RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race.

RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

farglebargle -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 6:10:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NavyDDG54 Years? Iran can already hit Britain. N Korea has a missile capable of reaching Hawaii, and are close to and longer range missile....Your outlook seems to be rooted in wishful thinking. I don't see "England" on my list of States in the United States. So THAT is not an issue. North Korea? Well, they don't have any nukes to put on their missile, which MIGHT make it to the general vicinity of Hawaii, so that's not my problem either. How the hell did the US go from having the balls to stand toe to toe with the Rooskies with the threat of Total Global Destruction in 30 minutes or less, then become a bunch of whiny pussies NOT BRAVE ENOUGH TO BEAR THE COSTS OF FREEDOM AND LIBERTY? Namely, the risk of OTHER PEOPLE being Free and having Liberty.

starshineowned -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 6:14:28 AM)
quote: Putin hits at US for triggering arms race And we care why? Well Wishes starshine Happy slave of Master Delvin

NavyDDG54 -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 6:32:04 AM)
You are not looking at the big picture. Look at what they can do now. What will they be able to do in 6 months? a year? What do they have that we dont know about? What about N Korea's nuclear test last year? Ahmidinejab is the next Hitler. And just like with Hitler the world has a chance to stop him before he kills millions and millions and throws the world into another World War. quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: ORIGINAL: NavyDDG54 Years? Iran can already hit Britain. N Korea has a missile capable of reaching Hawaii, and are close to and longer range missile....Your outlook seems to be rooted in wishful thinking. I don't see "England" on my list of States in the United States. So THAT is not an issue. North Korea? Well, they don't have any nukes to put on their missile, which MIGHT make it to the general vicinity of Hawaii, so that's not my problem either. How the hell did the US go from having the balls to stand toe to toe with the Rooskies with the threat of Total Global Destruction in 30 minutes or less, then become a bunch of whiny pussies NOT BRAVE ENOUGH TO BEAR THE COSTS OF FREEDOM AND LIBERTY? Namely, the risk of OTHER PEOPLE being Free and having Liberty.

farglebargle -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 6:38:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NavyDDG54 You are not looking at the big picture. Look at what they can do now. What will they be able to do in 6 months? a year? What do they have that we dont know about? What about N Korea's nuclear test last year? Ahmidinejab is the next Hitler. And just like with Hitler the world has a chance to stop him before he kills millions and millions and throws the world into another World War. The "Big Picture" is limited to those powers enumerated in the Constitution of the united States. Since Congress hasn't declared War, there's nothing to do about it. And keep you "Next Hitler" hyperbole to a minimum. We're Jews. We know Hitler and his kind. Remember how Hitler got the Democratic German People to, in their fear, give up Due Process? How's that Right to a Writ of Habeas Corpus holding up against Bush? Oh, you don't HAVE a Right to a Writ of Habeas Corpus anymore? Maybe you need to look closer to home for the Domestic Enemies of the Constitution...

meatcleaver -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 8:41:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NavyDDG54 Years? Iran can already hit Britain. N Korea has a missile capable of reaching Hawaii, and are close to and longer range missile....Your outlook seems to be rooted in wishful thinking. No, your outlook is fed by paranoia. If Iran can hit Britain with a missile already then it is pointless the US trying to stop them making one. Let's get to the real reason why most countries want nukes and its not for aggressive reasons but to stop Iraq happening to them. It's to keep the US at arms length and if they have resources, that is more reason why they need nukes. Let's be honest about this, if Iraq really did have WMD, the US wouldn't have invaded, it would have found some other way to face Saddam down.

sleazy -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 9:36:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Aegis worked great too, up until it done shot down a CIVILIAN FUCKING AIRLINER. Aegis did not shoot down a damn thing! A person did. Yup, thats right, a person who acted on the information available made the desicion they thought best to bring american service personell home safe and well. (Something you claim is far more important than any number of middle eastern lives) Let us not forget it was a civilian airliner doing its best (intentionally or otherwise) to appear to be something else too. Transponder codes are internationally ratified for a reason, namely to stop civvy airliners being identified as potential agressors, and lest we forget, civilian airliners make pretty effective weapons too. Off route, off schedule, and sending misleading IFF codes, failing to respond to challenges and requests for clear identification. quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle I don't see "England" on my list of States in the United States. So THAT is not an issue. It sure as hell is an issue, it is an issue for me because I happen to live here, it is an issue for you because the US is signatory to an international mutual defence treaty (remember international treaties? you sure seem to hold them in high regard in other threads). Might help you to bear in mind that it is just as possible to launch such a missile from a nice little tramp frieghter, perhaps from mid-atlantic and hit the eastern seaboard, or even to move to the 12 mile limit and that leave the entire US at risk.

farglebargle -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 9:39:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sleazy quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle Aegis worked great too, up until it done shot down a CIVILIAN FUCKING AIRLINER. Aegis did not shoot down a damn thing! A person did. Yup, thats right, a person who acted on the information available made the desicion they thought best to bring american service personell home safe and well. (Something you claim is far more important than any number of middle eastern lives) I reject and denounce that SLANDEROUS allegation. RIGHT NOW PROVIDE QUOTES FROM ME supporting the preposterous idea that I value AMERICAN LIVES more than any other lives by virtue of where they live. NOW. I'm done with you otherwise. How can someone have a reasonable discussion with someone who just makes shit up? Oh, and if YOU Want a Missile Defence System, BUILD IT AND FUCKING PAY FOR IT YOURSELF.

sleazy -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 9:44:30 AM)
I have asked you on other threads where you demand to bring the troops home now regardless of the cost in lives of other nationalities if that means you value US lives more than others. You have refused to answer that at all therefore I have drawn my own conclusions. Deal with it

farglebargle -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 9:56:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sleazy I have asked you on other threads where you demand to bring the troops home now regardless of the cost in lives of other nationalities if that means you value US lives more than others. You have refused to answer that at all therefore I have drawn my own conclusions. Deal with it Really? Have I refused to answer? I don't believe that's the case, as I usually don't ignore direct questions. Do you have links to those questions? I'd like to review the bidding. Well, it's nice that you label your incorrect conclusions as my beliefs, THEN promote your incorrect conclusions AS my beliefs. If that's the intellectual rigor applied to these matters, than I figure we're done.

luckydog1 -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 10:00:08 AM)
Farg, he is asking you now...why don't you answer? I have to say I agree with Sleazy's conclusion.

farglebargle -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 10:08:52 AM)
I'm a fucking jewish buddhist deadhead, what the hell do you THINK the answer is? "All life has the same intrinsic value." So, WHY do I feel that we need to bring our troops home, now, safely, alive, even though it will likely result in deaths among Iraqis? Because until and unless the Iraqis get it together, Iraqis will die, and the presence of US Troops doesn't do ANYTHING to slow down or stop the process. In fact, a great argument can be made that the presence of US Troops incites and inflames the violence. It's not "The White Man's Burden" to bring the ideas of Freedom, Liberty, and Democracy to the "Savages"... And it's not permitted in the Constitution, the source of ALL legitimate Federal Authority. I said it before, and I'll say it now. Leave all the small arms in the hands of the Neighborhood Militias, and wish them luck in securing their own Freedom and Liberty. If people WANT TO be free, they'll EARN it themselves.

sleazy -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 10:16:19 AM)
http://www.collarchat.com/m_767929/mpage_12/key_fargle/tm.htm#813464 There you go Fargle

farglebargle -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 10:21:25 AM)
What, you missed the VERY NEXT MESSAGE to your last post on that page, and I quote: quote: No. They are exactly equivalent. That doesn't mean it's OUR RESPONSIBILITY to take care of them. We only have responsibility for the safety and security of OURSELVES, OUR FAMILIES, and OUR NEIGHBORS. And Lincoln was quite clear, at Gettysburg, that the ONLY reason the Republic is justified in mobilization is to preserve the existence of the Republic. And there, George W. Bush fails the Lincoln Test. The social structure where the government's primary responsibility if to protect everyone, rather than promoting personal liberty and responsibility is called Socialism, isn't it? So the question you accuse me of ducking WAS IN FACT ANSWERED IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING.

luckydog1 -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 10:32:25 AM)
so the answer is no, the Iraqis are worth less, because they are not our neighbors, "We only have responsibility for the safety and security of OURSELVES, OUR FAMILIES, and OUR NEIGHBORS. " So you certainly do not value all life the same. You are pretty confused as to what socialism means also. Never met an actuall Bhuddist deadhead who put the US government above the teachings.

farglebargle -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 10:37:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 so the answer is no So I SAY, "YES", but you respond with "So the answer is no". Interesting way of interperting a response. Nice spin. Exactly where is the US Government in my beliefs? Subordinate to the State. Which is Subordinate to The Individual. So, you've got some strange ideas of what "Above" means.

sleazy -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 10:37:48 AM)
Query, did the blacks in south africa earn freedom themselves or were they assisted? How about the jews in europe in the middle of the last century? Pretty sure they had some help being freed and given an autonomous homeland. How about the US, did they earn it themselves contrary to the law of the land, or were they aided by other foriegn powers? I ask if you are religous, and if you are or not to consider the parable of the good samaritan, walking by and ignoring something is not what I would call a humanitarian act, I would call it the height of selfishness, I got freedom but under no circumstances will I help you achieve it. That I am afraid is

farglebargle -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 10:48:16 AM)
This doesn't look like an apology for attempting to misrepresent my statements extant on the record. I'm not sure we can just pretend you didn't say what you did. quote: ORIGINAL: sleazy Query, did the blacks in south africa earn freedom themselves or were they assisted? Biko, Oh Biko, Biko.... quote: How about the jews in europe in the middle of the last century? Pretty sure they had some help being freed and given an autonomous homeland. How does that case study in the futility of "The White Mans Burden" support your case? Is everything quiet on the Temple Mount? I didn't think so.

meatcleaver -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 12:25:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sleazy Query, did the blacks in south africa earn freedom themselves or were they assisted? There was a lot of tokenism but not much real help. I find it pretty sick how many western governments jumped on the bandwagon when the Nationalists decided to negotiate with the ANC. quote: ORIGINAL: sleazy How about the jews in europe in the middle of the last century? Pretty sure they had some help being freed and given an autonomous homeland. I'm pretty sure they had no help. WWII wasn't fought over how Jews were treated, in fact they had very little help and the Nazi had a lot of assistance in rounding them up. The fact they were liberated from the death camps was incidental to the allies winning the war. The Brits didn't want Jewish emigration to Palestine because what they feared would happen has happened but after WWII Britain didn't have the will to sort out the animosity between the Jews and Arabs and neither did France. quote: ORIGINAL: sleazy How about the US, did they earn it themselves contrary to the law of the land, or were they aided by other foriegn powers? The French did a pretty good job at Chesapeake Bay, the only defeat the Royal Navy ever suffered in traditional sea warfare (before airplanes).

caitlyn -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 1:40:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver The French did a pretty good job at Chesapeake Bay, the only defeat the Royal Navy ever suffered in traditional sea warfare (before airplanes). Only if you exclude: 19 August 1812: USS Constitution vs HMS Guerriere 18 October 1812: USS Wasp vs HMS Frolic 25 October 1812: USS United States vs HMS Macedonian 29 December 1812: USS Constitution vs HMS Java 24 February 1813: USS Hornet vs HMS Peacock 3 September 1813: USS Enterprise vs HMS Boxer 29 April 1814: USS Peacock vs HMS Epervier 28 June 1814: USS Wasp vs HMS Reindeer 1 September 1814: USS Wasp vs HMS Avon Even if you wanted to say that these were individual battles of a larger naval war, you would have to give a massive win to the United States Navy over the Royal Navy in the War of 1812. Only the HMS Shannon and HMS Pheobe were able to get any sort of wins at all against the Americans. The HMS Shannon's win against the USS Chesapeake was against a ship that only had ten working cannons on board.

meatcleaver -> RE: Putin accuses the US of starting a new arms race. (2/13/2007 2:57:38 PM)
I should have said every major battle but the 1812 war was a disaster for the US although it claims it was a victory but some Americans still claim Vietnam wasn't a defeat but a retreat.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125