Sept. 11 and the War on Terror: Bullshit or Patriotism?

the guardian · Post by **the guardian** » Wed Jul 17, 2002 4:43 am

im gona roll back to the 8th thread where hammer reply was... i know he was trying to be ironic, not offended in this part, and yes, i suppose i deserve that, i generalized(but america IS 60% fat, dont forget)

there's realy no need for bashing hammer, he made a point, and im hardly offended by anything

just as long as its humor

it is just jokes, right? its probably is, ive read your posts before, tohugh ive had some silly conversations with people thinking we(jews) have this giant agenda and that we control all the big businesses... i think the real classic is how we make matzot(nothing like good ol' fashion christian babies blood, MMM,MMM!)....

on the 9th thread, CB said "we are the hardest working nation in the world" again, i ask, and please dont ignore, at what area? middle class jobs, perhaps, but what about the lower class? who gives you food? you might exell at sitting in an office all day long, but in other places, people work diffrently, and at those jobs, americans could not exell

you then said that without america we would be stoned, or whatever... the only people im thankful for are the british, who had terretorial control on palastine and eventualy gave us half. the rest of the world can go boinky up the ass... when it comes to being thankful for that is

as for the whole black issue... im not touching that,im not familiar with it

Bulldog · Post by **Bulldog** » Wed Jul 17, 2002 7:06 am

I wonder how long it's going to take before people realize that America is not and never will be close to perfect. It has a lot of problems, it's a big country with a lot of people in it, and some of these people have the ability to make thier opinions action, etc etc..........

So next time you'd like to mention "Amerikkka is evil hahah yuo r not free and yuo founder raped slaves BASTARD!@@" you should first accept that this is not news to anybody. Even people who support America don't think they live in some perfect dreamworld utopia.

Megatron · Post by **Megatron** » Wed Jul 17, 2002 7:18 am

except Constipated Bladerunner.

the guardian · Post by **the guardian** » Wed Jul 17, 2002 10:23 am

yes well, contipated bladerunner is a special case....

Bulldog · Post by **Bulldog** » Wed Jul 17, 2002 10:34 am

Pyro wrote:except Constipated Bladerunner.

Oh, you still read his posts?

Haplo · Post by **Haplo** » Wed Jul 17, 2002 11:16 am

Hammer wrote:Oh please are you all THAT stupid? Jesus H Christ, "CHOPPED PECKERS" is hardly a serious racist comment, and if you have ever seen me defend Israel in the past you'd know I was being sarcastic, how come I don't see anybody jumping on Guardian about his stereotyped comments, huh?

And in case you shit birds STILL can't see the point I was making, let me show you. Guardian comes in ranting and raving about all Americans being this and being that, nobody calls him a bigoted racist and tells him to take a hike, however, I make a post with such goofy 'attacks' like chopped peckers and blood drinking Jews and I am taken seriously, basically, I was trying to get my point across that I was not happy with his stereotypes, just like he would not be happy with mine.

Get it?

Not stupid, just very agressive when it comes to what I think are insults to my friends. Or myself.

I get your point though. I apologize for getting angry about your post, now that I've heard the truth from you.

Constipated BladeRunner · Thu Jul 18, 2002 1:24 am

Hammer wrote:See Kaskkuck, you said that Blacks were opressed in the USA, and I gave you reasons why they were not.

Oh and yes Blacks do get a lesser sentence, when I a white man does it, its considered a Hate crime.

If two guys get murder 1, under the same circumstances-
the black guy is much MUCH more likely to die for his crime- I live in Chicago ,we hear that ALOT.

DeepOmega · Post by **DeepOmega** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 1:29 am

It's a two edged sword. Black man accused of killing a white man, he's more likely to be convicted (statistically proven) but a white man who kills a black man can be harder to defend, since they always claim it's a hate crime. In the end, both forms of racism cancel each other out. Not good, but better a balanced state of disgustingness than an unbalanced one, neh?

Peace and much love...

Constipated BladeRunner · Thu Jul 18, 2002 1:33 am

During the Commie scare, many people where killied because of a dream.
We had slaves.
We are in some ways cultrally opressive- anyone who has ever been to lakeforst will know this

We are an inderct democracy, meaning that it is not a singel dictator, but a whole group of them!
Though, I think overall America is a step in the right direction- now you have 1 superpower that means very little chance of world wide nuclear war, not to mention the fact that we peacekeep the world most of the time- though I think we should do something about Africa and the middle east

Constipated BladeRunner · Thu Jul 18, 2002 1:38 am

Bulldog wrote:
Pyro wrote:except Constipated Bladerunner.
Oh, you still read his posts?

Now, let me think, there is a word for this...
O, yeah
BITCH

DeepOmega · Post by **DeepOmega** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 2:06 am

World Wide nuclear war is a possibility, albeit a small one. The real problem is the India/Pakistan situation. If there's ever a war, some amount of nuclear weapons will be deployed. Practically a given. What frightens me, tho, is the possibility that they'll work[/]. If India and Pakistan can nuke each other without significant "accidents" or civilian damage, then major powers would most likely point to this as evidence of nuclear wars being "safe." Thing is, India and Pakistan have relatively tiny nukes... US and Russia still have ones over 20 megatons, compared to the kiloton bombs in India and Pakistan. Not only that, but nobody knows the long term effects of nuclear war. It's never been done, and we sure as hell can't test. Of course, it looks like fallout is a bigger deal than we thought, seeing as how a recent study shows that everyone living in the US since 1951 has a significant amount of radiation in their body...

Peace and much love.

James · Post by **James** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 6:38 am

The real problem is the India/Pakistan situation. If there's ever a war, some amount of nuclear weapons will be deployed. Practically a given. What frightens me, tho, is the possibility that they'll work[/]. If India and Pakistan can nuke each other without significant "accidents" or civilian damage, then major powers would most likely point to this as evidence of nuclear wars being "safe."

I disagree I don't see how, if either side was the aggressor, they would risk the security of their nation by advancing to a point where the other side felt that using WMDs was useful militarily.

And yes, they will work. Both sides conducted successful tests. Pakistan may well use a U235 gun bomb design, which, if you actually have the U235, is very hard not to do right. India has tested a number (six, IIRC) of bombs, probably being Pu239 implosion weapons.

There really is a war in Kashmir at the moment anyway, it just hasn't escalated further than artillery duels etc. IMO, both sides have the bomb makes such escalation more risky and therefore less likely.

US and Russia still have ones over 20 megatons

No they don't (US), and possibly, but if so they are obsolete (Russia). As far as I know, the last US B53 bombs have left service. These had 9MT yields and were the last of the '50s era high MT range weapons in the US stockpile. Russia may have some SS-18 Mod 6 missiles with 20 MT warheads, but given that this missile system has a CEP of around 250m, then one would have to question the usefulness of these systems. The SS-19 mod 2 has a single 5 MT RV, which is AFIK the biggest warhead.

Remember: because delivery systems are more accurate and more reliable now, much less brute force is needed to achieve even a hard target kill. In fact, the best weapons for use against hard targets have yields in the range of hundreds of kT. Note that modern (and some not so modern) Russian designs are capible of good CEPs also.

Examples of suitable non MT range weapons suitable for hard targets:

US: the W88 RV, from the D-5 Trident SLBM is a 475 kT device (CEP 90m), and the upgraded Minuteman III missiles have 1 W87 RV, of 300kT (CEP 120m) (upgradeable to 400kT by adding a DU sleeve, this makes the it more dirty though)

Russia: The RS-12 (i.e. SS-25) carries a single comparatively large 750 kT RV (CEP 200m). This is also Russias most flexible land based system, as it is road mobile.

Thing is, India and Pakistan have relatively tiny nukes

Not really, small would be single or sub kT figures, which actually makes the device in all but name a neutron bomb. I don't have the data on hand, but if Pakistan is using gun bombs then the yields would be in tens of kT, and the Indian designs are likely to be of similar or slightly higher yields. Plus if India is using implosion designs, tricks like fusion boosting could be used to increase yield dramatically. (This is where a tiny amount of tritium is added to the centre of the device, which undergoes fusion. Although this fusion only adds a tiny amount to the yield, it causes a burst of neutrons which dramatically increases the efficiency, and therefore yield, of the fission stage.)

And even the smallest nuclear devices are capable of causing tens or hundreds of thousands of deaths if used in a densely populated environment.

seeing as how a recent study shows that everyone living in the US since 1951 has a significant amount of radiation in their body...

Yes, but it gets much worse after you eat a banana for example. Bananas are radioactive naturally.

Peace and much love.

Yes indeed!

boywoos · Post by **boywoos** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 6:44 am

Just wondering, do either India or Pakistan have ICBM's?

the guardian · Post by **the guardian** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 6:56 am

say constipated bladerunner, do you acully ignore my posts, or do you just dont see them? because there's atlist 3 questions i asked you that have yet to be replied throughout this topic....

James · Post by **James** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 7:10 am

Just wondering, do either India or Pakistan have ICBM's?

No. That’s very reliable information and what follows is reliable, but less so.

Bear in mind that neither side need ICBMs. They only need to deter each other, so IRBMs along with tactical airpower are fine. And neither side likely has enough bombs to deter any other nuclear power by correlation of forces alone even if they did have weapons systems which put the other nuclear power within range.

They have theatre (a scud is an example of a theatre range missile, although Indian and Pakistani weapons are more advanced) and regional (IRBMs these are more like ICBMs but don’t have nearly the same range) level ballistic missiles.

India has tested an Agni II missile to about 2000 km, but its not service yet. They have missiles capable of reaching about 350 km that certainly seem to have the throw weight to handle an implosion bomb.

Pakistan has tested Ghuari missile to 1100 km, and it is likely to have a somewhat longer range than that. It has a throw weight which should be able to cope with light gun-bomb designs, and implosion weapons. Longer ranged versions, like the Indian Agni, are not yet in service. They also have a 700 km ranged missile in service, with a decent throw weight.

Pakistan have the missile advantage, and its likely to stay that way for some time.

However, both sides would probably use aircraft to deliver nuclear bombs as well as ballistic missiles.

DeepOmega · Post by **DeepOmega** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 7:50 am

Finally, someone knowledgeable on the topic... I *salute* you, James!

Ahem. Are you sure the US doesn't have any of the massive warheads left? I was fairly certain we had a few, but I'm not certain how up to date my sources were, so I could be wrong. Eh. It's a moot point for India/Pakistan.

Yeah, there's a war in Kashmere already, and troops lining up. However, no full-scale attacks have begun. It's pretty likely that Pakistan will go for a "surprise" attack (or as surprising as possible) since their military is a good deal smaller than India's (can't remember the figures off the top of my head). India will, in all likelihood, spank them in a conventional war. So Pakistan will be losing a war, and invasion by India will be an obvious result. In all likelihood, they will use nukes, most likely tactical. But once the first nuke is used, it'll escalate very quickly...

As for them working, I meant their goal being achieved effectively. I.e. no civilian deaths, no accidental irradiation of large cities, etc. I fear any situation in which a government could point and say "Look! Nukes are safe!"

You're right about the size of India and Pakistan's warheads... And a great deal of direct deaths would occur in a densely populated area. (read: Most of India). The greater damage, however, might lie in the effects on the environment. Like I said, US tests of nuclear weapons has resulted in increased radiation in US citizens (check <a href=http://cnn.looksmart.com/og/pr=FastSite ... ml>this</a> for more details...) and we know for sure that any nuke over 1 megaton sends a large proportion of radiated paricles into the upper atmosphere (and thus, the jetsream) allowing fallout to fall way the hell away from the site of detonation. Fortunately, India and Pakistan don't have nukes large enough for this to be a factor.

Peace and much love...

Walks with the Snails · Thu Jul 18, 2002 11:20 am

Yeah, what's troublesome about Pakistan is they're pretty much outmatched, but they seem unwilling to admit it out of pride or some kind of delusions of grandeur. I guess they think Allah's going to smite the unbelievers for them. Somebody needs to tell them that aggression only works when you've got the upper hand. When you're constantly provoking a country that's more than your match, though, you're pretty much asking to get slapped down. And they've said they'll use nukes if their existence is threatened. I kind of wonder how they think that will actually make India more sypathetic to them if they get overrun. I can imagine if India conquers Pakistan and no nukes are fired their attitude will pretty much be, "Screw you guys, stay the hell out of Kashmir and we'll let you keep your state this time since occupying you would be more trouble than it's worth." If they go nuclear though, they can pretty much expect to get booted out of their whole country for good in response, though. Few are going to be shedding many tears on their behalf, either.

Bulldog · Post by **Bulldog** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 12:01 pm

Constipated BladeRunner wrote: BITCH

Yup, that's the word we use for people like you. Hey, you can use colors to make yourself feel big, that's great. I have a ball, would you like to bounce it?

Now twirl it up your dickeye, fuckface.

Kashluk · Post by **Kashluk** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 2:07 pm

the guardian wrote:there's realy no need for bashing hammer, he made a point, and im hardly offended by anything

Well, the dude did (although not in this conversation) write that China is evil and we should get rid of all of 'em. :roll: And he's said many stupid things, leaning on to patriotism, that it makes me sick.

Bulldog wrote:I wonder how long it's going to take before people realize that America is not and never will be close to perfect. It has a lot of problems, it's a big country with a lot of people in it, and some of these people have the ability to make thier opinions action, etc etc..........

So next time you'd like to mention "Amerikkka is evil hahah yuo r not free and yuo founder raped slaves BASTARD!@@" you should first accept that this is not news to anybody. Even people who support America don't think they live in some perfect dreamworld utopia.

Thank you, bulldog. That is all I wanted to hear. Seriously. But this seems to be so difficult to some people, like Hammer for example, to "confess". All I wanted was to write along those lines, but it seemed to be too much, because they're still flaming up these kinds of threads.

Thank you.

Now I'm out of here, too much amerikkanos

DeepOmega · Post by **DeepOmega** » Thu Jul 18, 2002 7:36 pm

Kashluk wrote:Now I'm out of here, too much amerikkanos

Heeey.... Kashluk is insulting us Americans! Er. I think. Speak English, damn you! Methinks it's time for me to put on a cowboy hat, get in my pickup truck, and dispense with some good ol' fashioned American justice (Dubya style...)

Peace and much love.

Duck and Cover

Sept. 11 and the War on Terror: Bullshit or Patriotism?

What do you think of the War on Terror?