that's an interesting tackle....headbutt to the nuts
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
I watched that charity match with Boris. It was the 1st time I'd heard of him. It was a beautiful tackle (especially against the Germans, who were taking the match very seriously ) Because no-one I know, knows anything about politics, that's the only thing we know him forEdited by Addy291 on 04-05-2008 13:12
So the israeli air force conducted a simulation of a strike in preparation to attacks on iranian facilities. The attack is expected to (for political reasons) in no way ever occur before the end of american elections, otherwise they might not have the inconditional support of american media, however it's expected to occur before the next american president actually takes to power.
Iranians have already, as usual, ranted that they will crush all invaders, yadda yadda, etc.
Israeli government have no qualms about admitting they will use nuclear weapons if a full war erupts.
Can't say this wasn't coming sooner or later. Mentalities like those of the Israeli and Pakistani peoples will lead to nuclear war sooner or later.
And the world we live in right now will be seen retroactively as a paradise...
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
relative peace for 60 years is pretty good. Also North Korea have finally realised that food is more important than nukes, so they should be peaceful. Also I expect the war to remain in the middle east so I doubt it will be as bad as the World Wars.
[url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182]Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
mb2612 wrote:
Sorry but I don't see why a nuclear war should never happen
Let's set aside the devastation and the horrors of nuclear war that will kill people of deformities and make all land uninhabitable for centuries to come, because apparently that doesn't scare you enough.
Everyone has allies. when it starts between two countries, each will pull it's allies in. Those allies will pull it's allies. and so on.
every country will be in it. it will be full scale planetary nuclear war. and I guarantee it'll be the last world war humanity will ever wage. and not in a good way.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
You misunderstand, I have no doubt that, in general, a nuclear war would be a bad thing. And yes I don't really want the earth to be a wasteland. However there could be times where a nuclear war can be justified.
Also you say every country will be in it, however, once major countries start chucking nukes around many minor countries without nukes will suddenly become very neutral. Also as only 10 or so countries have a great deal of nuclear weapons they will be very careful not to attack one another.
i.e. I can see the US or Israel nuking Iran but I cant see China, France or Russia taking enough offense to nuke the US back
[url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182]Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
mb2612 wrote:
there could be times where a nuclear war can be justified.
are you american?
mb2612 wrote:
Also you say every country will be in it, however, once major countries start chucking nukes around many minor countries without nukes will suddenly become very neutral. Also as only 10 or so countries have a great deal of nuclear weapons they will be very careful not to attack one another.
I meant all with nuclear arsenals. I apologise if it wasn't as obvious as I thought it was.
mb2612 wrote:
i.e. I can see the US or Israel nuking Iran but I cant see China, France or Russia taking enough offense to nuke the US back
it won't start with any of those countries. After the end of the cold war, a gigantic number of soviet nuclear specialists and material suddenly were free and available on the black market. These days even a corporation can have their own nuclear program, provided they have enough money. And all it takes is one single maniac pushing a button.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
No I am not American, and I am highly offended by that comment.
I agree with you that the most likely form of nuclear attack in is a terrorist attack. However this is surely contradictory to your point that this would cause a nuclear war as I doubt countries would start fighting one another with nukes over a terrorist attack.
[url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182]Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
mb2612 wrote:
No I am not American, and I am highly offended by that comment.
you're offended by a question of whether or not you're american?
mb2612 wrote:
I agree with you that the most likely form of nuclear attack in is a terrorist attack.
I never said any of that
The fact that you are offended by someone asking if you're american plus the fact you believe black market and one madman immediately can only be in referrence to a terrorist organisation, indicates you have a very stylized, stereotypical view of the world.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
I don't think that believing 1 man with a nuke = terrorist organisation is really a large step, the funding, planning and technical expertise required to steal a nuke, place it in a city in the developed world and then activate it is far greater than possible for someone acting alone, it is far more likeliy to require backers ect. this implies that it is an organisation. Given that this is a madman attacking civilian populations with the intent to kill and induce panic he is also clearly a terrorist, hence terrorist organisation.
Also its quite rich saying i have a stereotypical view of the world, when your imediate response to me saying there might be a rational basis for use nuclear weapons is asking whether or not i was american.
[url=www.pcmdaily.com/forum/viewthread.php?thread_id=33182]Team Santander Media Thread[/url]
mb2612 wrote:
Also its quite rich saying i have a stereotypical view of the world, when your imediate response to me saying there might be a rational basis for use nuclear weapons is asking whether or not i was american.
I'm afraid the man has a point.
I do disagree with all his agruements about nuclear weapons being ok in some situations, but that one is valid
mb2612 wrote:
I don't think that believing 1 man with a nuke = terrorist organisation is really a large step, the funding, planning and technical expertise required to steal a nuke, place it in a city in the developed world and then activate it is far greater than possible for someone acting alone, it is far more likeliy to require backers ect. this implies that it is an organisation. Given that this is a madman attacking civilian populations with the intent to kill and induce panic he is also clearly a terrorist, hence terrorist organisation.
1. you misunderstand. one madman does not necessarily have to be acting alone. all it takes is the one man who has the final say in whichever government
2. if that's your definition of terrorist, then the israeli military are terrorists. which is a sentence I agree with.
mb2612 wrote:
Also its quite rich saying i have a stereotypical view of the world, when your imediate response to me saying there might be a rational basis for use nuclear weapons is asking whether or not i was american.
have you seen the discussions on these subjects we've had around here? americans always have the same points of view. doesn't mean these points of view are wrong. I'm simply stating a fact which I've observed.
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
(especially against the Germans, who were taking the match very seriously
) Because no-one I know, knows anything about politics, that's the only thing we know him for
