Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
But, you'd change it, because it's not up to your standards, no?
I don't see how I copped out by saying that. I acknowledged your lack of support for the country you live in, coupled it with my want for it to stay a badass motherfucker by doing work, and concluded that maybe it's not the place for you. Just a thought.
If anyone is copping out- it's you. Read your replies above.
I stated the truth and backed it with facts. You got caught doing the only thing you can do - spew bullshitQuote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
Clinton didn't respond to the bombing of the Cole. Bush had the military capture al-Nashiri and Tawfiq bin Attash and kill Abu Ali al-Harithi.Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
Russia still has their nukes pointed at us and even worked to smuggle tactical nukes into the US. Have you ever heard of Stanislav Lunev?
You are uneducated and lack the ability to back up your statements with facts.
On this we can both agree. Both candidates are puppets of their party platforms as they have to be in order to be the nominee.Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
That what I thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by David88vert
Conspiracy theories? That's your defense? You gotta do better than that. Let's take off our tin foil hats for a minute. Lunev defected to the US.Quote:
Russia still has their nukes pointed at us and even worked to smuggle tactical nukes into the US. Have you ever heard of Stanislav Lunev?
http://archive.newsmax.com/articles/?a=1999/6/15/124657
http://www.cnn.com/chat/transcripts/2001/02/20/lunev/
Lunev has also said himself that improvised nuclear devices, which I'm guessing that's what you're speaking of, are not feasible, that they were prohibitively expensive and the nuclear core would decompose too quickly
http://www.historycommons.org/entity...nislav_lunev_1
Have you heard of Mutual Assured Destruction? How about the Non-proliferation treaty?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutua...ed_destruction
It would be at the detriment of any nation to have any active nuclear weapons pointed at the US ready to go, as both belligerents would be irrevocably destroyed. Maybe by aimed, you mean a "launch ready" ICBM and a US base as one of many preset coordinates. This could be plausible. However, numerous treaties, including The New START/Prague treaty (signed by both Russia and the US, have helped to reduce the effectiveness of a nuclear attack. It would be rather difficult to launch a nuke at the US and actually reach mainland, save for maybe Alaska. Maybe you're referring to the soviet missiles placed in Cuba in the 60s as a response to the Jupiter US missiles placed in Turkey, both of which were dismantled and moved as a result of a mutual agreement between JFK an Khrushchev?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban...isis#section_9
Did you just accuse me of not backing up my statements with facts, and then actually do what you accused me of? LOLQuote:
You are uneducated and lack the ability to back up your statements with facts.
Stop getting your information from infowars. You lose. Once again.
I didn't lose anything. I showed you that we did respond to the attack on the Cole with the military. you claimed that the military had not accomplished anything in the past 10-15 years.
I also showed you that the Soviet Union was around still less than 30 years ago, and was a threat to the US, which you asked for, implying that we had not threats against us in the last 30 years.
I do not read InfoWars. I study history and facts.
The nukes in Russia are still aimed at the US, that is fact, and our nukes are still aimed at them. These facts are undeniable, and nuclear war is still a threat. While tensions are not at all time highs, the threat remains, and our military is our first line of defense. ICBMs can easily hit anywhere in the US, not just Alaska. You don't seem to understand the distance that rockets can travel, and if you think that we can just pop them out of the air, you do not understand the difficulty of hitting a target like that.
Now, personaly, I do not think that we will have a nuclear war in the near future, but the threat remains regardless of what you wish to believe.
Improvised devices are not what were being referred to. The Russians had him investigate how to smuggle in military grade tactical nuclear warheads into the Shenendoah Valley area. Now, with our current capability of detection, I would suspect it is harder for them to do that now, but it shows that they did do research into it already - and that is a first strike tactic, which is a threat. You wanted to imply that we had not military threats against us.
You lose again. You are making a bad habit of it.
Im still trying to find where I claimed or implied any of this. I think you just might be failing at reading comprehension. Sorry...Quote:
Originally Posted by David88vert
So....you agree with me and just want to frame it like you're right and I'm wrong. Lol.Quote:
The nukes in Russia are still aimed at the US, that is fact, and our nukes are still aimed at them. These facts are undeniable, and nuclear war is still a threat. While tensions are not at all time highs, the threat remains, and our military is our first line of defense. ICBMs can easily hit anywhere in the US, not just Alaska. You don't seem to understand the distance that rockets can travel, and if you think that we can just pop them out of the air, you do not understand the difficulty of hitting a target like that.
Now, personaly, I do not think that we will have a nuclear war in the near future, but the threat remains regardless of what you wish to believe.
So you're saying we face the same threat today from smuggled nuclear warheads, with state of the art detection equipment and methods, as we did 30 years ago?Quote:
Improvised devices are not what were being referred to. The Russians had him investigate how to smuggle in military grade tactical nuclear warheads into the Shenendoah Valley area. Now, with our current capability of detection, I would suspect it is harder for them to do that now, but it shows that they did do research into it already - and that is a first strike tactic, which is a threat.You wanted to imply that we had not military threats against us.
You seem to have a problem with your short term memory. Go re-read your own statements and questions, which I answered for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
I am not agreeing with you. I am showing you that there still is a threat, which you questioned in your previous statements.
We have state of the art detection methods for smuggled drugs, illegal aliens, etc, yet still are unable to stop the unending tide of them. Do you believe that it is impossible to smuggle weapon components into the US, including weapons grade plutonium and uranium? Are you so disengaged that you believe that the US hasn't already prepared to do the same in Russia, and other countries as well?
Back on the original topic - since you appear to think that our military doesn't really contribute to the citizens in our current times, what have you personally done to protect any citizens of the country? Have you ever been under fire from a foreign enemy? Have you ever put yourself in harms way? Have you every even trained to prepare for such a possibility? Our servicemen have trained, prepared, and performed - and that is everyone that enters the military. What have you done to be in a position to diminsh their service to protecting YOUR family?
You seem to be a little slow. Let me help you and anyone else who failed their 9th grade english courses...Quote:
Originally Posted by David88vert
These questions are called Socratic questions. Similar to the kind of questioning methods they do on essay questions in school. They are not meant imply anything, they are simply questions to garner information from the reader. I know exactly what we've accomplished, I know exactly what threats we face and have faced in the past 30 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
Never said this either, but ok, I'll let you draw your own conclusions...Quote:
Back on the original topic - since you appear to think that our military doesn't really contribute to the citizens in our current times
::Sigh:: What does any of that have to do with anything? I would imagine anyone who isnt or hasnt been in the military or police force would probably not have an answer for that nonsense anyway. I see what you're trying to do, and youre failing miserably, but nice try.Quote:
what have you personally done to protect any citizens of the country? Have you ever been under fire from a foreign enemy? Have you ever put yourself in harms way? Have you every even trained to prepare for such a possibility? Our servicemen have trained, prepared, and performed - and that is everyone that enters the military. What have you done to be in a position to diminsh their service to protecting YOUR family?
Seems like I made the point quite well. You are backpedaling, as usual.
Review your initial statements and it is clear that you did not know recent history. I gave you clear answers and you don't like that they don't support your liberal agenda.
You call it backpedaling, I call it continuously proving your ignorance, and never cease to amaze.Quote:
Originally Posted by David88vert
Yet the facts back up my statements....Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
If by facts, you mean conspiracy theories, then I agree with you 100%Quote:
Originally Posted by David88vert
Blank! come drop your opinion on that debate over in the politics section!
Do you believe that Russia just decided not to point their warheads at the US? Or do you think that ICBMs don't really exist?Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
Do you believe that the Cole wasn't really attacked?
Do you believe that Obama has fully secured all of the US borders?
What do you mean by "point" and "aim"? In a literal sense, no they're not pointed at the US. In reality, there may be a ICBM stored that has a set of pre-programmed destination coordinates, which include the US, which also include many other destinations. The US may also have an ICBM stored somewhere with a similar set of pre programmed destination coordinates. Are they a threat to the US? Both countries have agreed that any kind of nuclear warfare would wipe both countries off the planet. Such an event would not be beneficial to either parties interests.Quote:
Originally Posted by David88vert
Yes. The USS Cole was really attacked. Theres a big hole on the side of a naval destroyer that confirms this.
What do you mean by secured? Are we keeping tabs on borders? Yes. Is it possible to get some kind of variant of a nuclear warhead, however small, through a border check? Unlikely, but I wouldnt doubt it. Is it feasible or practical to take that kind of route to inflict any kind of damage? Not at all.
Thank you for that response. This time, you stated your position and belief clearly, and I can respect that.
All ICBMs have a target programmed into their system. An ICBM can have multiple warheads, but let's be clear, if one is targetting North America, then all of the warheads on that missle are targetting North America, and in a fairly limited range. You will not find a missle targetting multiple continents. It is the equivalent of someone pointing a shotgun at you. I think that you would find a shotgun being pointed at you a threat.
Our military has managed to make you feel safe aparently, based upon your previous statements. Since you feel safe, how can you not recognize their full value, and instead think that they are over-glorified? No one else is capable of providing this service for you.
I know I am a little late to this party but being prior military, and defending sorry dumbass people like you who think that everything you have was just given to you. I would go as far to say that you would prob. never join any type of armed forces and if you did your opinion would change alot!! Oh and your info in the ICBM's i am sure yiou got off the internet and as we all know everything off the internet is true!! We have a many ICBM in america ready to go at all times and no there are no preloaded targets in them. So I say all this to say is makes my blood boil to see people who have never served and never will disgrace the military with bad mouthing and shit talking, but go ahead and do it cause thats a right I have put my life on the line for so you can and nobody can stop you. Just remember that
I was gonna have a little more fun with you David, but I think I want to address this little hill-jack first. Grab a seat and some popcorn, or a coke and a smile.This post embodies exactly what I mean when I say the military is over-glorified. You got people like Rodney here. I don't know you, so you obviously don't know me. You don't know my military history at all, so it's definitely not a subject you can speak on. As long as ignorant fucks can bad mouth your commander in chief, I'll bad mouth the military, and you Rodney, wouldn't do a fucking thing about it. But I'm not going to bad mouth the military. I never have. However I am going to bad mouth you.Quote:
Originally Posted by rodney120985
It's of no surprise you are or were in the military. Your english skills make it evident you dropped out of high school and thus had nowhere else to go with your life. But that's good. The armed forces gives a lot of young men the direction they need to move forward with their lives. They also help pay for higher education, which you obviously didn't take advantage of, or you would have read my post more clearly and we wouldn't be in the position we're in right now. In some people, the military brings out the inner entitled jack ass that was before repressed. The kind of self-important cocksucker that thinks that because he wears a uniform, he's somehow more bad ass than his fellow citizens.
This is where you fit in. To say you put your life on the line for my freedom, when you and I both know you're not fighting for my freedom, disgraces your predecessors before you who actually did put a uniform on and fought for my freedom. You and I both know you're a washed up lackey. Another pawn in a seemingly endless battle for control.
The ICBM argument is moot. Neither you, nor I have fired one, and its so far from the original topic, it's not even worth rehashing.
So this is why I'm upset at the military. Because there are too many people like you. People who think the world owes them something all the time. Even one would be too many. Just sit back and enjoy the ride you volunteered for. I crack you off a piece of my check every week. I don't think I owe someone like you much else.
You know you can talk alot of crap that is evident as many on here can see. it does no good to even try to explain something to you cause you have your mind set on one thing and thats that.
Also for your information you dont know what my military backgound is or my families, or hell anything about me in general. I didnt drop out of high school I went to college before and while in the military for that matter. I have never been one to boast about being in the military till I come across all knowing dick heads like yourself. And yes if it wasnt for your military fighting for you rights as we speak we would not be here having this retarded ass argument!
So in that case I stand where I stand and you stand where you stand.
Incorrect. Every deployed warhead (currently mounted to an ICBM and capable of being lanched once the release authorization has been given) has coordinates programmed into its instructions. Target coordinates can be changed, but our defense system is not sitting with misle incapabe of being launched. An authorizaton code is just that - release permission. It is not a list of targets to program to the warheads. We are discussing ICBMs, not cruise missles - they are very different.Quote:
Originally Posted by rodney120985
Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
Any serving member is defending your freedom daily from foreign hostile forces. If you were to disband the military, do you believe that we would not be attacked by other countries looking to capture our natural resources? Go look at history.
You think the minor amount of compensation that servicemen get is why they put their lives on the line? You think that is enough for them? Your mentality really falls in line with the French philosophy, and we know that they would be speaking German now if it weren't for the US.
Give me a minute. Still trying to find where I said disband the military. You said I said it so it must be in here....Quote:
Originally Posted by David88vert
I did not say that you said that. You think that others have reading comprehension problems? No one you don't answer questions put to you - you can't seem to understand what you read.Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
Stating a hypothetical situation, to ask an opinion based off the hypothetical situation, means he said it. Duh, don't be stupid.
Not calling any one out specifically, but if you think we as a country are not being constantly tested then you are wrong. I've personally talked to a f22 fighter pilot who was stationed in Alaska for a while. He said that while there, they received numerous alerts that Russia was flying bombers over Alaska to test our defenses. He and others were called to go "push them back" into Russia.
spoken like a true socialist.. Also, its not "only in America". Go to different countries and make friends that arent brainwashed sheeple like yourself and you will realise the stupidity in your statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by .blank cd
I have known plenty of muslims and even befriended some. There are a few muslims that arent radical but they still have anti american feelings yet they come here to leech off of us. This is my personal experience with 2 of my so called "friends". I could go on for hours about how fucked all muslims are but I have some pork to eat while I burn a Koran.Quote:
Originally Posted by Got Milk?
LOL. You mean countries like China, North Korea, Russia? You're not helping your "socialist" case at all. Especially with your anti-Muslim rant. Why don't you go do something constructive for yourself like read a book for the first time?Quote:
Originally Posted by ftp
You do however make a great case for the failing education system in America.