Bachmann's latest. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


DarkSteven -> Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 9:12:48 AM)

http://news.yahoo.com/bachmann-china-blinded-u-satellites-lasers-213339849.html

China's blinded satellites with lasers?

The woman's a total nutjob.  China would blind a staellite only if it intended to launch military action.  They're crushing us economically - why would they attack us?  It would make China-owned US investments worth less.




tazzygirl -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 9:15:02 AM)

Um.. they want to crush the nation of which China holds the debt? [8|]




slvemike4u -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 9:57:38 AM)

Someone earlier(Lucy?) characterized her as the"gift that keeps on giving"....I can not improve on that sentiment[:)]




Moonhead -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 9:58:41 AM)

Maybe they just crushed Bachmann's head?
[image]http://krapps.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/CrushingYourHeadFun.jpg[/image]




mnottertail -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 9:59:08 AM)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2-GqYkwjTM




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 10:08:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

http://news.yahoo.com/bachmann-china-blinded-u-satellites-lasers-213339849.html

China's blinded satellites with lasers?

The woman's a total nutjob.  China would blind a staellite only if it intended to launch military action.  They're crushing us economically - why would they attack us?  It would make China-owned US investments worth less.



That they attempted to do this in 2006 is well documented so your protest that they would never do it has already been proven wrong. The only thing unclear is how succesful the test was at blinding the satellite. That the HIC should have information that isnt public knowledge is also obvious.

The only nutjob is one who claims that she is way out in left field on this.




FirmhandKY -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 11:17:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

http://news.yahoo.com/bachmann-china-blinded-u-satellites-lasers-213339849.html

China's blinded satellites with lasers?

The woman's a total nutjob.  China would blind a staellite only if it intended to launch military action.  They're crushing us economically - why would they attack us?  It would make China-owned US investments worth less.

I'm not following the link, but yes, there is some proof or suspicion that China has experimented with blinding US satellites with lasers.

Firm




joether -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 1:25:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
http://news.yahoo.com/bachmann-china-blinded-u-satellites-lasers-213339849.html

China's blinded satellites with lasers?

The woman's a total nutjob.  China would blind a staellite only if it intended to launch military action.  They're crushing us economically - why would they attack us?  It would make China-owned US investments worth less.


A bigger joke: She's on the 'House Intelligence Committee'. Don't you feel even more safe and secure knowing that Bachmann's superior brain is 'hard on the case' for the betterment of America?




Sanity -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 2:56:09 PM)


An even bigger joke - that she's on the House Intelligence Committee only means that shes in a far better position to know the facts than either you or Steven.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
http://news.yahoo.com/bachmann-china-blinded-u-satellites-lasers-213339849.html

China's blinded satellites with lasers?

The woman's a total nutjob.  China would blind a staellite only if it intended to launch military action.  They're crushing us economically - why would they attack us?  It would make China-owned US investments worth less.


A bigger joke: She's on the 'House Intelligence Committee'. Don't you feel even more safe and secure knowing that Bachmann's superior brain is 'hard on the case' for the betterment of America?




outhere69 -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 3:38:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
http://news.yahoo.com/bachmann-china-blinded-u-satellites-lasers-213339849.html
China's blinded satellites with lasers?
The woman's a total nutjob.  China would blind a staellite only if it intended to launch military action.  They're crushing us economically - why would they attack us?  It would make China-owned US investments worth less.

That they attempted to do this in 2006 is well documented so your protest that they would never do it has already been proven wrong. The only thing unclear is how succesful the test was at blinding the satellite. That the HIC should have information that isnt public knowledge is also obvious.

The only nutjob is one who claims that she is way out in left field on this.

Not as well documented as you think.  When you trace the sources back, you'll find that the claim is overblown (I started with the London Daily Telegraph, down to DefenseTech, and then the actual source document).  The original source ("Military Power of the People's Republic of China 2006", Office of the Secretary of the Defense) states:

"Evidence exists that China is improving its situational awareness in space,
which will give it the ability to track and identify most satellites. Such capability will allow for the deconfliction of Chinese satellites, and would also be required for offensive actions. At least one of the satellite attack systems appears to be a groundbased laser designed to damage or blind imaging satellites."

That's a long ways from stating that a blinding attempt happened and was documented in 2006.  If Bachmann has some factual open-source information that proves an attempt, fine and dandy.  If she leaked classified info, then she should be hung by the short and curlies.





erieangel -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 3:46:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

http://news.yahoo.com/bachmann-china-blinded-u-satellites-lasers-213339849.html

China's blinded satellites with lasers?

The woman's a total nutjob.  China would blind a staellite only if it intended to launch military action.  They're crushing us economically - why would they attack us?  It would make China-owned US investments worth less.




One telling statement in this article was that she did not offer evidence.  Bachmann seldom does.  She just makes outrageous, unverifiable claims designed to frighten the wingnuts.  For some reason, it works every time (on a small percentage of the population at least).




DarkSteven -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 3:51:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

An even bigger joke - that she's on the House Intelligence Committee only means that shes in a far better position to know the facts than either you or Steven.



If she leaked classified info, she'd be a security threat.  I prefer to think she was talking out her ass.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 3:54:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

An even bigger joke - that she's on the House Intelligence Committee only means that shes in a far better position to know the facts than either you or Steven.



If she leaked classified info, she'd be a security threat.  I prefer to think she was talking out her ass.



Again. The 2006 attack is not classified, but the result of it may be. She didnt disclose the results.




erieangel -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 3:56:27 PM)

What happened in 2006 wasn't an attack, it was a test.  As in they wanted to see if they could do it if they wanted or felt the need the to do it.  Geez




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 3:57:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

What happened in 2006 wasn't an attack, it was a test.  As in they wanted to see if they could do it if they wanted or felt the need the to do it.  Geez


ROFL. A test by attacking a satellite with the weapon. Nice try.




DarkSteven -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 3:59:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

An even bigger joke - that she's on the House Intelligence Committee only means that shes in a far better position to know the facts than either you or Steven.



If she leaked classified info, she'd be a security threat.  I prefer to think she was talking out her ass.



Again. The 2006 attack is not classified, but the result of it may be. She didnt disclose the results.


Sanity implied that she had access to info that joether and I didn't.  My response was that she could not divulge that info.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 4:01:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

An even bigger joke - that she's on the House Intelligence Committee only means that shes in a far better position to know the facts than either you or Steven.



If she leaked classified info, she'd be a security threat.  I prefer to think she was talking out her ass.



Again. The 2006 attack is not classified, but the result of it may be. She didnt disclose the results.


Sanity implied that she had access to info that joether and I didn't.  My response was that she could not divulge that info.



But she can refer to it, which she apparently has.




slvemike4u -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 4:13:30 PM)

Not the first time she has "referred" to shit that no one else has verifiable information of.Perhaps when god tells her to do things...it's really just the voices in her head [8|]




DomKen -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 5:16:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


An even bigger joke - that she's on the House Intelligence Committee only means that shes in a far better position to know the facts than either you or Steven.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
http://news.yahoo.com/bachmann-china-blinded-u-satellites-lasers-213339849.html

China's blinded satellites with lasers?

The woman's a total nutjob.  China would blind a staellite only if it intended to launch military action.  They're crushing us economically - why would they attack us?  It would make China-owned US investments worth less.


A bigger joke: She's on the 'House Intelligence Committee'. Don't you feel even more safe and secure knowing that Bachmann's superior brain is 'hard on the case' for the betterment of America?


If she is releasing classified material, the only way she could be telling the truth, then she has violated the National Security Act and should be prosecuted. Strange how cons keep breaking that law but their 'hard on crime' followers don't seem to mind.




DomKen -> RE: Bachmann's latest. (10/1/2011 5:17:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

What happened in 2006 wasn't an attack, it was a test.  As in they wanted to see if they could do it if they wanted or felt the need the to do it.  Geez


ROFL. A test by attacking a satellite with the weapon. Nice try.

Did they target a US satellite? No. Then it wasn't what Bachmann claimed.




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875