cre8tiff Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 (edited) Nice job, George. Edited May 31, 2007 by cre8tiff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Nice job, George. um, didn't H8 tell you this is all Nancy Pelosi's fault? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted May 31, 2007 Author Share Posted May 31, 2007 um, didn't H8 tell you this is all Nancy Pelosi's fault? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Two Facts: The ABM Treaty was signed with the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union no longer exists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 "Putin said Russia's tests on Tuesday of a two new missiles were a direct response to U.S. moves to create a missile defense system." There is logic only a Russkie Commie or a Democrat could understand. It's our fault we're trying to create a defense system so the answer is, of course, to make more missiles. Don't you libs ever tire of being stupid, wrong, and ugly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted May 31, 2007 Author Share Posted May 31, 2007 "Putin said Russia's tests on Tuesday of a two new missiles were a direct response to U.S. moves to create a missile defense system." There is logic only a Russkie Commie or a Democrat could understand. It's our fault we're trying to create a defense system so the answer is, of course, to make more missiles. Don't you libs ever tire of being stupid, wrong, and ugly? Your journey to the dark side is nearly complete. You need only kill dmarc and you may take your rightful place at the side of H8tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 "Putin said Russia's tests on Tuesday of a two new missiles were a direct response to U.S. moves to create a missile defense system." There is logic only a Russkie Commie or a Democrat could understand. It's our fault we're trying to create a defense system so the answer is, of course, to make more missiles. Don't you libs ever tire of being stupid, wrong, and ugly? Putin said it was our fault, so yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Your journey to the dark side is nearly complete. You need only kill dmarc and you may take your rightful place at the side of H8tank. May the Schwartz be with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Putin could blame this morning's squirts on America and the Dems would fall in line and blame Bush. You do know we've been working on a missile defense program for decades now? Where do you think those Patriot missiles came from that were shooting down Scud missiles back in '90? Wait, I forget...it's easier to blame Bush/America for everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Why can't everything be settled by playing conquer club? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Putin could blame this morning's squirts on America and the Dems would fall in line and blame Bush. You do know we've been working on a missile defense program for decades now? Where do you think those Patriot missiles came from that were shooting down Scud missiles back in '90? Wait, I forget...it's easier to blame Bush/America for everything. Yep. We will be Europe in 10 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Putin could blame this morning's squirts on America and the Dems would fall in line and blame Bush. You do know we've been working on a missile defense program for decades now? Where do you think those Patriot missiles came from that were shooting down Scud missiles back in '90? Wait, I forget...it's easier to blame Bush/America for everything. What wonderful schtick. "Our review indicated in general that the Army and supporting contractors overcame significant obstacles to provide tactical missile defenses in Saudi Arabia and Israel, but that the Project Manager's assessment that the Patriot was successful against 70 percent of Iraqi Scuds was not supported." (Testimony of Richard Davis Director Of Army Issues National Security and International Division before the House Government Operations Committee, April 7, 1992) You fight with a guy for 70 years. You reach an understanding. Yet, he wants to create an environment that your greatest weapon agains him for the previous 70 years gets negated, and he's supposed to shrug and say ok? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I don't understand this reasoning at all -- then again I don't live in imaginaryland like the libs. I plan on perfecting a missile defense program and your counter is to build more missiles? Can I please play you in Risk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemonKnight Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I don't understand this reasoning at all -- then again I don't live in imaginaryland like the libs. I plan on perfecting a missile defense program and your counter is to build more missiles? Can I please play you in Risk? Did you read the article? These are new multi-warhead rockets. I believe the one big rocket would deliver the payload to the threshold of our missle defenses then seperate into multiple smaller rockets when nearing our defenses making them harder to target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted May 31, 2007 Author Share Posted May 31, 2007 I don't understand this reasoning at all -- then again I don't live in imaginaryland like the libs. I plan on perfecting a missile defense program and your counter is to build more missiles? Can I please play you in Risk? Every perfect defense has triggered development of a stronger weapon to thwart it. That fact is, the Bush White House has myoptically loaded nations near the Middle East with short and medium range nukes to threaten Iran. The freakin idiots apparently didn't even consider Russia was also within range. Typical Chimpy McDumbass decision making. The damage done to our diplomacy in the world will take DECADES to repair, if it can be at all. Just keep your blinders on, son. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Did you read the article? These are new multi-warhead rockets. I believe the one big rocket would deliver the payload to the threshold of our missle defenses then seperate into multiple smaller rockets when nearing our defenses making them harder to target. The point remains the same. We are building a purely DEFENSIVE WEAPON and the Commies/Libs think it is our fault that the Russkies are building more OFFENSIVE WEAPONS? Maybe we should just surrender to the rest of the world now and save them the trouble. I think a missile defense program is a great idea. It stands to reason if we can target one, the technology can be mastered to target a hundred. Should we just stand around with our pants down by our ankles waiting? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Every perfect defense has triggered development of a stronger weapon to thwart it. Just keep your blinders on, son. I guess the answer is yes. If we only build sticks, then they will to. Bad America bad!!! Shame on us for defending ourselves. We shouldn't be jerks like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Or maybe we can negotiate them away. After all, no one will ever break a signed document, would they??? Nah, I still think the lib response to terrorism is probably the same as this....sticking our heads in the sand hoping nothing will ever happen will work. We can spend the money we save on global warming and helping the lazy poor. Great idea!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 The point remains the same. We are building a purely DEFENSIVE WEAPON and the Commies/Libs think it is our fault that the Russkies are building more OFFENSIVE WEAPONS? Maybe we should just surrender to the rest of the world now and save them the trouble. I think a missile defense program is a great idea. It stands to reason if we can target one, the technology can be mastered to target a hundred. Should we just stand around with our pants down by our ankles waiting? C'mon Tim. There is no such thing as a purely defensive weapon system. The point of a defensive system is to counter an offense so we can engage in our own offensive. Everything in military strategery is interconnected. And you can't tell me if the Russkies decided to come over to say Canada or Mexico or Cuba (hey, remember that one?) and decided to build their own "defensive weapon" we wouldn't be justified in a response of some sort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 After America is a burning rubble, are the survivors allowed to wonder why we didn't invest in the technology to allow us to defend ourselves because we didn't want to make them mad or should we just use our war sticks we stockpiled to roast marshmallows and be quiet? By this logic, we should destroy all our airplane and aircraft carriers because they may provoke someone to do something really mean. Can I live in your world singing Cumbaya for awhile? It's must nice and quiet there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 What do you momos not understand about no politics in the TG. Now back to the 'johnson' thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 They are test firing over there, so we don't have to do it here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 (edited) After America is a burning rubble, are the survivors allowed to wonder why we didn't invest in the technology to allow us to defend ourselves because we didn't want to make them mad or should we just use our war sticks we stockpiled to roast marshmallows and be quiet? By this logic, we should destroy all our airplane and aircraft carriers because they may provoke someone to do something really mean. Can I live in your world singing Cumbaya for awhile? It's must nice and quiet there. I'm not arguing that we aren't justified in building a defense system. What I am arguing is it seems pretty natural to me to see one of our older enemies feeling threatened by it and reacting in kind. Actions have consequences. Something that short sighted leadership does not seem to take into account. You do understand for instance that one of the reasons (other than of course rabid religious fundamentalism) that Iran does not like us is because we took out a democratically elected leader of their country back in the '50s to support our own puppet? Again, that may have been the thing to do for our own self interests. But to act like the United States is always morally just in its actions around the world and that we shouldn't expect any "blow back" (thank you Ron Paul) is pretty dumb. Edited May 31, 2007 by CaP'N GRuNGe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 The point remains the same. We are building a purely DEFENSIVE WEAPON Are you really this dense, or have you picked up Spain's torch? What does this "defensive weapon" do? Renders their weapons obsolete. They won't have this defense which means as their weapons go obsolete, ours remain relevant meaning we can threaten them again if they do nothing. So you're arguing that the smart thing for them to do is nothing? Or do you think we could benefit from sharing this technology so they don't think -rightfully- that we're trying to one up them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Actions have consequences. Bush never had to deal with consequences growing up as a child, how will he understand consequences as an adult? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.