Well, an interesting way to handle terrorism

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

That has got to be one of the dumbest ideas I have ever seen in my life. At no point in time did they come anywhere close to a coherent point. I award them no points, and may God have mercy on their souls.

 

What in the blue heel? That has got to be retarded. Try some fossil fuels, alternative energy, something that's not nuclear?

 

--Ryan

...who is banging his head into the wall over this one...

[Justice 0]

I have to agree. I gave Kerry the benefit of the doubt, but calling the bluff with Nuclear Weapons involved in this day and age is beyond stupid. o.0

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

...and this is why I'm not exactly a Kerry "supporter".

 

Shit, MY idea there -- the idea I THOUGHT he had -- was better than that.

[Styles 0]

I don't get this logic at all.

 

It's like a parent wants to keep his kid off drugs, decides the kid will probably try to find drugs anyway, so instead of stopping the kid, just supplies the stuff himself.

 

Bush's team would be smart to exploit this one in the debates.

[Prime Time Andrew Doyle 0]

How fucking dumb could Kerry be. Boy am I glad that I'm Australian and would'nt have a possible future Head of State that would do such a idiotic thing. Going on what he said, how would they collect the spent rods if thewy refuse to return them, or what would happen if terrorists hijacked the delivery of the rods. While I can sort of understand the reasoning (I think?), the possibility of something going drastically wrong far outweighs the good intentions that this questionable move has

[Guest MikeSC]

Wow, I suppose the apologies to me will be forthcoming.

 

They AREN'T?

 

Oh well...

-=Mike

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

I admitted I'm wrong. Not like you've ever "apologized" when wrong, so don't expect it from me.

[Guest Paul H.]

They way Korea has been dealing with the White-House it has shown the world the US will pussyfoot around you if they fear casualties and WMD's.

 

I have a feeling they'll have to go in there sooner or later.Also,it's not "ripe" for revolution as people say.

 

They have internal issues?Yes,so does China ,doesn't mean they'll be un uprising there either.

[Guest Paul H.]

Plus,just this afternoon Iran tested a long-range missle...

 

 

Uh...I'm looking for a Link..

[Justice 0]

Plus,just this afternoon Iran tested a long-range missle...

 

 

Uh...I'm looking for a Link..

Here you go. It's a bit more complex than just Iran testing a missile, but perhaps that's what makes it so much more disturbing.

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

Beautiful. Simply f'n beautiful.

 

I won't buy anything coming out of Iran, because we all know how that goes. North Korea's been pissed at the U.S. forever and a half. It's disturbing, yes. I haven't seen much in terms of actual evidence (and yes, I DID read the story)...

 

Just going to have to ride this one out for now

 

--Ryan

...Money is clean, we can scrub it good

With guns and gasoline we can save the world

Nothing's obscene if we all just close our eyes

Boys and girls welcome to this joyride...

[Justice 0]

Fuck it, let's go bowling.

I think that sums up your opinion best.

[Special K 0]

Let me say, this is the dumbest goddamn thing I've heard. Jaysis, who am I going to vote for?

 

BTW, Mike has been 100% correcy in this thread. At least unless you're not fucking crazy.

 

Iran is much more of a threat than Iraq ever was, that is something both sides should agree upon.

[Guest Wildbomb 4:20]

Don't care to be associated with an activity that involves Everyone's Favorite Filmmaker, thanks...

 

For those that care, my opinion is: Iran does not need, require, deserve nuclear power and/or the capability to create nuclear weapons. Entering into a stronger alliance with North Korea over nuclear capabilities is damndably idiotic at best and potentially catastrophic at its worst. My gut tells me this isn't good. My brain wants to think otherwise. But it probably won't work out that way.

 

I think an attempt at going through the diplomatic reasoning process should start, but let them be warned that any alliance with North Korea over weapontry would be considered a hostile act.

 

--Ryan

...I hate bowling...

[Justice 0]

Don't care to be associated with an activity that involves Everyone's Favorite Filmmaker, thanks...

 

For those that care, my opinion is: Iran does not need, require, deserve nuclear power and/or the capability to create nuclear weapons. Entering into a stronger alliance with North Korea over nuclear capabilities is damndably idiotic at best and potentially catastrophic at its worst. My gut tells me this isn't good. My brain wants to think otherwise. But it probably won't work out that way.

 

I think an attempt at going through the diplomatic reasoning process should start, but let them be warned that any alliance with North Korea over weapontry would be considered a hostile act.

 

--Ryan

...I hate bowling...

Actually, that wasn't MM. That was a quote from The Big Lebowski, an excellent Coehns Bros. film. I've made the same mistake before, too. I highly reccommend it.

 

I meant it more as "I agree" rather than to marginalize your opinion.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Jesus Christ, can none of you READ?

 

What the hell do you THINK this is saying? Tyler and snuffy, you sound like delusional geezers.

          -=Mike

He is saying that if they believe they only need fuel to power their country, we will provide them with non-nuclear fuel to power their country, so that they don't acquire a nuclear anything of any kind.

 

In that way, we're saying "Well, if you ONLY want the nuclear power to electrify your country, than you'll take our free fossil fuels, right? They'll power your country and then you won't need to muck around with nuclear materials. Because, you WERE just interested in the nuclear materials for pure electrical reasons, right? Right?"

 

In short, as long as we keep providing them with an electricity source, they can't make the excuse that they need nuclear energy for electricity.

 

Unfortunately, you refuse to see it in any context other than the distorted conclusion you jumped to when you read the text, that Kerry would openly hand over the ingredients to a nuclear weapon and then not pay attention to what they do with it.

[Justice 0]

Jesus Christ, can none of you READ?

 

What the hell do you THINK this is saying? Tyler and snuffy, you sound like delusional geezers.

          -=Mike

He is saying that if they believe they only need fuel to power their country, we will provide them with non-nuclear fuel to power their country, so that they don't acquire a nuclear anything of any kind.

 

In that way, we're saying "Well, if you ONLY want the nuclear power to electrify your country, than you'll take our free fossil fuels, right? They'll power your country and then you won't need to muck around with nuclear materials. Because, you WERE just interested in the nuclear materials for pure electrical reasons, right? Right?"

 

In short, as long as we keep providing them with an electricity source, they can't make the excuse that they need nuclear energy for electricity.

Uh... Jobber... Mike is right. fk confirmed it on Kerry's website. They are actually going to give nuclear fuel to Iran.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Uh... Jobber... Mike is right. fk confirmed it on Kerry's website. They are actually going to give nuclear fuel to Iran.

Well then, my idea is better than Kerry's.

[Justice 0]

Uh... Jobber... Mike is right. fk confirmed it on Kerry's website. They are actually going to give nuclear fuel to Iran.

Well then, my idea is better than Kerry's.

Oh, not saying it isn't. Just... yeah. This is one of those topics that REALLY hard to believe, ya know?

[Stephen Joseph 0]

I think an apology is in order, for not reading the thread

...

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I think an apology is in order, for not reading the thread

...

Sorry, I've been reformatting my drive and haven't kept up with the conversations lately.

 

Expect to see some delayed responses to old discussion.