Talk of nuclear terrorists...Lord who will save us from Obama?

ink the world

ink the world

Well-Known Member
tip top toker said:
does that mean you're happy for everyone outside of america not to give two shits about planes being flown into buildings and such, much rather they take out a thousand of you than the 100 of us.

but no, i feel for both sides. i do not mould my morals and ethics to work for me, or in relation to the other side, but unfortunately, as i showed in my other thread, americans don't really care about morals values if the other guy doesn't play by them.
Click to expand...

Yep, I couldnt care less what the French (surrender monkeys) or anyone else thinks of me or my country.

Just out of curiosity what country do you hail from?
I certainly hope it isnt France, Italy, Belgium, Panama or any of the other countries that me, my father and grandfather FOUGHT to liberate.

If so it must be nice to enjoy the freedom that Americans provided you by sacrificing our lives for. Get off your high horse man.
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
i am from the UK and i will not defend any country, yours or mine, if they do something stupid.

and you granted people in the past freedoms, not me and my generation. if i was born to speak german and live the german life, then i'd be born to live the german life, i wouldn't really know otherwise to gripe and wish for my freedom.

this isn't about who saved who when and wher and who should be grateful for who. this is about "terrorists with nuclear weapons", last time it was a regime with nuclear weapons. i think it's just plain stupid, especially as i have said, when the casualty ratio is as it is/could be.

and i have no respect for someone who doesn't care about another man woman or cihld simply because they are a different race...
 
tinyTURTLE

tinyTURTLE

Well-Known Member
you guys are WRONG.
the US and Russia have deals to
deliver the nuclear material to
an alien species who need it to
power the vessel that carries their
culture and civilization to a new world (not ours).
It's nothing to get all bunched up about.
 
tip top toker

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
i'm white. wow. that change. EVERYTHING.

and you state you'd rather see 1,000,000 iraqi civilians die over 1000 american civilians.

i'm UKish, not english, (and i'm damned glad i have one saving grace in the welsh side in that the welsh never really had any respect from anyone to jsutify doing anything worthwhile :lol:) but i hate to hear about or watch a video about a bunch of innocent people, elsewhere, getting killed for some reason, just as much as i hate to hear about the london tube bombings. for me there is little difference between the two
 
ink the world

ink the world

Well-Known Member
tip top toker said:
i'm white. wow. that change. EVERYTHING.
Youre the one that inferred that i was a racist, it was my sarcastic way of saying Im not a racist.
and you state you'd rather see 1,000,000 iraqi civilians die over 1000 american civilians.
Yep, I would if thats what it came down to. I dont know Iranian people, I know American people. I care more about my family and friends than strangers in a strange land. I dont consider that to be abhorrent or implying I want Iranian civilians dead. You made that assumption.


but i hate to hear about or watch a video about a bunch of innocent people, elsewhere, getting killed for some reason, just as much as i hate to hear about the london tube bombings. for me there is little difference between the two
Click to expand...
Agreed, I hate to see civilians die too. The main difference being that if it came down to a choice between Americans dying and Iranians dying I'll choose the Iranians.
 
Murfy

Murfy

Well-Known Member
bush and obama are buddie s conspiring to confuse and manipulate you

this whole fiasco since 9/11 has been about establishing a base of operations and standing military presence with intel in the middle east for a war with iran

i would make sense considering a bunch of guys with NO real organized military can stay off the greatest in the world- we were playing stalemate on purpose
 
CrackerJax

CrackerJax

New Member
Anyone who doesn't think Al Queda would JUMP at the chance of obtaining a nuke...needs to stop snorting cosmic sunshine.
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
Those damned lying Democrats!!! :lol:


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" -- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
 
CrackerJax

CrackerJax

New Member
uhhhh .... ouch!

Thank goodness we have Obama working towards a nuclear free world... right? :lol: oh wait... :sad:

Dream on.... it's called padding the Nobel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top