Guest Rogue 9 Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 we can shoot down their liquid fueled ICBM's with Patriots unless I miss my guess, which does happen occasionaly, but if I'm wrong on this one the Internet will probably be down in the U.S. and none of you will be able to say anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlib Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 Zargon: OK, so maybe I wouldn't be blessed with a direct hit. Bummer. "... shoot them down..." Huh? With what? Reagan era "Star Wars" technology? I sure wouldn't be trusting the future of the country on that. I'd just as soon take my chances with "Duck and cover" Even if we did manage to get most of them there would still loss of American lives. Maybe just in the hundreds of thousands instead of millions. Still too high for me. Am I alone in this? I can't believe I'm the only one here who feels this way! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taarkin Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 Considering I live near Los Angeles, March AFB(home of the west coast's primary refueling wing) and San Diego Harbor(home port of at least 2 aircraft carriers), me=f***ed. AND A WORLD WITHOUT TAARKIN IS FAR WORSE THAN ANY NUCLEAR WAR CAN HOPE TO BE. ------------------ Was I supposed to eat the heads too? 'Cause I took nooo prisioners! Once again, evil is defeated through the use of decorative agricultural technology! Official forum Psychic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rogue 9 Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 well if we get nuked the valley where I live will get fallout from SF and LA, thats why I support out missle defense projects, and out\r first strike programs, chinas Bombers would never survice to get to the U.S. so I am not worried about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Fondas Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 1. Please leave God out of this. He cannot held responsible, in any way for human greed and stupidity. 2. About the US vs China. People, you fail to see something VERY obvious. US have the means to devstate China, Without even a nose bleed. How ? Well just think of Germany. Hitler wanted to conquer Europe. He failed because he did it the wrong way. Nowadays, Germany has taken over Europe ! Yes that's right, ECONOMICALLY !!! So you can see that due to the effects of global economy, US can , quite easily I might add, beat China without even firing a bullet. Simple ! ------------------ "No matter how pretty the bait, a hook is still a hook !" TZG+7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rogue 9 Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 that is a posibility, OK, revised stategy for dealing with China, Total Trade Embargo, none of our exports go in, none of there imports come over here, if that doesn't get there attention then knock them back to the stone age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 Are you SURE you'd want the US to gain TOTAL CONTROL of the Pacific Rim's economy? If the US grabbed Japan, Taiwan, China, and the Koreas, you'd be looking at the #1, #2, #4, and a few other nicely sized ones lumped together into some sort of supereconomy capable of doing whatever it wanted... AMERICA: THE COLOSSUS THAT BESTRODE THE PACIFIC Anyhow, China's leadership is starting to use it's brain and stop listening to their versio n of guys like me and stop trying to humilate the US. "I have visited a lot of countries and seen that it is normal for people to ask forgiveness or say 'excuse me' when they collide in the street," Jiang said. "But the American planes come to the border of our country and do not ask forgiveness. Is this behavior acceptable?" he asked. That's a bit calmer than APOLOGIZE NOW NEO-IMPERIALIST DOGS or whatever they've been screaming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Zoom Rabbit Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 Things seem to be cooling down. I think China realizes that it's being overly sensitive, and America realizes that it's being mean. Perhaps now the children will play along without hitting each other. However, if a 'playground fight' does break out, I live in the mountains of Oregon. My sword and I will emerge from the hills in a few years to lead the tattered and irradiated remnants of humanity on the long road back to the stone age... Just think. Archaeologists in the far future would write papers about the 'Easter Rabbit Cult' that sprang up in the post-atomic west of North America. Carved idols with rabbit ears would dot the landscape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Zaarin Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 Just to clear up a few points here, in response to Conor. I dont't wat to get into a flame-war religion/pacifism discussion, but anyway. First, I believe that, however difficult, total pacifism is possible. It probably won't be achieved for many millenia, if at all, but I still believe that it can happen. Second, the religion point. I don't, in any way, deny that god may exist, and the entire Christian religion may be true. All I'm saying is, that, in my mind (wait? I have a mind?), all killing, regardless of he circumstances, is murder. And, IMHO, I don't believe that any being can be automatically right. To me, anything, no matter how much more advanced, or on whatever plane of existance, can be incapable of wrongdoing, or mistakes. Yes, there is WWII. Yes, it was necessary to fight Hitler. That doesn't make it morally right. Necessity is often far from morality. Remember, of course, that these were the insane ravings of a hopelessly deranged lunatic, with 3 alternative personalities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlib Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 "First, I believe that, however difficult, total pacifism is possible. It probably won't be achieved for many millenia, if at all, but I still believe that it can happen." It will take the human race evolving beyond what we are now, shedding all traces of our ancestral past, and going beyond the base inpulses dictated by our reptillian brain for this to truly take effect. Until then we will squabble over territory, resources, and mating rights like every other creature on this planet. We really aren't as evloved as we like to think we are. We are still driven by instinct on many levels, though we don't like to admit it. Once we can get rid of this primeval baggage idiotic conflicts such as this will be unthinkable to our decendants. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 Human nature can't be changed, and total pacifism runs contrary to human nature. Man has been fighting each other ever since we figured out we could jab each other in the eyes with sticks. Then it was hit the guy in the head with a rock...and we just keep escalating to the point of where we do ALL our eye poking on the scale of entire cities at once with a single kamikaze robot from space. Call it progress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Conor Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 Actually, I'd insist that God by definition cannot do something morally wrong. In order for an action to be an objective moral transgression, there simply must be an authority on just what is moral. If there is no authority, nothing is morally wrong (many people believe just this). If God is a supreme being, again by definition there cannot be any authority over Him. Every thing He does is automatically the right thing to do unless he specifically puts restrictions on Himself. And just because religion pops up doesn't mean flames are going to happen. Discussion probably will, but I doubt anyone has ever become a worse human being from a civil discussion. Politics actually seems to be more dangerous here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Zaarin Posted April 6, 2001 Share Posted April 6, 2001 I'm just being careful. I've been unfortunate enough to experience several religion-related flame wars on other boards, and I don't want to see a repeat of that here. Anyway, as you can probably guess, I'm no expert on Christianity. I suppose, maybe, I've seen an unpleasant side of it living here. I just can't keep up the argument when I know less about religion than anyone else in the known universe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Juggernaut Posted April 7, 2001 Share Posted April 7, 2001 I HATE NUKES. You send it to a city and millions is vaporized. Lot of people who has their lives, their loves, their jobs is not more because a guy click a buttom and set the curse of the missile to any city. He kill childs, mothers. Why?, for a war?, kill citizens to avoid loss soldiers? If any of they use it against my city, I hope be with my girlfriend . The other day I read about a nuclear warhead with 25 MT!, what the hell was thinking the one who design it?, destroy the moon?, if 1 KT can destroy a city 25 MT can destroy Australia! ------------------ Also knowed as Kanon Let get those guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr. Cracken Posted April 7, 2001 Share Posted April 7, 2001 The Cold War basically was a big pissing contest. who could biuld the bigger bomb, who's ideal's were better, ect. we won. but at the cost of massive nuclear arms stores. now, Russia sell these stores for the cost of a few mil. MIL! Some go for even less, like the cost of a VOLKSWAGON. Getting the INTO your respective country is what's hard, and that's why nobody's sneaked one in yet, i bet. But if they could, nuclear terrorism would be a horrifying reality. We have screwed ourselfs over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Odin Posted April 7, 2001 Share Posted April 7, 2001 Yes, Zoom my sig is ironic but that is how I feel about war. I also am glade that things are cooling down betweent the nations. ------------------ "Dulce bellum inexpertis." (Sweet is war to those who have never experinced it.) Roman Proverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted April 7, 2001 Share Posted April 7, 2001 25 megatons would be hard pressed to kill all of New York City or London....huge-ass cities... I've started reading stuff that labels the Cold War the SHADOW WAR. The SHADOWS of the US and Soviet Union actively fought each other with their puppet nations, pulling the strings they had to pull. Every time you'd pull a string, that string would get weaker and weaker until the string would break and then that nation would stop being your puppet. Example: The Russians pulled the strings in Poland one last time in 1983 when they voted on martial law. The string broke and Poland started down the road to freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rogue 9 Posted April 7, 2001 Share Posted April 7, 2001 1KT can destroy a city 25 MT can destroy Australia! 1 Kiloton can partially destroy a city made of wood, see Hiroshima Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Zoom Rabbit Posted April 7, 2001 Share Posted April 7, 2001 In Sikhism (a quirky little religion that seeks to balance both Hindu and Moslem ideas) the 'just' war question is answered by asking if we aren't willing to fight, how will the faith survive? And fight they did! Still do, actually... I don't find a conflict in being a good Christian who can and will fight. Myself, I have some military training, and keep my gun skills fresh; swords, of course, I use just about daily...and while I may joke about 'cutting off' someone's head, it is after all, the whole point in swordsmanship. Nevertheless, I have never struck another person in anger,* and practice peace in my daily life. My understanding is that there are situations when it may not only be justified, but absolutely required to kill. In those instances, it is important to be able to do the thing quickly and dispassionately--one must be able to do so unfettered by the conscience, or that moment's hesitation could cost one their life! I've never been in such a situation, but I pray that if I am, I'll have the sense of right and wrong to take the correct action on instinct... <font size=1>*Military training and Kendo don't count.</font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Air Juggernaut Posted April 7, 2001 Share Posted April 7, 2001 What was the objetive of the Cold War?, USSR had plans to invade the world after WW2 or just was a mistake?. Both forces NATO/USSR make weapons to repel enemy weapons, portable SAM launchers against heavily armored helicopters, and this last to be used like a flying artillery for ground forces to stop an advance, for example. I´m not a military specialist so above you can found errors but for me both forces was defensive, NATO thought that USSR will invade and USSR thought that NATO will invade. Of that mistake we have a lot of unneeded and dangerous plutonium. ------------------ Also knowed as Kanon Let get those guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nute Gunray Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 Plutonium is one of the most valuable heavy metals on the planet. It makes excellent shells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlib Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 Originally posted by Nute Gunray: Plutonium is one of the most valuable heavy metals on the planet. It makes excellent shells. But are they any good stuffed with ricotta cheese and covered in tomato sauce? ------------------ "I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my life-style" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rogue 9 Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 sure until your teeth fall out and you rot while still alive, in simple terms anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rogue 9 Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 Originally posted by Air Juggernaut: What was the objetive of the Cold War?, USSR had plans to invade the world after WW2 or just was a mistake?. Both forces NATO/USSR make weapons to repel enemy weapons, portable SAM launchers against heavily armored helicopters, and this last to be used like a flying artillery for ground forces to stop an advance, for example. I´m not a military specialist so above you can found errors but for me both forces was defensive, NATO thought that USSR will invade and USSR thought that NATO will invade. Of that mistake we have a lot of unneeded and dangerous plutonium. actually that would be NATO vs. the Warsaw Pact. not NATO vs. the USSR, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Zoom Rabbit Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 Plutonium shells?!? Uh, Nute, you've been playing with plutonium yourself, haven't you? Admit it! I've heard of depleted uranium being used for making anti-tank shells. Now...there is some controversy over the slight amount of radiation released by these rounds, but a plutonium round would be deadly to everyone, for miles around! [This message has been edited by Zoom Rabbit (edited April 08, 2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.