatred of the united states makes you think they think countries should be attacked, and with nuclear weapons no less. you're incredibly naive.

and exactly what 'rules' have they broken on their war against the taliban. please, tell me mister expert.

 

[Derek]

"And you believe this? btw, what was your point? i don't see it other than some treaty..."

the guy asked why it was ok for the us to produce weapons of mass destruction and not china, russia, et al.

and i responded that it isn't ok for anyone to produce them, and came back with the treaty.

i never said it is being followed by everyone. if anyone finds out for a fact that anyone (us, russia, china, pakistan, india) is producing these weapons sanctions should be taken against them.




now i gotta head out, if you want to continue to be naive i'll argue with you later.

 

[Josep]

"dabobs, concluding im about to conclude that u believe just about everything ur gov't sez"

actually you're the one who it seems like believes every bit of anti-american propoganda you hear. even sy is on my side, and he's a brit. i'm telling you what has been reported, by the united states and national media, about what was in those statements. i can't believe your hatred of the united states makes you think they think countries should be attacked, and with nuclear weapons no less. you're incredibly naive.

and exactly what 'rules' have they broken on their war against the taliban. please, tell me mister expert.

theres that word 'rules' again, your being extremely indecisive. First off its not a war, yet, Second, united states and national media, eeer sadly we've gone over this in another thread but given your posts i doubt you were here for that. Hatred for the U.S.? hmmmm...people RUNNING it maybe

 

[Josep]

now i gotta head out, if you want to continue to be naive i'll argue with you later.

THUMBS UP SOME MYSTERIOUS TREATY, lets make sure we don't play this naive and keep talking about those treaties that everyone just knows about, you know, those ones that everyone keeps talking about, Ya know?

 

[2fast4u]

dabods:

3 words: L O L ! that probably means that criticizing the american gov't is considered anti-american propaganda? sorry, thats ridiculous.

and exactly what 'rules' have they broken on their war against the taliban. please, tell me mister expert.

read the thread about the war on terrorism.

now i gotta head out, if you want to continue to be naive i'll argue with you later.

rather not, i prefer to discuss with people who arent as naive as j00, sir.

 

[Derek]

Josep: first of all, i wasn't calling you naive, 2fast4u is the on who can't comprehend what he reads.

and he's the one who brought up the 'rules' the united states is breaking. that's why i asked him about the 'rules'. he's the one you should be asking about the use of the term, not me.

and there is an anti-nuclear weapons ban treaty. if you have the time, go look it up, at this time i don't have the spare time to look for it.

"3 words: L O L ! that probably means that criticizing the american gov't is considered anti-american propaganda? sorry, thats ridiculous. "

actually not. i hate bush. i voted for gore. i could think of a million things to criticize him for, including his handling of the atmosphere and his pro-big business stance on things. but having a contingency plan to attack other nations if things got desparate is not one of them. every country in the world is prepared, as they should be.

 

[Josep]

Noo! NADAR!!!! however you spell that cool guy's name, gore would have sucked TOO every country in the world is prepared...to blow the shit outta of each other, good deal can we get a 2 for 1 deal on table 3?

but having a contingency plan to attack other nations if things got desparate is not one of them,
every country in the world is prepared, as they should be.

UH?! whaa? contradiction in a half!

 

[Josep]

o yea, i do have the time to look up this mysterious treaty, im doing hw right now, on a saturday, but i gotta go to the beach tommorow! i HAVE TO

 

[Derek]

josep: that's not a contradiction at all. go back and re-read.

and i'm sure you've heard of the nuclear test ban treaty. there are tons of treaties on the use and production of nuclear weapons. have yourself a field day.

for years the us has known that russia has plans akin to what was released now. for years russia has known that we have plans. what's different now? the media knows.

 

[2fast4u]

what's different now? the media knows.

...and thats y we should ignore the problem. :satisfied :innocent: