[quote]Originally posted by Vertigo_1:
[b]OF COURSE! We are certainly bombing civvies. With FOOD![/b][/quote]
Lol. [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img] Too true.
[quote]Here is the difference between what we do, and what they do.
They attack civilians and target them. They try to kill innocent people.
We do our damndest to avoid killing civilians and don't target them. Hell, we've been feeding their people for years.
Some may die, but that's war. Always been that way, always will.[/quote]
That is true. That is the main difference. We will try to avoid civilian casualties (although to completely avoid is impossible, it is the essence of war, killing)while they will try their damndest to kill civilians. That is also why this attack is so different from the attack on Pearl Harbor.
------------------
[i]"Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future, or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain."[/i] G'Kar, Season 3
Please check out the Babylon 5 mod for Battlecruiser Millenium at [url="http://mods.firstones.com/B5BCM"]http://mods.firstones.com/B5BCM[/url]
[quote]Originally posted by TheSaint:
[b]Serious Christians don't go around killing and maiming the innocent;
---
They do if they believe they're doing God's work. Many religions has a funny way of making people of other religion not people at all. Like a certain newspaper article by God said, the Muslims massacred the Hindus, the Hindus massacred the Muslims, and the Christians killed just about everyone they can get their hands on since the Crusades.
[/b][/quote]
EDIT, had a huge rant on this one to vent off after seeing your post, deleated all of it. My suggestion, rid that post mate.
------------------
[b]whitestar90: [/b]"it would give the computer a heartattack just looking at it" -
[b]Sanfam: [/b]"And Drazi didn't like it one bit.-
[b]Mr.Bungle: [/b][i]"So that's where the forum went..."[/i]-
---
[b][i]ahhh, the good old days of HTML.[/i][/b]
[This message has been edited by A2597 (edited 10-07-2001).]
*shrugs* I was just quoting the Onion.
[url="http://www.theonion.com/onion3734/god_clarifies_dont_kill.html"]http://www.theonion.com/onion3734/god_clarifies_dont_kill.html[/url]
Christian history has been rather blood-stained, like most other religions. Sure, technically the Crusades and stuff were carried out by greedy and oppertunistic individuals who weren't really try to follow God's teachings, but they were still Christians. Technically.
------------------
"God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
By the same logic that terrorists can be associated with Islam, and the Crusades can be associated with Christianity, one could state that all women are child-murdering looneys after hearing about Andrea Yates, and whoever that woman was a few years ago who strapped her kids into a car and drove into a lake. Or that all men are closet bomb fanatics after Kascynski and McVeigh.
I know this has been said over and over, but there are still people that don't get it. I feel that it is important enough that it should be repeated until it is understood.
Nick
I guess now that the bombing has started the 8 foreign aid workers won't leave Afghanistan alive now [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/frown.gif[/img]
------------------
Emperor Turhan: How will this end?
Kosh: In fire
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
[quote]Originally posted by Randy:
[b]I hear you.
All I can add is that war always sucks.
Wouldn't it be great if we could find a way to neutralize troublemakers, and deal with disagreements without resorting to war?
Maybe that'll happen one day. I know a lot of people are working for that. But for now, we live in the world we live in. [/b][/quote]
Maybe it will happen one day. But the sad truth is that can only happen when everyone wants it to happen. If one side wants it and another doesn't, guess who will go to war and wipe out the other side.
Messiah: It may be a waste of old buildings, but what about the Taliban's waste of old buildings? Remember those huge Bhudda statues that were carved into the side of a cliff in Afghanistan? I hope you do, because that's all we can do with them now. The Taliban destroyed them.
------------------
[b][url="http://www.minbari.co.uk/log12.2263/"]Required reading[/url][/b]
Never eat anything bigger than your own head.
The Balance provides. The Balance protects.
"Nonono...Is not [i]Great[/i] Machine. Is...[i]Not[/i]-so-Great Machine. It make good snow cone though." - Zathras
[quote]Originally posted by JackN:
[b]Probably missing it in the first strike due to Patriot or some other anti missile tech,[/b][/quote]
It's not likely to be a nuclear missile - more likely a missing Russian backback nuke...something more portable. Plus, Patriots don't do as good of a job against missiles as many people think. The SCUD is a relatively short-range theater missile and doesn't have the same flight path as an ICBM, which would be a _LOT_ more difficult to hit, as our many failures with the NMD tests show. The Patriots also didn't do as well as the government claimed against the SCUDs.
[b] [quote]Russia might be inclined to put her arsenal to use with her own coalition, not really caring about the cost or impact globally. [/b][/quote]
With the way Russia's economy is running and relations as they are, I doubt Russia would start a WW3 under their current administration, or attack us for anything other than us attacking them or their direct allies.
[b] [quote]Many still think they can win a nuclear war over there.[/b][/quote]
Many think the same here, too. I doubt anyone in power over there thinks they can win a nuclear exchange, though. The Soviets did have plans during the peak of the Cold War to use theater nukes to break up troop concentrations as a quick way to avoid large NATO groupings, but that was a nutty and frightening time, too. Russia seems to be more interested in gaining through diplomacy and back-room deals, these days.
[b] [quote]It is REAL likely that there will be a Nuclear Terrorist attack within the next few years or decade.[/b][/quote]
Experts don't seem to agree with that. They've been saying that a nuclear attack isn't terribly likely in the short or long term. A biological attack isn't likely in the short term, while they are expecting chemical weapon attacks of some sort, sooner or later. The current fear is a terrorist attack in response to the US and UK hitting Taliban and Al Qaeda resources in Afghanistan and other targets that would help the Northern Alliance make some headway in taking back the country and ousting the Taliban.
[b] [quote]Once again New York as the prime target.[/b][/quote]
Another target may be more likely...perhaps even Hollywood, which probably wouldn't be as likely as an economic center outside New York. Perhaps Chicago or a population center in CA? Bin Laden has been making a lot of references to hitting American citizens, too.
[b] [quote]This "war on terrorism" we have engaged, although a necessary response to terrorism, will pan out as the key to a much larger scale incident in the end.[/b][/quote]
Possible, but I don't see any critical large scale incidents happening terribly quickly, any more so than our war with Iraq.
[b] [quote]Make no mistake, these are perilous times, and we aren't going to gain any quick resolutions to a war that will likely take decades to stop.[/b][/quote]
I'd expect it to take, if we (the world) have the backbone to run the course, perhaps even as long as the Cold War...which ran for what, 40 years and change? If we're going to "win," perhaps it will be in a similar way.
[b] [quote]The people over there see us as a threat to their way of life, and elements of their religion. That doesn't go away very easily if ever.[/b][/quote]
"The people," meaning what? Every single man, woman and child? The relatively few radicals? Islam is a religion of peace and equality. The terrorists are using Islam as a way to rationalize their murders, just like we saw the same with Christianity and the Crusades or Inquisition. None of those were Christian or Islamic acts.
Clumping every Arab and practitioner of Islam into a group that, as one whole group, see us as a threat to their way of life and religion, is inherently an inaccurate generalization.
[b] [quote]And... America must diminish, if not all out disappear, for Europe to come to full power, and the Asian empire to flourish.[/b][/quote]
I disagree there too, depending on what you mean by "full power" and "Asian empire." There isn't any Asian empire, unless you mean China, which has been trying to gain a blue water navy and longer-reach for the rest of its armed forces. I strongly disagree that we need to fall for Europe (if you can talk about one whole Europe) to reach "full power," however that is defined. Many European nations have been lax in maintaining their armed forces and are having economic problems, but I don't see Europe rising at the cost of the US any time soon.
Things are just too linked, economically, for any American hard times to cause anything but hard times for the rest of the world, and the same goes for the rest of the world affecting our economy.
[quote]Originally posted by TheSaint:
[b]They do if they believe they're doing God's work.[/b][/quote]
They're not Christians, then. They'd just be using the religion as a rationalization for what Christianity would probably decree as an evil and/or sinful act.
[quote]Originally posted by Messiah:
[b]US ALWAYS attack the capitol of the country they are bombing. Let me just ask this: how many capitols have big military targets hidden within?[/b][/quote]
You mean...like the Pentagon? That's one big military target.
Plenty of capital cities have significant military targets. I'm willing to guess that, since they are capital cities, most probably do.
WARNING : This post is rated MA for mature audiences only, it contains bad words, sexual references, gallows humour and themes that may offend some viewers....
and one must also remember that the guy pulling the strings is a meglo dickhead...
number 11 of 13 kids, a self absorbed hypochondriac who is also absolutely chock full of himself to boot.
Osama wants attention... any attention. A spoilt brat will throw a tantrum to get noticed... negative attention is of value to a desperate child. Some kids set fire to thier rooms to get some acknowledgement from thier parents. I'm sure he still enjoys getting spanked.
Unfortunately for us, this adolescent throwback has lots of money and a bunch of malleable extremists to manipulate. So setting fire to his room translates to toasting 5000 people...
Which leaves the spanking part...
I guess he's going to need a team of proctologists to get his head back past his sphincter or he will be in trouble when the coalition forces lube up the tomohawk missile aimed for the same cavity.
Always, beneath culture, beneath country, beneath any alliance or percieved grouping...
[quote]Originally posted by Biggles:
[b]
Messiah: It may be a waste of old buildings, but what about the Taliban's waste of old buildings? Remember those huge Bhudda statues that were carved into the side of a cliff in Afghanistan? I hope you do, because that's all we can do with them now. The Taliban destroyed them.
[/b][/quote]
Ya, I remember. I was so Angry. Destroying history is the worst thing one can do imo, because history consists of so many lives, and so many failures.
[quote]Originally posted by JohnD[b]
You mean...like the Pentagon? That's one big military target.
Plenty of capital cities have significant military targets. I'm willing to guess that, since they are capital cities, most probably do.[/b]
[/quote]
That is the only major military target I know of that lies in a capitol city. I've been around, and never seen anything resembling that.
Thats not saying that is the truth, Im just stating what i know. What military targets (Other than symbolic) do you know of that lies within a capitol city?
(Thanks for not flaming me, you guys are the best [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img])
edit: remember, The christian church (Im not saying christianity) is the church on the planet with most blood on its hands. The muslim church is actually the most peaceful of the large religions other then buddhism.
Biggles: A glimpse of hope: The Chinese government is rebuilding the buddhas on homesoil [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img]
There's lots of military targets, or targets that have military value, in capitials else we wouldn't be blowing them up. There's power stations, radio stations, command and control buildings, and AAA sites.
Washington DC Military Targets... (I've lived there)
Major Military ONLY targets inside the Beltway:
The Pentagon
The Headquarters of the Marine Corps (Henderson Hall)
Fort Myer
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Defense Communications agency
Cameron Station (now closed)
Army Material command
Defense mapping agency
Bolling air force base
Naval district Washington anacostia
Anacostia naval station
Fort Lesley J Mcniar
Naval Security Station
Walter Reed AMC
The Washington Navy Yard
The Marine Corps College/Barracks
The Naval Observatory with its "nuclear" clock
The Headquarters of the CIA
And most of all the Commander in chief lives in the city, what more do you want?
Relatively Close By:
Andrews air force base
Quatico
Fort Belvoir
The goddard space flight center
etc etc etc etc...
[quote]Originally posted by Messiah:
[b] I just have to say this, it makes me mad, and dont think i dont wholeheartedly support USA's attack on terrorism today...
But, and this is a big but...
US ALWAYS attack the capitol of the country they are bombing. Let me just ask this: how many capitols have big military targets hidden within?
Ok, I know what you are thinking: Perhaps it was terrorist targets. Its just that its always this way...
Im not trying to start a flamewar here. Just venting heat...
[/b][/quote]
Rumsfeld said we didn't bomb the capital. We bombed an airfield on its outskirts.
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
[quote]Originally posted by Messiah:
[b] Biggles: A glimpse of hope: The Chinese government is rebuilding the buddhas on homesoil [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]
Only problem with that is that it won't be quite the same as some people building them hundreds or maybe even thousands of years ago with primitive tools, carving them out entirely by hand. China will use modern machinery. Better than nothing, though.
------------------
[b][url="http://www.minbari.co.uk/log12.2263/"]Required reading[/url][/b]
Never eat anything bigger than your own head.
The Balance provides. The Balance protects.
"Nonono...Is not [i]Great[/i] Machine. Is...[i]Not[/i]-so-Great Machine. It make good snow cone though." - Zathras
Well, it’s been a while, so I figured it was time for me to chime in again.
And so it begins. On October 7, 2001 the first public campaign of the long twilight struggle began. As the great leaders of the nations around the world have stated, this will not be a swift exchange with a decisive victory, but rather a prolonged, sustained effort that will end not with a bang, but a whimper.
Some debate the wisdom of “taking it to them.” But when they are so willing to take the lives of 300 men, women and children on aircrafts to turn them into a “living cruise missile,” all you have to do is remember the faces of the children to know why this must be done.
Will there be additional attacks on our sovereignty and security? Most certainly. Not just to the US, but also those who stand by her. But should we let fear rule our response? No.
If the cause is just, it is our duty to rise to the call.
Fear and terror cannot be allowed to win, no matter the cost, for should they win, all humankind will suffer the consequences. I wouldn’t want to live under a Nazi flag, and I sure as hell wouldn’t pledge allegiance to megalomaniac extremist with delusions of being a Messiah.
What acts might come next to counter our call? Well, I do not subscribe to the notion that Russia would willingly support these people, especially given their history in Afghanistan and their own intolerance of religious fanaticism; while there may be pressures both financial and power-based to sell nuclear technology on the open market, selling it and delivering it to a “meaningful target” with absolute secrecy are two separate things. A nuke is a very hard thing to keep secret and to smuggle. And, contrary to popular belief, they aren’t that hard to detect.
As for the “Backpack Nuke,”there has been no credible verification of the existence of a Russian version of this device—all that’s been heard of this is urban legend and media hype. That being the case, it would take, at the least, a decent sized van to move a conventional warhead around and have all the equipment necessary to detonate it. If they were going to try it, they probably would have done so in the 1993 attempt to take WTC down.
You sure as hell won’t get one on a commercial airliner.
What about China? Well, you better believe that the tiny strip of border that they have with Afghanistan is laced with their own version of special forces. China, though they do not publicize it, has several regular occurrences of domestic terror that are the result of fanaticism, and they have no desire to magnify the number of eyes on that problem.
No, it is more likely that destruction that can be affected by a very small number of people with minimal support will be the acts we will see next. Things like what are seen in Palestine/Israel/West Bank/Gaza Strip. Bombs and Snipers? Possibly. Chemical? Maybe. Biological? Doubtful. Nuclear? Not bloody likely.
The Afghanistan part of this operation will be the easy part. I have confidence that the coalition will do their best to get in, do business, and return the country to a government of the people’s choosing.
And I hope they take Bin Laden alive. Killing him is too easy, and, most likely, what he wants. I’d rather see him in front of an international court and locked away in a 6 x 6 windowless cell for the rest of his life. I don’t want to make him a martyr. I’d rather have him face his greatest fear for the rest of his life: Being locked in a cell, isolated from all contact, with no one who gives a damn about what he says in earshot.
No, the hard part comes after Afghanistan. When the coalition have to go into other countries to weed out the bad plants from the turf. Will the coalition stand? Will the world remain united in it’s fight against chaos and terror? The answer to that questrion is the one that will determine the length and ultimate success of this campaign. If Iraq has backed bi Laden and his followers, will we go back and finish what was started in the Gulf War? (Though he is the consummate soldier, and would never say “I told you so,” Gen. H. Norman Shwartzkopf* did warn of the consequences of not taking it to Baghdad and finishing the job.)
As for Israel/Palestine, well, that’s a real bundle of tangled yarn. When you have so many people fighting for so long, the cause vanishes, and only the hate remains. From a top-down view, both sides seem to have forgotten the binding principles of their religions, and are, instead, twisting religious views around to suit their means. God teaches love, not hate. God teaches tolerance, not contempt. God favors life, not death. And now, the people who live there, rather than providing a world of peace and security, are condemning their unborn children to death so that they can claim that “their people” hold the city of Jerusalem. Neither side will give quarter. Both will settle for nothing less.
I really only see two ways that this can be resolved:
1. Jerusalem becomes a piece of volcanic glass, and no one gets it (which probably isn’t too far off, if the fighting continues).
2. Jerusalem becomes a new center for the United Nations; where no country lays claim to it, and it is protected by multilateral forces representative of all of the member nations.
Of course, the Israelis and the Palestinians could have a sudden change of heart, but, to Quote Mr. Scott “If my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a wagon.”
As for bin Laden’s rant on TV: What a surprise (sic). Of course he’s going to hide his personal aspirations for power and glory behind the political struggles in Iraq and Israel. If anyone thinks he’d drop back to his tent and live a pious life of nonviolence were the US to withdraw all of her forces worldwide, and cease all means of support to her allies, well, there’s a bridge in the North Bay I have for sale that you might me interested in…
-Rick
* My definition of hero, btw, *IS* H. Norman Shwartzkopf...
------------------
[i]"...Never start a fight...but [b]always[/b] finish it."[/i]
[This message has been edited by Rick (edited 10-08-2001).]
[quote]Originally posted by Biggles:
[b] Only problem with that is that it won't be quite the same as some people building them hundreds or maybe even thousands of years ago with primitive tools, carving them out entirely by hand. China will use modern machinery. Better than nothing, though.
[/b][/quote]
Actually, that's not true. Most of the labor will be manual in this effort. Despite what most people think, manual labor is still the major way things get done in China. While I was visiting my wife's family there, for example, I was quite surprised that there was almost no heavy equipment involved in making most of the buildings (moreso in Northern China). Slabs were poured manually, than carried/hoisted manually to the areas that the materials were needed. this was even common in multi-story buildings.
One of the strengths of the Chinese society is how it embraces the manual labor before resorting to equipment. It helps keep more people employed.
That's not to say that they don't use any heavy equipment in construction, it's just much more conservative than what we use here in The States.
-Rick
------------------
[i]"...Never start a fight...but [b]always[/b] finish it."[/i]
edit: remember, The christian church (Im not saying christianity) is the church on the planet with most blood on its hands. The muslim church is actually the most peaceful of the large religions other then buddhism.
.
.
.
.
errrm, yea, whatever.
The chiristan churches only blood to my knowladge, besides the wars from the biblical historys, is from the crusades. correct? (Yes, the witch hunts, can't forget those... [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img] )
now that I'm calmer, going to re-state what I had before. [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img]
The crusades were all over the Holy Land, The Christans/Catholics had it, then the MUSLIMS came and butchered everyone there and took it back for themselfs. (They thought it was there, we thought it was ours, *sigh* )
anyhoo, thus a crusade to take it back, we killed them, they killed us, we won, took it back. a few years later the Muslims took it over again, so another crusade. and so fourth. Eventually the Crusades were not even run by Christans/Catholics, but rather called for to earn $$$ for the governments. Fewer and fewer people decided to fight in the crusades, and eventually they stopped.
oh well, tis History now.
IMO, forget about the past of what the so called "Religions" have done. Never base your opinions of an individual by what faith they are.
------------------
[b]whitestar90: [/b]"it would give the computer a heartattack just looking at it" -
[b]Sanfam: [/b]"And Drazi didn't like it one bit.-
[b]Mr.Bungle: [/b][i]"So that's where the forum went..."[/i]-
---
[b][i]ahhh, the good old days of HTML.[/i][/b]
While I respect everyone's opinion, and the statements provided that would tend to disagree with mine...
I respectfully say to you that I believe you harbor a naive belief that we can control the flow of nuclear materials with a superman grip.
It reminds me of Gun Control. It controls the guns that legal registered owners have. To me the same is true of Nuclear material. We can police countries that are in agreement with us quite well. What of countries that regard us as enemy, or at the very least in disregard?
It is quite easy to smuggle just about anything into the US if one is determined, clever, and keeps their mouth shut about it well enough.
As to Russia and other countries turning on the US in a moment of opportunity. The comments made are predicated on the assumption that this madness doesn't spread like a virus from one country to another.
There are many here who still remember World War II, and thought before war broke out that Hitler would be just a fad...
What makes you think you can count on the civility of anyone, rich or poor, leader or follower? Especially after the madness of war putrifies into something more sinister...
------------------
"Playing computer and video games doesnt create murderers and terrorists....cancelling computer and video games creates them." -Me-
Join the fight for freedom at [url="http://www.newrepublic.de"]http://www.newrepublic.de[/url] and [url="http://www.isd-imperium.co.uk"]http://www.isd-imperium.co.uk[/url]
[quote]Originally posted by JackN:
[b]It is quite easy to smuggle just about anything into the US if one is determined, clever, and keeps their mouth shut about it well enough.
[/b][/quote]
And therein lies the issue. Sneaking two dozen people into the country that have a wish to die as extremist martyrs is one thing; involving black market arms from Russia or the Ukraine is quite another. We still have traditional networks in place to cover those means.
And, dispite what they say publicly, you better believe the CIA counts those warheads. I'm equally sure that there have been "quiet recovery operations," that have already happened, and we may never know about them.
In some respects, what happened to the US last month happened because we eased our guard. We learned, in a horrible way, just how important it is to heed Jefferson's words:
[i]"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance"[/i]
Case in point-- take a look at Y2K (a Christian party if there ever was one)...doesn't anyone find it odd that the terrorists seemed to take that day off? (last week, The West Wing pointed this one out as well).
Let's go a bit further than this. Can anyone here name one terrorist activity that actually suceeded in achieving it's goals?
- Ireland is still a part of the UK.
- Israel is still a soverign nation.
- All of the US hostages were freed from Iran.
- New York is still open for business.
- The Pentagon is still C&C for the US.
So what does this tell us? Terrorists will only be remembered as footnotes in history, not as agents of legitimate change. Why? Because people, on the whole, refuse to be ruled by fear and intimitation.
-Rick
------------------
[i]"...Never start a fight...but [b]always[/b] finish it."[/i]
[quote]Originally posted by Messiah:
[b]What military targets (Other than symbolic) do you know of that lies within a capitol city?[/b][/quote]
Ignoring the fact that symbolic military targets are still targets...
Air bases/airports are valid targets - we can easily use Reagan (the airport) for military purposes. In CT alone, there are the following near big cities or the capital...Sikorsky Aircraft, UTC Research/Pratt & Whitney, General Dynamics/Electric Boat and the sub yard near the EB yards. There are bases of some sort near many large cities including capital cities, even just by the fact that the capital needs to be protected.
Using Moscow as an example, the largest concentration of their ABMs and SAMs is probably around that city, probably along with some command and control facilities.
[quote]Originally posted by Rick:
[b]That being the case, it would take, at the least, a decent sized van to move a conventional warhead around and have all the equipment necessary to detonate it.[/b][/quote]
Remember, we had nuclear shells for our 203mm (8 inch) artillery pieces, and those weren't our smallest nuclear weapons. The Davey Crockett was a that fired a nuclear projectile, but was withdrawn due to one flaw...decommissioned in 1972 because the explosion was too close to the soldier to avoid some effects. Technology has advanced quite a bit since the weapon was first designed, too. Basically, you'd dig a deep pit, fire the weapon and quickly jump into the pit, hoping you didn't want to have any children after that weapon launch. No, I'm not kidding.
[quote][b]If they were going to try it, they probably would have done so in the 1993 attempt to take WTC down.[/b][/quote]
You're assuming they have access to a nuclear weapon and the ability to deliver it, though...and if they were willing to use it to take down the World Trade Center. Two passenger planes did the job well enough. I'd bet bin Laden would be willing to use a nuke against us, though. The problem with that is I have no doubt George Bush would order a nuclear response. That would not be good.
[quote][b]You sure as hell won?t get one on a commercial airliner.[/b][/quote]
Do you think Christians could get away with it today? No sir. Why? It would stop before it begins. "Let's go conquer our holy land!" Everyone else would shut him up and tell him to learn his religion before he tries to conquer nations for it.
Now let's flash back about 1000 years. Does anyone remember from history what pre-reformation Christianity was like? Nobody had access to Bibles except priests and monks. All the knowledge about their religion the common folk got came from the priests and monks. Usually that was "Do what we say, or you'll go to hell!" Pretty efficient way to stay in power. If anyone said a word, they were in league with the devil and association with such a person meant you shared their fate.
With things like this, how can we condemn Christianity for the crusades? Since when does the Bible say that Christians should conquer others for the sheer fun of it? I personally (as a Chrisitan) see no problem with fighting OBL, yet many others (quoting "turn the other cheek") wouldn't. (They support policemen who arrest criminals who try to rob them, yet disapprove of us doing the same as a nation-there's more in the Bible than that phrase, and I encourage them to look harder.) Christians today could find no legitimate way to fight the crusades; Christians back then beleived what they were told and the people on top told them God wanted them to kill Muslims. It's the same thing as OBL telling Muslims God wants them to kill Christians. Saying Christianity has the blood of the crusades on its hands is like saying Islam has the blood of the twin towers and the Pentagon on its hands.
Yeah, I guess we just have to see how the Anthrax bit down in Florida plays out. Rare strain not naturally occuring and two cases and a building contaminated with the shit.
You're really reasuring me.
"As for the “Backpack Nuke,”there has been no credible verification of the existence of a Russian version of this device—all that’s been heard of this is urban legend and media hype. "
Are you compltely discounting the Russian intelligence people who tesitifed at the capital saying they can't find all the damn suitcase nukes and whatever else they call the small nukes?
Nukes aren't huge things and haven't been in 40 years.
I know you juys arent going to drag this into a religious debate, but just watch yourselves...
I believe that our next target is Iraq. The money trail seems to lead to Sadamm, our second favorite asshole... We dont have 4 aircraft carriers there for nothing...
[quote]I really only see two ways that this can be resolved:
1. Jerusalem becomes a piece of volcanic glass, and no one gets it (which probably isn’t too far off, if the fighting continues).
2. Jerusalem becomes a new center for the United Nations; where no country lays claim to it, and it is protected by multilateral forces representative of all of the member nations.
Of course, the Israelis and the Palestinians could have a sudden change of heart, but, to Quote Mr. Scott “If my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a wagon.”
[/quote]
Sadly this is true. Israel and Palistine dont really ever want peace. As my dad says, "Arafat never misses a chance to miss a chance." I do not meen by this that Palistine is at fault. They both are.
[quote]As for bin Laden’s rant on TV: What a surprise (sic). Of course he’s going to hide his personal aspirations for power and glory behind the political struggles in Iraq and Israel. If anyone thinks he’d drop back to his tent and live a pious life of nonviolence were the US to withdraw all of her forces worldwide, and cease all means of support to her allies, well, there’s a bridge in the North Bay I have for sale that you might me interested in…[/quote]
Also true. Bin Lauden doesnt give a rats ass if we met every demand he wanted, he would still kill innocents in the name of Allah. Its sad how he twist the religion. He doesnt even deserve the name "religious fascit" because he has no religion.
[quote]* My definition of hero, btw, *IS* H. Norman Shwartzkopf...[/quote]
From what I have heard, he is a true American hero. Do you have any recommended books that tell his story? I am now going to bed. Goodnight all.
------------------
[i]"Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future, or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain."[/i] G'Kar, Season 3
Please check out the Babylon 5 mod for Battlecruiser Millenium at [url="http://mods.firstones.com/B5BCM"]http://mods.firstones.com/B5BCM[/url]
You guys are using reference to Nuclear Missiles and bomb components soley in your arguements.
I'm talking grass roots nail and hammer trigger on a pound of enriched Uranium, or a block of Plutonium. You don't need fancy electronics, and you really don't need fancy explosives.
Simply the fuel, and simply the fanatic who doesn't care that he'll get radiation poisoning from the damn thing for the couple of weeks he carries it. He's in it for the long haul and will probably detonate it himself long before the cancerous sickness sets into his body.
You guys keep talking about traditional points of entry into our country, there are many low tech avenues which clever, determined, quiet people could use to get into this country. We just don't have the manpower to watch everything...
Really we don't... We can hope for the Satellites and other monitoring technology to be triggered, but in the end, there are always ways to get a job done.
Look how long it took these guys to plan this shit with the WTC... Who knows if there isn't some other terrorist cell out there that has smuggled in material, and is just sitting on it, sand bagging for the right moment when people have calmed down a little.
I guess I come acrossed as paranoid with all this, but people have to wake up and not take for granted that we are ever safe...
We didn't win the cold war, it ended because the Soviet Union couldn't afford it anymore. Russia itself still controls a large portion of the Soviet Unions nuclear force. They are still a threat to be reconed with if not more so at this point.
Their nuclear scientists still need to eat, their sources for nuclear materials are not policed as well as they once were...
I just get frustrated by the pretty picture that gets painted, when there are many new and far more dangerous threats to recon with in our world.
[quote]Originally posted by JackN:
[b]I'm talking grass roots nail and hammer trigger on a pound of enriched Uranium, or a block of Plutonium.[/b][/quote]
If, by that, you mean something to the effect of dropping weapons-grade (enriched) uranium in a reservoir or grain silo, I wonder how much damage that would actually do. It wouldn't do anywhere near the damage of a nuclear weapon, though.
[quote][b]We didn't win the cold war, it ended because the Soviet Union couldn't afford it anymore. Russia itself still controls a large portion of the Soviet Unions nuclear force. They are still a threat to be reconed with if not more so at this point.[/b][/quote]
Same end result - we "won" the Cold War by spending them into submission. Also, I was of the impression that the SALT and START agreements reduced/would have reduced the Soviet and American stockpiles by quite a bit, but I don't think they're more of a threat to us now, especially with how close the Cuban Missile Crisis took us to the edge of that cliff.
Biggles<font color=#AAFFAA>The Man Without a Face</font>
I think I have to side with Jack on this one. The threat of a terrorist nuke is far greater than most people want to believe. They can't be blamed for this, the idea of a terrorist nuking a city makes me feel very sick. I don't think I want to live in a world where that can happen, but unfortunately we don't have much choice at the moment. [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/frown.gif[/img]
------------------
[b][url="http://www.minbari.co.uk/log12.2263/"]Required reading[/url][/b]
Never eat anything bigger than your own head.
The Balance provides. The Balance protects.
"Nonono...Is not [i]Great[/i] Machine. Is...[i]Not[/i]-so-Great Machine. It make good snow cone though." - Zathras
[quote][b] Originally posted by JohnD
[QUOTE]Originally posted by JackN:
[b]I'm talking grass roots nail and hammer trigger on a pound of enriched Uranium, or a block of Plutonium.[/b][/quote]
If, by that, you mean something to the effect of dropping weapons-grade (enriched) uranium in a reservoir or grain silo, I wonder how much damage that would actually do. It wouldn't do anywhere near the damage of a nuclear weapon, though. [/b][/quote]
No, he means pounding two pieces of uranium together and "lighting up" the city, eh? Cause pounding uranium together makes a nuclear explosion. And it's "rec-->K<--oned". Unless you (JackN) meant reconnoitered. How I know? My 11th grade English teacher is a jerk in ways I can't even begin to describe*.
*I'm aware this doesn't explain much...
------------------
"Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a life time. But teach a man to BE a fish, and he can eat himself."
--Dennis Miller, Dennis Miller Live
Comments
[b]OF COURSE! We are certainly bombing civvies. With FOOD![/b][/quote]
Lol. [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img] Too true.
[quote]Here is the difference between what we do, and what they do.
They attack civilians and target them. They try to kill innocent people.
We do our damndest to avoid killing civilians and don't target them. Hell, we've been feeding their people for years.
Some may die, but that's war. Always been that way, always will.[/quote]
That is true. That is the main difference. We will try to avoid civilian casualties (although to completely avoid is impossible, it is the essence of war, killing)while they will try their damndest to kill civilians. That is also why this attack is so different from the attack on Pearl Harbor.
------------------
[i]"Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future, or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain."[/i] G'Kar, Season 3
Please check out the Babylon 5 mod for Battlecruiser Millenium at [url="http://mods.firstones.com/B5BCM"]http://mods.firstones.com/B5BCM[/url]
[b]Serious Christians don't go around killing and maiming the innocent;
---
They do if they believe they're doing God's work. Many religions has a funny way of making people of other religion not people at all. Like a certain newspaper article by God said, the Muslims massacred the Hindus, the Hindus massacred the Muslims, and the Christians killed just about everyone they can get their hands on since the Crusades.
[/b][/quote]
EDIT, had a huge rant on this one to vent off after seeing your post, deleated all of it. My suggestion, rid that post mate.
------------------
[b]whitestar90: [/b]"it would give the computer a heartattack just looking at it" -
[b]Sanfam: [/b]"And Drazi didn't like it one bit.-
[b]Mr.Bungle: [/b][i]"So that's where the forum went..."[/i]-
---
[b][i]ahhh, the good old days of HTML.[/i][/b]
[This message has been edited by A2597 (edited 10-07-2001).]
[url="http://www.theonion.com/onion3734/god_clarifies_dont_kill.html"]http://www.theonion.com/onion3734/god_clarifies_dont_kill.html[/url]
Christian history has been rather blood-stained, like most other religions. Sure, technically the Crusades and stuff were carried out by greedy and oppertunistic individuals who weren't really try to follow God's teachings, but they were still Christians. Technically.
------------------
"God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
I know this has been said over and over, but there are still people that don't get it. I feel that it is important enough that it should be repeated until it is understood.
Nick
------------------
Emperor Turhan: How will this end?
Kosh: In fire
[b]I hear you.
All I can add is that war always sucks.
Wouldn't it be great if we could find a way to neutralize troublemakers, and deal with disagreements without resorting to war?
Maybe that'll happen one day. I know a lot of people are working for that. But for now, we live in the world we live in. [/b][/quote]
Maybe it will happen one day. But the sad truth is that can only happen when everyone wants it to happen. If one side wants it and another doesn't, guess who will go to war and wipe out the other side.
Messiah: It may be a waste of old buildings, but what about the Taliban's waste of old buildings? Remember those huge Bhudda statues that were carved into the side of a cliff in Afghanistan? I hope you do, because that's all we can do with them now. The Taliban destroyed them.
------------------
[b][url="http://www.minbari.co.uk/log12.2263/"]Required reading[/url][/b]
Never eat anything bigger than your own head.
The Balance provides. The Balance protects.
"Nonono...Is not [i]Great[/i] Machine. Is...[i]Not[/i]-so-Great Machine. It make good snow cone though." - Zathras
[b]Probably missing it in the first strike due to Patriot or some other anti missile tech,[/b][/quote]
It's not likely to be a nuclear missile - more likely a missing Russian backback nuke...something more portable. Plus, Patriots don't do as good of a job against missiles as many people think. The SCUD is a relatively short-range theater missile and doesn't have the same flight path as an ICBM, which would be a _LOT_ more difficult to hit, as our many failures with the NMD tests show. The Patriots also didn't do as well as the government claimed against the SCUDs.
[b] [quote]Russia might be inclined to put her arsenal to use with her own coalition, not really caring about the cost or impact globally. [/b][/quote]
With the way Russia's economy is running and relations as they are, I doubt Russia would start a WW3 under their current administration, or attack us for anything other than us attacking them or their direct allies.
[b] [quote]Many still think they can win a nuclear war over there.[/b][/quote]
Many think the same here, too. I doubt anyone in power over there thinks they can win a nuclear exchange, though. The Soviets did have plans during the peak of the Cold War to use theater nukes to break up troop concentrations as a quick way to avoid large NATO groupings, but that was a nutty and frightening time, too. Russia seems to be more interested in gaining through diplomacy and back-room deals, these days.
[b] [quote]It is REAL likely that there will be a Nuclear Terrorist attack within the next few years or decade.[/b][/quote]
Experts don't seem to agree with that. They've been saying that a nuclear attack isn't terribly likely in the short or long term. A biological attack isn't likely in the short term, while they are expecting chemical weapon attacks of some sort, sooner or later. The current fear is a terrorist attack in response to the US and UK hitting Taliban and Al Qaeda resources in Afghanistan and other targets that would help the Northern Alliance make some headway in taking back the country and ousting the Taliban.
[b] [quote]Once again New York as the prime target.[/b][/quote]
Another target may be more likely...perhaps even Hollywood, which probably wouldn't be as likely as an economic center outside New York. Perhaps Chicago or a population center in CA? Bin Laden has been making a lot of references to hitting American citizens, too.
[b] [quote]This "war on terrorism" we have engaged, although a necessary response to terrorism, will pan out as the key to a much larger scale incident in the end.[/b][/quote]
Possible, but I don't see any critical large scale incidents happening terribly quickly, any more so than our war with Iraq.
[b] [quote]Make no mistake, these are perilous times, and we aren't going to gain any quick resolutions to a war that will likely take decades to stop.[/b][/quote]
I'd expect it to take, if we (the world) have the backbone to run the course, perhaps even as long as the Cold War...which ran for what, 40 years and change? If we're going to "win," perhaps it will be in a similar way.
[b] [quote]The people over there see us as a threat to their way of life, and elements of their religion. That doesn't go away very easily if ever.[/b][/quote]
"The people," meaning what? Every single man, woman and child? The relatively few radicals? Islam is a religion of peace and equality. The terrorists are using Islam as a way to rationalize their murders, just like we saw the same with Christianity and the Crusades or Inquisition. None of those were Christian or Islamic acts.
Clumping every Arab and practitioner of Islam into a group that, as one whole group, see us as a threat to their way of life and religion, is inherently an inaccurate generalization.
[b] [quote]And... America must diminish, if not all out disappear, for Europe to come to full power, and the Asian empire to flourish.[/b][/quote]
I disagree there too, depending on what you mean by "full power" and "Asian empire." There isn't any Asian empire, unless you mean China, which has been trying to gain a blue water navy and longer-reach for the rest of its armed forces. I strongly disagree that we need to fall for Europe (if you can talk about one whole Europe) to reach "full power," however that is defined. Many European nations have been lax in maintaining their armed forces and are having economic problems, but I don't see Europe rising at the cost of the US any time soon.
Things are just too linked, economically, for any American hard times to cause anything but hard times for the rest of the world, and the same goes for the rest of the world affecting our economy.
[b]They do if they believe they're doing God's work.[/b][/quote]
They're not Christians, then. They'd just be using the religion as a rationalization for what Christianity would probably decree as an evil and/or sinful act.
[b]US ALWAYS attack the capitol of the country they are bombing. Let me just ask this: how many capitols have big military targets hidden within?[/b][/quote]
You mean...like the Pentagon? That's one big military target.
Plenty of capital cities have significant military targets. I'm willing to guess that, since they are capital cities, most probably do.
and one must also remember that the guy pulling the strings is a meglo dickhead...
number 11 of 13 kids, a self absorbed hypochondriac who is also absolutely chock full of himself to boot.
Osama wants attention... any attention. A spoilt brat will throw a tantrum to get noticed... negative attention is of value to a desperate child. Some kids set fire to thier rooms to get some acknowledgement from thier parents. I'm sure he still enjoys getting spanked.
Unfortunately for us, this adolescent throwback has lots of money and a bunch of malleable extremists to manipulate. So setting fire to his room translates to toasting 5000 people...
Which leaves the spanking part...
I guess he's going to need a team of proctologists to get his head back past his sphincter or he will be in trouble when the coalition forces lube up the tomohawk missile aimed for the same cavity.
Always, beneath culture, beneath country, beneath any alliance or percieved grouping...
the character of the individual will out...
[b]
Messiah: It may be a waste of old buildings, but what about the Taliban's waste of old buildings? Remember those huge Bhudda statues that were carved into the side of a cliff in Afghanistan? I hope you do, because that's all we can do with them now. The Taliban destroyed them.
[/b][/quote]
Ya, I remember. I was so Angry. Destroying history is the worst thing one can do imo, because history consists of so many lives, and so many failures.
[quote]Originally posted by JohnD[b]
You mean...like the Pentagon? That's one big military target.
Plenty of capital cities have significant military targets. I'm willing to guess that, since they are capital cities, most probably do.[/b]
[/quote]
That is the only major military target I know of that lies in a capitol city. I've been around, and never seen anything resembling that.
Thats not saying that is the truth, Im just stating what i know. What military targets (Other than symbolic) do you know of that lies within a capitol city?
(Thanks for not flaming me, you guys are the best [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img])
edit: remember, The christian church (Im not saying christianity) is the church on the planet with most blood on its hands. The muslim church is actually the most peaceful of the large religions other then buddhism.
Biggles: A glimpse of hope: The Chinese government is rebuilding the buddhas on homesoil [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img]
------------------
[i][b][url="http://www.dd.chalmers.se/~gu00mama/"]http://www.dd.chalmers.se/~gu00mama/[/url]
Vir - Are you saying you don't trust me anymore? I made your favourite, Spoo.
Londo - I'll order in.[/b][/i]
[This message has been edited by Messiah (edited 10-08-2001).]
Major Military ONLY targets inside the Beltway:
The Pentagon
The Headquarters of the Marine Corps (Henderson Hall)
Fort Myer
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
Defense Communications agency
Cameron Station (now closed)
Army Material command
Defense mapping agency
Bolling air force base
Naval district Washington anacostia
Anacostia naval station
Fort Lesley J Mcniar
Naval Security Station
Walter Reed AMC
The Washington Navy Yard
The Marine Corps College/Barracks
The Naval Observatory with its "nuclear" clock
The Headquarters of the CIA
And most of all the Commander in chief lives in the city, what more do you want?
Relatively Close By:
Andrews air force base
Quatico
Fort Belvoir
The goddard space flight center
etc etc etc etc...
[b] I just have to say this, it makes me mad, and dont think i dont wholeheartedly support USA's attack on terrorism today...
But, and this is a big but...
US ALWAYS attack the capitol of the country they are bombing. Let me just ask this: how many capitols have big military targets hidden within?
Ok, I know what you are thinking: Perhaps it was terrorist targets. Its just that its always this way...
Im not trying to start a flamewar here. Just venting heat...
[/b][/quote]
Rumsfeld said we didn't bomb the capital. We bombed an airfield on its outskirts.
[b] Biggles: A glimpse of hope: The Chinese government is rebuilding the buddhas on homesoil [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img]
[/b][/quote]
Only problem with that is that it won't be quite the same as some people building them hundreds or maybe even thousands of years ago with primitive tools, carving them out entirely by hand. China will use modern machinery. Better than nothing, though.
------------------
[b][url="http://www.minbari.co.uk/log12.2263/"]Required reading[/url][/b]
Never eat anything bigger than your own head.
The Balance provides. The Balance protects.
"Nonono...Is not [i]Great[/i] Machine. Is...[i]Not[/i]-so-Great Machine. It make good snow cone though." - Zathras
And so it begins. On October 7, 2001 the first public campaign of the long twilight struggle began. As the great leaders of the nations around the world have stated, this will not be a swift exchange with a decisive victory, but rather a prolonged, sustained effort that will end not with a bang, but a whimper.
Some debate the wisdom of “taking it to them.” But when they are so willing to take the lives of 300 men, women and children on aircrafts to turn them into a “living cruise missile,” all you have to do is remember the faces of the children to know why this must be done.
Will there be additional attacks on our sovereignty and security? Most certainly. Not just to the US, but also those who stand by her. But should we let fear rule our response? No.
If the cause is just, it is our duty to rise to the call.
Fear and terror cannot be allowed to win, no matter the cost, for should they win, all humankind will suffer the consequences. I wouldn’t want to live under a Nazi flag, and I sure as hell wouldn’t pledge allegiance to megalomaniac extremist with delusions of being a Messiah.
What acts might come next to counter our call? Well, I do not subscribe to the notion that Russia would willingly support these people, especially given their history in Afghanistan and their own intolerance of religious fanaticism; while there may be pressures both financial and power-based to sell nuclear technology on the open market, selling it and delivering it to a “meaningful target” with absolute secrecy are two separate things. A nuke is a very hard thing to keep secret and to smuggle. And, contrary to popular belief, they aren’t that hard to detect.
As for the “Backpack Nuke,”there has been no credible verification of the existence of a Russian version of this device—all that’s been heard of this is urban legend and media hype. That being the case, it would take, at the least, a decent sized van to move a conventional warhead around and have all the equipment necessary to detonate it. If they were going to try it, they probably would have done so in the 1993 attempt to take WTC down.
You sure as hell won’t get one on a commercial airliner.
What about China? Well, you better believe that the tiny strip of border that they have with Afghanistan is laced with their own version of special forces. China, though they do not publicize it, has several regular occurrences of domestic terror that are the result of fanaticism, and they have no desire to magnify the number of eyes on that problem.
No, it is more likely that destruction that can be affected by a very small number of people with minimal support will be the acts we will see next. Things like what are seen in Palestine/Israel/West Bank/Gaza Strip. Bombs and Snipers? Possibly. Chemical? Maybe. Biological? Doubtful. Nuclear? Not bloody likely.
The Afghanistan part of this operation will be the easy part. I have confidence that the coalition will do their best to get in, do business, and return the country to a government of the people’s choosing.
And I hope they take Bin Laden alive. Killing him is too easy, and, most likely, what he wants. I’d rather see him in front of an international court and locked away in a 6 x 6 windowless cell for the rest of his life. I don’t want to make him a martyr. I’d rather have him face his greatest fear for the rest of his life: Being locked in a cell, isolated from all contact, with no one who gives a damn about what he says in earshot.
No, the hard part comes after Afghanistan. When the coalition have to go into other countries to weed out the bad plants from the turf. Will the coalition stand? Will the world remain united in it’s fight against chaos and terror? The answer to that questrion is the one that will determine the length and ultimate success of this campaign. If Iraq has backed bi Laden and his followers, will we go back and finish what was started in the Gulf War? (Though he is the consummate soldier, and would never say “I told you so,” Gen. H. Norman Shwartzkopf* did warn of the consequences of not taking it to Baghdad and finishing the job.)
As for Israel/Palestine, well, that’s a real bundle of tangled yarn. When you have so many people fighting for so long, the cause vanishes, and only the hate remains. From a top-down view, both sides seem to have forgotten the binding principles of their religions, and are, instead, twisting religious views around to suit their means. God teaches love, not hate. God teaches tolerance, not contempt. God favors life, not death. And now, the people who live there, rather than providing a world of peace and security, are condemning their unborn children to death so that they can claim that “their people” hold the city of Jerusalem. Neither side will give quarter. Both will settle for nothing less.
I really only see two ways that this can be resolved:
1. Jerusalem becomes a piece of volcanic glass, and no one gets it (which probably isn’t too far off, if the fighting continues).
2. Jerusalem becomes a new center for the United Nations; where no country lays claim to it, and it is protected by multilateral forces representative of all of the member nations.
Of course, the Israelis and the Palestinians could have a sudden change of heart, but, to Quote Mr. Scott “If my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a wagon.”
As for bin Laden’s rant on TV: What a surprise (sic). Of course he’s going to hide his personal aspirations for power and glory behind the political struggles in Iraq and Israel. If anyone thinks he’d drop back to his tent and live a pious life of nonviolence were the US to withdraw all of her forces worldwide, and cease all means of support to her allies, well, there’s a bridge in the North Bay I have for sale that you might me interested in…
-Rick
* My definition of hero, btw, *IS* H. Norman Shwartzkopf...
------------------
[i]"...Never start a fight...but [b]always[/b] finish it."[/i]
[This message has been edited by Rick (edited 10-08-2001).]
[b] Only problem with that is that it won't be quite the same as some people building them hundreds or maybe even thousands of years ago with primitive tools, carving them out entirely by hand. China will use modern machinery. Better than nothing, though.
[/b][/quote]
Actually, that's not true. Most of the labor will be manual in this effort. Despite what most people think, manual labor is still the major way things get done in China. While I was visiting my wife's family there, for example, I was quite surprised that there was almost no heavy equipment involved in making most of the buildings (moreso in Northern China). Slabs were poured manually, than carried/hoisted manually to the areas that the materials were needed. this was even common in multi-story buildings.
One of the strengths of the Chinese society is how it embraces the manual labor before resorting to equipment. It helps keep more people employed.
That's not to say that they don't use any heavy equipment in construction, it's just much more conservative than what we use here in The States.
-Rick
------------------
[i]"...Never start a fight...but [b]always[/b] finish it."[/i]
.
.
.
.
errrm, yea, whatever.
The chiristan churches only blood to my knowladge, besides the wars from the biblical historys, is from the crusades. correct? (Yes, the witch hunts, can't forget those... [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img] )
now that I'm calmer, going to re-state what I had before. [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/smile.gif[/img]
The crusades were all over the Holy Land, The Christans/Catholics had it, then the MUSLIMS came and butchered everyone there and took it back for themselfs. (They thought it was there, we thought it was ours, *sigh* )
anyhoo, thus a crusade to take it back, we killed them, they killed us, we won, took it back. a few years later the Muslims took it over again, so another crusade. and so fourth. Eventually the Crusades were not even run by Christans/Catholics, but rather called for to earn $$$ for the governments. Fewer and fewer people decided to fight in the crusades, and eventually they stopped.
oh well, tis History now.
IMO, forget about the past of what the so called "Religions" have done. Never base your opinions of an individual by what faith they are.
------------------
[b]whitestar90: [/b]"it would give the computer a heartattack just looking at it" -
[b]Sanfam: [/b]"And Drazi didn't like it one bit.-
[b]Mr.Bungle: [/b][i]"So that's where the forum went..."[/i]-
---
[b][i]ahhh, the good old days of HTML.[/i][/b]
I respectfully say to you that I believe you harbor a naive belief that we can control the flow of nuclear materials with a superman grip.
It reminds me of Gun Control. It controls the guns that legal registered owners have. To me the same is true of Nuclear material. We can police countries that are in agreement with us quite well. What of countries that regard us as enemy, or at the very least in disregard?
It is quite easy to smuggle just about anything into the US if one is determined, clever, and keeps their mouth shut about it well enough.
As to Russia and other countries turning on the US in a moment of opportunity. The comments made are predicated on the assumption that this madness doesn't spread like a virus from one country to another.
There are many here who still remember World War II, and thought before war broke out that Hitler would be just a fad...
What makes you think you can count on the civility of anyone, rich or poor, leader or follower? Especially after the madness of war putrifies into something more sinister...
Worf
------------------
"Playing computer and video games doesnt create murderers and terrorists....cancelling computer and video games creates them." -Me-
Join the fight for freedom at [url="http://www.newrepublic.de"]http://www.newrepublic.de[/url] and [url="http://www.isd-imperium.co.uk"]http://www.isd-imperium.co.uk[/url]
[b]It is quite easy to smuggle just about anything into the US if one is determined, clever, and keeps their mouth shut about it well enough.
[/b][/quote]
And therein lies the issue. Sneaking two dozen people into the country that have a wish to die as extremist martyrs is one thing; involving black market arms from Russia or the Ukraine is quite another. We still have traditional networks in place to cover those means.
And, dispite what they say publicly, you better believe the CIA counts those warheads. I'm equally sure that there have been "quiet recovery operations," that have already happened, and we may never know about them.
In some respects, what happened to the US last month happened because we eased our guard. We learned, in a horrible way, just how important it is to heed Jefferson's words:
[i]"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance"[/i]
Case in point-- take a look at Y2K (a Christian party if there ever was one)...doesn't anyone find it odd that the terrorists seemed to take that day off? (last week, The West Wing pointed this one out as well).
Let's go a bit further than this. Can anyone here name one terrorist activity that actually suceeded in achieving it's goals?
- Ireland is still a part of the UK.
- Israel is still a soverign nation.
- All of the US hostages were freed from Iran.
- New York is still open for business.
- The Pentagon is still C&C for the US.
So what does this tell us? Terrorists will only be remembered as footnotes in history, not as agents of legitimate change. Why? Because people, on the whole, refuse to be ruled by fear and intimitation.
-Rick
------------------
[i]"...Never start a fight...but [b]always[/b] finish it."[/i]
[b]What military targets (Other than symbolic) do you know of that lies within a capitol city?[/b][/quote]
Ignoring the fact that symbolic military targets are still targets...
Air bases/airports are valid targets - we can easily use Reagan (the airport) for military purposes. In CT alone, there are the following near big cities or the capital...Sikorsky Aircraft, UTC Research/Pratt & Whitney, General Dynamics/Electric Boat and the sub yard near the EB yards. There are bases of some sort near many large cities including capital cities, even just by the fact that the capital needs to be protected.
Using Moscow as an example, the largest concentration of their ABMs and SAMs is probably around that city, probably along with some command and control facilities.
[b]That being the case, it would take, at the least, a decent sized van to move a conventional warhead around and have all the equipment necessary to detonate it.[/b][/quote]
Remember, we had nuclear shells for our 203mm (8 inch) artillery pieces, and those weren't our smallest nuclear weapons. The Davey Crockett was a that fired a nuclear projectile, but was withdrawn due to one flaw...decommissioned in 1972 because the explosion was too close to the soldier to avoid some effects. Technology has advanced quite a bit since the weapon was first designed, too. Basically, you'd dig a deep pit, fire the weapon and quickly jump into the pit, hoping you didn't want to have any children after that weapon launch. No, I'm not kidding.
[quote][b]If they were going to try it, they probably would have done so in the 1993 attempt to take WTC down.[/b][/quote]
You're assuming they have access to a nuclear weapon and the ability to deliver it, though...and if they were willing to use it to take down the World Trade Center. Two passenger planes did the job well enough. I'd bet bin Laden would be willing to use a nuke against us, though. The problem with that is I have no doubt George Bush would order a nuclear response. That would not be good.
[quote][b]You sure as hell won?t get one on a commercial airliner.[/b][/quote]
Not likely, no.
Do you think Christians could get away with it today? No sir. Why? It would stop before it begins. "Let's go conquer our holy land!" Everyone else would shut him up and tell him to learn his religion before he tries to conquer nations for it.
Now let's flash back about 1000 years. Does anyone remember from history what pre-reformation Christianity was like? Nobody had access to Bibles except priests and monks. All the knowledge about their religion the common folk got came from the priests and monks. Usually that was "Do what we say, or you'll go to hell!" Pretty efficient way to stay in power. If anyone said a word, they were in league with the devil and association with such a person meant you shared their fate.
With things like this, how can we condemn Christianity for the crusades? Since when does the Bible say that Christians should conquer others for the sheer fun of it? I personally (as a Chrisitan) see no problem with fighting OBL, yet many others (quoting "turn the other cheek") wouldn't. (They support policemen who arrest criminals who try to rob them, yet disapprove of us doing the same as a nation-there's more in the Bible than that phrase, and I encourage them to look harder.) Christians today could find no legitimate way to fight the crusades; Christians back then beleived what they were told and the people on top told them God wanted them to kill Muslims. It's the same thing as OBL telling Muslims God wants them to kill Christians. Saying Christianity has the blood of the crusades on its hands is like saying Islam has the blood of the twin towers and the Pentagon on its hands.
Yeah, I guess we just have to see how the Anthrax bit down in Florida plays out. Rare strain not naturally occuring and two cases and a building contaminated with the shit.
You're really reasuring me.
"As for the “Backpack Nuke,”there has been no credible verification of the existence of a Russian version of this device—all that’s been heard of this is urban legend and media hype. "
Are you compltely discounting the Russian intelligence people who tesitifed at the capital saying they can't find all the damn suitcase nukes and whatever else they call the small nukes?
Nukes aren't huge things and haven't been in 40 years.
I believe that our next target is Iraq. The money trail seems to lead to Sadamm, our second favorite asshole... We dont have 4 aircraft carriers there for nothing...
[quote]I really only see two ways that this can be resolved:
1. Jerusalem becomes a piece of volcanic glass, and no one gets it (which probably isn’t too far off, if the fighting continues).
2. Jerusalem becomes a new center for the United Nations; where no country lays claim to it, and it is protected by multilateral forces representative of all of the member nations.
Of course, the Israelis and the Palestinians could have a sudden change of heart, but, to Quote Mr. Scott “If my grandmother had wheels, she’d be a wagon.”
[/quote]
Sadly this is true. Israel and Palistine dont really ever want peace. As my dad says, "Arafat never misses a chance to miss a chance." I do not meen by this that Palistine is at fault. They both are.
[quote]As for bin Laden’s rant on TV: What a surprise (sic). Of course he’s going to hide his personal aspirations for power and glory behind the political struggles in Iraq and Israel. If anyone thinks he’d drop back to his tent and live a pious life of nonviolence were the US to withdraw all of her forces worldwide, and cease all means of support to her allies, well, there’s a bridge in the North Bay I have for sale that you might me interested in…[/quote]
Also true. Bin Lauden doesnt give a rats ass if we met every demand he wanted, he would still kill innocents in the name of Allah. Its sad how he twist the religion. He doesnt even deserve the name "religious fascit" because he has no religion.
[quote]* My definition of hero, btw, *IS* H. Norman Shwartzkopf...[/quote]
From what I have heard, he is a true American hero. Do you have any recommended books that tell his story? I am now going to bed. Goodnight all.
------------------
[i]"Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future, or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain."[/i] G'Kar, Season 3
Please check out the Babylon 5 mod for Battlecruiser Millenium at [url="http://mods.firstones.com/B5BCM"]http://mods.firstones.com/B5BCM[/url]
Still...
You guys are using reference to Nuclear Missiles and bomb components soley in your arguements.
I'm talking grass roots nail and hammer trigger on a pound of enriched Uranium, or a block of Plutonium. You don't need fancy electronics, and you really don't need fancy explosives.
Simply the fuel, and simply the fanatic who doesn't care that he'll get radiation poisoning from the damn thing for the couple of weeks he carries it. He's in it for the long haul and will probably detonate it himself long before the cancerous sickness sets into his body.
You guys keep talking about traditional points of entry into our country, there are many low tech avenues which clever, determined, quiet people could use to get into this country. We just don't have the manpower to watch everything...
Really we don't... We can hope for the Satellites and other monitoring technology to be triggered, but in the end, there are always ways to get a job done.
Look how long it took these guys to plan this shit with the WTC... Who knows if there isn't some other terrorist cell out there that has smuggled in material, and is just sitting on it, sand bagging for the right moment when people have calmed down a little.
I guess I come acrossed as paranoid with all this, but people have to wake up and not take for granted that we are ever safe...
We didn't win the cold war, it ended because the Soviet Union couldn't afford it anymore. Russia itself still controls a large portion of the Soviet Unions nuclear force. They are still a threat to be reconed with if not more so at this point.
Their nuclear scientists still need to eat, their sources for nuclear materials are not policed as well as they once were...
I just get frustrated by the pretty picture that gets painted, when there are many new and far more dangerous threats to recon with in our world.
Anyway... enough said...
[img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/wink.gif[/img]
[b]I'm talking grass roots nail and hammer trigger on a pound of enriched Uranium, or a block of Plutonium.[/b][/quote]
If, by that, you mean something to the effect of dropping weapons-grade (enriched) uranium in a reservoir or grain silo, I wonder how much damage that would actually do. It wouldn't do anywhere near the damage of a nuclear weapon, though.
[quote][b]We didn't win the cold war, it ended because the Soviet Union couldn't afford it anymore. Russia itself still controls a large portion of the Soviet Unions nuclear force. They are still a threat to be reconed with if not more so at this point.[/b][/quote]
Same end result - we "won" the Cold War by spending them into submission. Also, I was of the impression that the SALT and START agreements reduced/would have reduced the Soviet and American stockpiles by quite a bit, but I don't think they're more of a threat to us now, especially with how close the Cuban Missile Crisis took us to the edge of that cliff.
------------------
[b][url="http://www.minbari.co.uk/log12.2263/"]Required reading[/url][/b]
Never eat anything bigger than your own head.
The Balance provides. The Balance protects.
"Nonono...Is not [i]Great[/i] Machine. Is...[i]Not[/i]-so-Great Machine. It make good snow cone though." - Zathras
[QUOTE]Originally posted by JackN:
[b]I'm talking grass roots nail and hammer trigger on a pound of enriched Uranium, or a block of Plutonium.[/b][/quote]
If, by that, you mean something to the effect of dropping weapons-grade (enriched) uranium in a reservoir or grain silo, I wonder how much damage that would actually do. It wouldn't do anywhere near the damage of a nuclear weapon, though. [/b][/quote]
No, he means pounding two pieces of uranium together and "lighting up" the city, eh? Cause pounding uranium together makes a nuclear explosion. And it's "rec-->K<--oned". Unless you (JackN) meant reconnoitered. How I know? My 11th grade English teacher is a jerk in ways I can't even begin to describe*.
*I'm aware this doesn't explain much...
------------------
"Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish and he eats for a life time. But teach a man to BE a fish, and he can eat himself."
--Dennis Miller, Dennis Miller Live