Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Fury on November 23, 2010, 09:22:54 AM
-
I've seen you consistently make this claim over the years yet I can't think of any time that you've actually provided proof of said claim of yours.
Nothing comes up on a quick google search either so please enlighten me.
-
Have to admit, I didn't remember that either.
-
i think he's talking about those missile tests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_missile_test,_2006
-
i think he's talking about those missile tests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_missile_test,_2006
THAT's what he's talking about?
Jesus, talk about spin.
-
THAT's what he's talking about?
Jesus, talk about spin.
what did he say?
-
i think he's talking about those missile tests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_missile_test,_2006
The missile test where North Korea DIDN'T fire at America? Where the only relation to America was that calculations showed the missiles had POTENTIAL RANGE that might be able to reach as far as Alaska?
That's what he's been talking about?
-
what did he say?
The following quote from earlier today reads like all the other comments he's made on this topic:
NKorea fired ICBMs at hawaii, remember? They promised to blow up california. They set off a fucking nuke. How did Bush punish them? He sent them ONE MILLION BARRELS OF OIL to cut it out. And they still didn't stop 100%, but they sure did enjoy the oil paid for with american tax dollars.
Looks like fear mongering and propaganda to me.
-
The following quote from earlier today reads like all the other comments he's made on this topic:
Looks like fear mongering and propaganda to me.
This I why I love this site. Good job BF.
-
LOL im so glad im not the only one who see's 240s bullshit these days...
-
LOL im so glad im not the only one who see's 240s bullshit these days...
Tony - did you see my thread calling out 240 and TA?
-
maybe he read this part from a story back then:
According to CNN, at least three missiles were launched including a Taepodong-2, which failed (or was aborted) in less than a minute. The Taepodong-2 is an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) with an estimated range of up to 6,000 km (3,730 miles). This would bring parts of the United States like Alaska and Hawaii within striking range of the missile. The ability to achieve this range has so far not been demonstrated in a test
NORAD was put on heightened alert in the past two weeks and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency told CNN that two missiles for interception of ballistic missiles were activated in California prior to test launches.
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/North_Korea_test-fires_missiles
-
maybe he read this part from a story back then:
According to CNN, at least three missiles were launched including a Taepodong-2, which failed (or was aborted) in less than a minute. The Taepodong-2 is an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) with an estimated range of up to 6,000 km (3,730 miles). This would bring parts of the United States like Alaska and Hawaii within striking range of the missile. The ability to achieve this range has so far not been demonstrated in a test
NORAD was put on heightened alert in the past two weeks and the U.S. Missile Defense Agency told CNN that two missiles for interception of ballistic missiles were activated in California prior to test launches.
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/North_Korea_test-fires_missiles
So they not only didn't fire them at us.....as far as the tests showed, they couldn't have fucking made it that far if they tried?
-
Yes. On the 4th of July. As the Space Shuttle launched. AT Hawaii but failed to make the distance. Also, made a shitload of threatening statements. And this was 9 months after setting off a nuke.
Please, let's not be bitches about this. Iraq didn't have WMD, and sure as shit didn't fire missiles at us on Independence day - and we attacked them. NKorea bragged about illegally having WMD, and we didn't do shit. it's that simple.
-
Yes. On the 4th of July. As the Space Shuttle launched. AT Hawaii but failed to make the distance. Also, made a shitload of threatening statements. And this was 9 months after setting off a nuke.
Please, let's not be bitches about this. Iraq didn't have WMD, and sure as shit didn't fire missiles at us on Independence day - and we attacked them. NKorea bragged about illegally having WMD, and we didn't do shit. it's that simple.
So they fired AT Hawaii...trying to hit the US with a missile attack...but failed to make the distance?
Why doesn't ANY report on the issue say that?
I took a shit towards China this morning. It failed to make the distance too.
Did I now officially attempt a turd-missile attack on China?
-
did they fire AT Hawaii?
I agree with the bs about Iraq and probably made the same point.
-
So they fired AT Hawaii...trying to hit the US with a missile attack...but failed to make the distance?
Why doesn't ANY report on the issue say that?
I took a shit towards China this morning. It failed to make the distance too.
Did I now officially attempt a turd-missile attack on China?
;D ;D ;D
-
if you want to launch a turd bomb at china, you don't have to shoot it that far. Just target one of the US corporate chinese loyalists all around you. :D
true...
-
Yes. On the 4th of July. As the Space Shuttle launched. AT Hawaii but failed to make the distance. Also, made a shitload of threatening statements. And this was 9 months after setting off a nuke.
Please, let's not be bitches about this. Iraq didn't have WMD, and sure as shit didn't fire missiles at us on Independence day - and we attacked them. NKorea bragged about illegally having WMD, and we didn't do shit. it's that simple.
You keep claiming they launched a missile DIRECTLY AT the USA. Can you provide proof of this or are these just spin games played by you? Testing a missile that has the capability to reach the coast =/= launching a missile at us.
-
sorry - they waited til a space shuttle launched on the 4th of july and fired missiles into our direction which had the capability to reach american soil, according to our intelligence agencies.
But since they didn't hit anything, I guess it's cool?
Fuck it. man up. Team america, you cuuunnnts. You set off nukes, talk shit, wait til our country's birthday when we're celebrating a shuttle launch - and you fire a half dozen missiles with the capability to hit us, toward us...
and you soft ass, no-gut libs want to say "hey, they didn't hit us, why so serious"?
Fuuuukk that. that's an act of war, whether the missiles hit or not. And to do it on our birthday? Shit, do you guys think the oil we paid them to cut it out was a good idea too? hahah oh sister...
-
sorry - they waited til a space shuttle launched on the 4th of july and fired missiles into our direction which had the capability to reach american soil, according to our intelligence agencies.
But since they didn't hit anything, I guess it's cool?
Fuck it. man up. Team america, you cuuunnnts. You set off nukes, talk shit, wait til our country's birthday when we're celebrating a shuttle launch - and you fire a half dozen missiles with the capability to hit us, toward us...
and you soft ass, no-gut libs want to say "hey, they didn't hit us, why so serious"?
Fuuuukk that. that's an act of war, whether the missiles hit or not. And to do it on our birthday? Shit, do you guys think the oil we paid them to cut it out was a good idea too? hahah oh sister...
Nice diatribe but there's still no proof from you that they actually launched missiles at us. All I've seen so far is that they tested missiles that may or may not have the capability to reach our soil.
-
240 - do you see why the search function is so helpful?
-
Nice diatribe but there's still no proof from you that they actually launched missiles at us. All I've seen so far is that they tested missiles that may or may not have the capability to reach our soil.
No, actually our defense agencies said the missiles DID have the capacity to reach american soil. it's linked at the bottom of the wiki page.
Hey, you can accept "well, technically, we can't PROVE they were aiming at us... and technically, it could only be a coincidence that it was the 4th of july, 2 minutes after a space shuttle launch...
And when you are having a BBQ on your birthday.... and you're blowing out the candles, and your a-hole neighbor screams threats to kill you, then throws bricks at your house but doesn't technically hit you with them...
You can give him all the $ in your wallet, smile timidly, and tell your birthday party guests that you can't PROVE he was trying to ruin your day or hit you with those bricks.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA oh sister....
Me, on the other hand, I'm picking up those bricks and smashing his head with them. You don't throw bricks at me on my birthday after making threats. Screw that.
-
No, actually our defense agencies said the missiles DID have the capacity to reach american soil. it's linked at the bottom of the wiki page.
Hey, you can accept "well, technically, we can't PROVE they were aiming at us... and technically, it could only be a coincidence that it was the 4th of july, 2 minutes after a space shuttle launch...
And when you are having a BBQ on your birthday.... and you're blowing out the candles, and your a-hole neighbor screams threats to kill you, then throws bricks at your house but doesn't technically hit you with them...
You can give him all the $ in your wallet, smile timidly, and tell your birthday party guests that you can't PROVE he was trying to ruin your day or hit you with those bricks.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA oh sister....
Me, on the other hand, I'm picking up those bricks and smashing his head with them. You don't throw bricks at me on my birthday after making threats. Screw that.
You are approaching Dan Rather territory: "Fake - but accurate"
-
You are approaching Dan Rather territory: "Fake - but accurate"
Nice personal attack. My argument is correct. They deserved to be bombed, but neither bush nor obama has the balls to do it. Agreed?
-
240, nobody here is siding with north korea except samson and mons lol. we fire test missiles into the pacific all the time, all of them probably headed toward someone else.
-
sorry - they waited til a space shuttle launched on the 4th of july and fired missiles into our direction which had the capability to reach american soil, according to our intelligence agencies.
But since they didn't hit anything, I guess it's cool?
Fuck it. man up. Team america, you cuuunnnts. You set off nukes, talk shit, wait til our country's birthday when we're celebrating a shuttle launch - and you fire a half dozen missiles with the capability to hit us, toward us...
and you soft ass, no-gut libs want to say "hey, they didn't hit us, why so serious"?
Fuuuukk that. that's an act of war, whether the missiles hit or not. And to do it on our birthday? Shit, do you guys think the oil we paid them to cut it out was a good idea too? hahah oh sister...
240 is Da Man! Great post!
-
sorry - they waited til a space shuttle launched on the 4th of july and fired missiles into our direction which had the capability to reach american soil, according to our intelligence agencies.
But since they didn't hit anything, I guess it's cool?
Your statement was that they fired at Hawaii. So, you think they launched a legitimate attack on us, but just messed up?
-
sorry - they waited til a space shuttle launched on the 4th of july and fired missiles into our direction which had the capability to reach american soil, according to our intelligence agencies.
But since they didn't hit anything, I guess it's cool?
Fuck it. man up. Team america, you cuuunnnts. You set off nukes, talk shit, wait til our country's birthday when we're celebrating a shuttle launch - and you fire a half dozen missiles with the capability to hit us, toward us...
and you soft ass, no-gut libs want to say "hey, they didn't hit us, why so serious"?
Fuuuukk that. that's an act of war, whether the missiles hit or not. And to do it on our birthday? Shit, do you guys think the oil we paid them to cut it out was a good idea too? hahah oh sister...
america only picks on DEFENSELESS nations. we're chickenshit bullies plain an simple.
-
240, nobody here is siding with north korea except samson and mons lol. we fire test missiles into the pacific all the time, all of them probably headed toward someone else.
It's not just the firing of test missiles.
It is the fact they threatened cali before that.
It is the fact they set off a nuke Oct 2005.
It is the fact they did it on our national birthday.
Personally, I'd prefer to not wait until they decide to tie a warhead (which they prove works) to a missile (which our agencies confirm can reach our soil) and blow up some part of this country I love. But there are some people out there who prefer to just pay them and beg them not to hurt us.
-
Your statement was that they fired at Hawaii. So, you think they launched a legitimate attack on us, but just messed up?
sorry, I got it wrong. They fired missiles which our agencies confirm could have reached US soil. They failed before they hit our soil.
I guess on 911, if the bad guys had crashed the planes into the ground before they hit the towers, we could have avoided all those flag pins and wars, right guys?
-
It's not just the firing of test missiles.
It is the fact they threatened cali before that.
It is the fact they set off a nuke Oct 2005.
It is the fact they did it on our national birthday.
Personally, I'd prefer to not wait until they decide to tie a warhead (which they prove works) to a missile (which our agencies confirm can reach our soil) and blow up some part of this country I love. But there are some people out there who prefer to just pay them and beg them not to hurt us.
america has no interest in fighting nations with the capability to respond.
-
240 - do you believe Obama will use this to divert attentin away from his domestic disasters?
-
240, nobody here is siding with north korea except samson and mons lol. we fire test missiles into the pacific all the time, all of them probably headed toward someone else.
If we decided to test fire 5 missiles toward China that failed...
After threatening to vaporize them....
After setting off a nuke to prove we could do it....
And we did it on their national holiday...
We could expect a million barrels of free oil to be sent over ASAP as a peace offering, right guys? ;)
-
240 - do you believe Obama will use this to divert attentin away from his domestic disasters?
Of course he will.
Much the same way you are now diverting this thread from NK's actions, to Obama's political moves, my shiny headed friend :)
-
It's not just the firing of test missiles.
It is the fact they threatened cali before that.
It is the fact they set off a nuke Oct 2005.
It is the fact they did it on our national birthday.
Personally, I'd prefer to not wait until they decide to tie a warhead (which they prove works) to a missile (which our agencies confirm can reach our soil) and blow up some part of this country I love. But there are some people out there who prefer to just pay them and beg them not to hurt us.
This is a lot of spin. Do you or do you not have any proof that they fired missiles at us?
I don't care about their nukes, or that it supposedly happened on July 4. You claim they fired missiles at us, which would be an egregious act of war. Claims like that are usually backed up with evidence, not just hearsay.
-
This is a lot of spin. Do you or do you not have any proof that they fired missiles at us?
I don't care about their nukes, or that it supposedly happened on July 4. You claim they fired missiles at us, which would be an egregious act of war. Claims like that are usually backed up with evidence, not just hearsay.
What spin? These are facts. They fired missiles that sank in the ocean. In our direction. On july 4th. After threatening california. After setting off a nuke.
All facts. Now, one can utilize a liberal, pacifist position of "look mister, until you vaporize an american city, there's no point in getting upset!".... or one can say "you're a clear and present danger, you've made threats, and you fired missiles toward the direction of my country on my country's birthday, after setting off a nuke and threatening to nuke me... Time for your ass to go..."
Me, I'm not a pacifist. But I do respect the beliefs of those who are.
-
america only picks on DEFENSELESS nations. we're chickenshit bullies plain an simple.
In that case I think you should pack your shit and leave immediately for a non bully nation
-
sorry - they waited til a space shuttle launched on the 4th of july and fired missiles into our direction which had the capability to reach american soil, according to our intelligence agencies.
But since they didn't hit anything, I guess it's cool?
Fuck it. man up. Team america, you cuuunnnts. You set off nukes, talk shit, wait til our country's birthday when we're celebrating a shuttle launch - and you fire a half dozen missiles with the capability to hit us, toward us...
and you soft ass, no-gut libs want to say "hey, they didn't hit us, why so serious"?
Fuuuukk that. that's an act of war, whether the missiles hit or not. And to do it on our birthday? Shit, do you guys think the oil we paid them to cut it out was a good idea too? hahah oh sister...
So you're saying that it wasn't a missile test, it was an organized attack on America that didn't quite make it far enough?
You understand that there is a VERY big difference between the two, right?
*EDIT* You've admitted you're wrong and that it was a test that never had any intention of landing on American soil. There wasn't even an attempt to actually fire the missiles that distance, regardless of what the direction was.
You're wrong on the nuclear bomb stuff now two. Unless you understand nuclear technology and the process of enriching Uranium to create viable fission bombs, I'd suggest you cut your losses and go find a thread to mention Sarah Palin in.
-
So you're saying that it wasn't a missile test, it was an organized attack on America that didn't quite make it far enough?
You understand that there is a VERY big difference between the two, right?
Hey, like I said... there are 2 ways to do things. You can stop the terrorists before they actually kill americans by pinkmisting them while they're still in the "testing" phase with confirmed WMD and functional missiles. Or you can wait for a smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud on US soil.
I'm just one of those old-fashioned guys who prefers to take out the bad guys with nukes and shooting missiles BEFORE they develop the capacity to hit us. Other people are more "modern" and wish to bribe them to play nice. We're just different that way, I suppose.
-
Hey, like I said... there are 2 ways to do things. You can stop the terrorists before they actually kill americans by pinkmisting them while they're still in the "testing" phase with confirmed WMD and functional missiles. Or you can wait for a smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud on US soil.
I'm just one of those old-fashioned guys who prefers to take out the bad guys with nukes and shooting missiles BEFORE they develop the capacity to hit us. Other people are more "modern" and wish to bribe them to play nice. We're just different that way, I suppose.
What do you think is North Korea's nuclear technology currently?
INCLUDING the newly discovered enrichment facilities?
-
What do you think is North Korea's nuclear technology currently?
INCLUDING the newly discovered enrichment facilities?
I dunno. 4+ years ago, they successfully set off a nuclear weapon.
I'm guessing at the very least, they have the ability to do that again.
To me, that's not acceptable. however, some appeasers think bribing them to not nuke us is the way to go. I am of the ilk that you can't negotiate with terrorists.
-
I dunno. 4+ years ago, they successfully set off a nuclear weapon.
I'm guessing at the very least, they have the ability to do that again.
To me, that's not acceptable. however, some appeasers think bribing them to not nuke us is the way to go. I am of the ilk that you can't negotiate with terrorists.
Did you want GWB to invade NK?
-
Did you want GWB to invade NK?
I believe NKorea fit the criteria we applied to Iraq, TEN TIMES OVER.
Iraq let us search saddam's bathrooms - there was a very small % chance they had real WMD. NKorea, on the other hand, detonated a nuke. 100% chance they had nukes.
I believe if Iraq was about removing a dangerous dictator and liberating an oppressed people - then NKorea was an equally worthy cause.
So yes. Apply the same standard. Don't pay them off. Imagine the shitstorm on getbig should Obama pay off Kim Jung Il to stop being mean. You guys would call him every name in the book.
-
Oh Lord.
-
I believe NKorea fit the criteria we applied to Iraq, TEN TIMES OVER.
Iraq let us search saddam's bathrooms - there was a very small % chance they had real WMD. NKorea, on the other hand, detonated a nuke. 100% chance they had nukes.
I believe if Iraq was about removing a dangerous dictator and liberating an oppressed people - then NKorea was an equally worthy cause.
So yes. Apply the same standard. Don't pay them off. Imagine the shitstorm on getbig should Obama pay off Kim Jung Il to stop being mean. You guys would call him every name in the book.
dude, n korea will fight back. we don't pick THOSE fights. ;)
-
I believe NKorea fit the criteria we applied to Iraq, TEN TIMES OVER.
Iraq let us search saddam's bathrooms - there was a very small % chance they had real WMD. NKorea, on the other hand, detonated a nuke. 100% chance they had nukes.
I believe if Iraq was about removing a dangerous dictator and liberating an oppressed people - then NKorea was an equally worthy cause.
So yes. Apply the same standard. Don't pay them off. Imagine the shitstorm on getbig should Obama pay off Kim Jung Il to stop being mean. You guys would call him every name in the book.
240- do u ever tire making a fool of 333567?
-
240- do u ever tire making a fool of 333567?
::) ::)
-
33,
what do you think of my argument?
Do you believe a nation that lets us search their commodes for WMD (and none are found) is a greater threat than a nation with ICBMs, proven nukes, and plenty of threatening statements?
-
33,
what do you think of my argument?
Do you believe a nation that lets us search their commodes for WMD (and none are found) is a greater threat than a nation with ICBMs, proven nukes, and plenty of threatening statements?
3333567 backed in a corner! can't wait for his Obama response
-
33,
what do you think of my argument?
Do you believe a nation that lets us search their commodes for WMD (and none are found) is a greater threat than a nation with ICBMs, proven nukes, and plenty of threatening statements?
I think you are so full of fucking shit - that you are doing anything to cover yor ass off of the beating you have been taking the last 2 months.
-
I think you are so full of fucking shit - that you are doing anything to cover yor ass off of the beating you have been taking the last 2 months.
I see. We'll label this an "attack the messenger" post.
Don't forget your door prize!
-
120 dude, you are all over the map. Have you been checked for multiple personality disorder?
-
I dunno. 4+ years ago, they successfully set off a nuclear weapon.
I'm guessing at the very least, they have the ability to do that again.
To me, that's not acceptable. however, some appeasers think bribing them to not nuke us is the way to go. I am of the ilk that you can't negotiate with terrorists.
(Remember....they can't even guarantee a successful launch of their long range missiles...which can't reach any major US cities anyway...)
The "nuclear" bomb in 2006 was a pipsqueak fission reaction that was less than a kiloton in yield. The estimates on its yield go as low as 550 tons...
Disregarding the difficulties in enriching Uranium, and the fact that even the NEWLY released information on North Korea's enrichment program indicates that they have a MAXIMUM capability of producing about ONE minimal payload worth of weapons grade U235 a year, the "bomb" in 2006 was a couple of Kilotons at BEST...which would have to be loaded onto missiles with high failure rates at launch and without the capabilities of ever even making it to major American cities if used to attack us....
The bombs we dropped in 1945 had explosive yields of 12,500 and 22,000 tons.
Tsar Bomb tested by Russia was half of what was originally a 100,000,000 Ton yield.
See the difference? 550 vs. 100,000,000?
So you don't have to go search for a calculator, that means it would take close to 200,000 North Korean "bombs" to equal ONE SINGLE full-strength Tsar bomb.
At an enrichment rate of 1 bomb per year with the new findings, that means that they'll have a stockpile equal to that SINGLE bomb in the year 202010....
The fucking 2006 "bomb" explosion wasn't a "chest thumping" by North Korea. It was a RELIEF to Nuclear Engineers and Physicists who weren't sure of their capabilities.
You don't "test" a bomb with 1 kiloton of yield. If you can only produce 1k of fissionable Uranium for testing purposes, then you don't have megatons sitting back at home.
Considering the yield-to-weight ratio they probably got out of the thing, they took every drop of U235 they had and crossed their fingers for a chain reaction.
(For reference, the Trinity "test" was over 20,000 tons in yield....65 years ago)
The US has 15 or so GBU-43/B's at 165 tons of guaranteed to launch successfully and reach their target yield that would clear out every major North Korean military base WITHOUT USING NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY before Kim Jong Fever's "Tinkering Tom" crashes into the ocean somewhere.
Unless Russia wants to see MAD play out, they could send out 11 or so FOABs at 44 tons a piece (NON-NUCLEAR) to hit any other selected targets they'd like before the North Korean commanding officers get the news that their "bomb's" only fatality was a beluga whale somewhere in the Pacific.
*In case you didn't catch it....the yield of 11 FOABS is ~575 tons...MORE than the North Korean "nuclear" bomb....and decidedly non-nuclear in payload.
-
sorry, I got it wrong. They fired missiles which our agencies confirm could have reached US soil. They failed before they hit our soil.
I guess on 911, if the bad guys had crashed the planes into the ground before they hit the towers, we could have avoided all those flag pins and wars, right guys?
So you're standing by the point it was a failed attack? A planned attack against US soil? Or was it a test?
-
(Remember....they can't even guarantee a successful launch of their long range missiles...which can't reach any major US cities anyway...)
The "nuclear" bomb in 2006 was a pipsqueak fission reaction that was less than a kiloton in yield. The estimates on its yield go as low as 550 tons...
Cool. So as long as their missiles would only be able to stike minor targets - smaller US cities - it's cool?
And as long as it would only be a SMALL nuke blast - only killing a few thousand instead of tens of thousands - that's cool too?
Look - if they threaten us, and they have any WMD capable of reaching any US soil - their asses gotta go. But that's just me. I'm no pacifist.
-
So you're standing by the point it was a failed attack?
I'm standing by the fact that a nation with proven nuke capability - that made threats at us - fired missiles in our direction on our nation's birthday.
Any nation that does this - they need a little boot in the ass.
-
I'm standing by the fact that a nation with proven nuke capability - that made threats at us - fired missiles in our direction on our nation's birthday.
Any nation that does this - they need a little boot in the ass.
Fine. But that's not what was expressed on the G&O and started this thread.
The did not attack us. They did not fire a missile at Hawaii.
I demand a retraction. ;D
-
The did not attack us. They did not fire a missile at Hawaii.
I demand a retraction. ;D
you are correct. I apologize. My peace offering...
-
Cool. So as long as their missiles would only be able to stike minor targets - smaller US cities - it's cool?
And as long as it would only be a SMALL nuke blast - only killing a few thousand instead of tens of thousands - that's cool too?
Look - if they threaten us, and they have any WMD capable of reaching any US soil - their asses gotta go. But that's just me. I'm no pacifist.
Did you read my post?
Do you understand ANYTHING about nuclear weapon technology?
I usually let you waddle around here and spout off at the mouth with whatever jibberish you feel like typing down, but I have to let you know that you're a fucking moron on this one.
Do you know anything about nuclear physics? Weapons? Technology?
You don't, because if you did, you'd realize that how absurd you are with this shit.
Supposing that they could produce another "1 kiloton" FISSION bomb that didn't fail at launch....and actually reached the MAXIMUM THEORETICALLY ATTAINABLE DISTANCE and fell off the coast of Alaska.
What is the damage?
What is the initial damage of a 1 kiloton yield? (or likely less than that)
What is the "fall out?"
You don't know those answers, because if you did, you'd realize they're not a viable nuclear threat on their own, won't be for a long time, and shut the fuck up and go back to writing 2,000 word dissertations of progressive praise and pandering before ending it with a "I'm not saying I agree with it, but the repubs did it too. Sarah Palin." to make sure everyone knows you "toe the line."
Are you freaked the fuck out by their non-nuclear weapons capabilities? Because it's certainly much more of a legitimate threat than their nuclear capabilities.
-
you are correct. I apologize. My peace offering...
Accepted! Feel free to make more incorrect statements and peace offerings in the future!
-
I think you are so full of fucking shit - that you are doing anything to cover yor ass off of the beating you have been taking the last 2 months.
240- please have mercy on him. Obama is 3333456 only answer. :D :D :D :D :D
-
Are you freaked the fuck out by their non-nuclear weapons capabilities? Because it's certainly much more of a legitimate threat than their nuclear capabilities.
Sorry. Any threat is too much of a threat. Even if it's only a "small" nuke. If they suitcase that shit, that means thousands of dead Americans. I'm not down with that.
And if you allow them to build small nukes, they will continue to evolve until they have large nukes.
My standards are simple - any nation that fires missiles toward us, makes threats, and sets off a nuke of any size - they're certainly a threat worthy of the Bush doctrine.
in what respect, Charlie?
-
240- please have mercy on him. Obama is 3333456 only answer. :D :D :D :D :D
Remind us again why you have to post under a gimmick account
-
Sorry. Any threat is too much of a threat. Even if it's only a "small" nuke. If they suitcase that shit, that means thousands of dead Americans. I'm not down with that.
And if you allow them to build small nukes, they will continue to evolve until they have large nukes.
My standards are simple - any nation that fires missiles toward us, makes threats, and sets off a nuke of any size - they're certainly a threat worthy of the Bush doctrine.
in what respect, Charlie?
You are complety obsessed with Sarah. You are almost pathological. The woman is not a governor, not a senator not a president, not a mayor, or anyone having any power over your life.
Why did you bring her in to this?
-
Sorry. Any threat is too much of a threat. Even if it's only a "small" nuke. If they suitcase that shit, that means thousands of dead Americans. I'm not down with that.
And if you allow them to build small nukes, they will continue to evolve until they have large nukes.
My standards are simple - any nation that fires missiles toward us, makes threats, and sets off a nuke of any size - they're certainly a threat worthy of the Bush doctrine.
in what respect, Charlie?
but but but....what if they fight back? :'(
-
240- please have mercy on him. Obama is 3333456 only answer. :D :D :D :D :D
If these boards really are moderated, blatant trolls like this one need to be banned.
-
Cool. So as long as their missiles would only be able to stike minor targets - smaller US cities - it's cool?
And as long as it would only be a SMALL nuke blast - only killing a few thousand instead of tens of thousands - that's cool too?
Look - if they threaten us, and they have any WMD capable of reaching any US soil - their asses gotta go. But that's just me. I'm no pacifist.
Who else has to go then? Because there isn't a developed country out there that doesn't have a 550 ton launch ready payload. Who do we leave out?
Should we start with the country that has an enrichment rate to produce a maximum (brand fucking new estimates) of one fission bomb a year?
Even though they don't have a viable long range missile program?
Even though the "tests" you've talked about for four fucking years showed only that they can't guarantee failure-free first phase? That they can't guarantee the midcourse rockets? That they can't guarantee accuracy on any of them?
Even though MOST analysts don't believe they even have the capabilities to reach the American coast even IF they make it through boost, midcourse, and their GPS actually works?
You hear "nuclear" and you think some crazy shit happens. Hold a fucking geiger counter up while you're sitting at your computer.
Better yet, hold one up next to your grandma's old china.
Even better, hold it up while you're going through an airport scanner.
Or even better....hold it up out in the middle of fucking nowhere...watch it tick from the radiation.
You don't know what it means to "test" a 1 kiloton warhead.
If you did, you'd know how the enrichment of Uranium works.
If you knew that, you'd know that you don't fucking test at 1 kiloton yield unless you can't fucking produce U235 at any effective rate and it's taken you so long to produce that tiny amount that you're not even sure if the U235 you made 20 years ago is going to be worth a damn anymore.
The fucking Trinity test was 20 kiloton, in 1945 when no one had any fucking clue how to properly enrich Uranium, or if Plutonium was the better choice, or if the fucking idea would even work.
1945, no clue in the world, and they pumped out over 20 kilotons in the desert....in a few years....from fucking scratch.
It ain't the "knowledge." Any physics major in the world could tell you how the process of making U235 works. Any grad student focusing on Nuclear physics could write an entire novel on that SINGLE subject. Any Nuclear Engineer could probably tell you half a dozen variations, thousands of cost effective changes, and even more theoretical possibilities for both.
The problem is, it's fucking hard to make U235. It's fucking expensive too...especially on a $5 billion annual military budget.
All you do by "testing" a 1 kiloton yield fission bomb is let the world know that you're not even fucking close to enriching uranium at a rate to be a viable threat to fucking Tuva.
All that did was let everyone know that they do not have a nuclear arsenal, cannot produce a nuclear arsenal, and will not have those capabilities for some time.
It let everyone (who doesn't hear "nuclear" and associate it with some kind of sorcery or magic) know that they are likely to call up Seoul and ask to be friends again before they achieve any kind of modern fusion bomb technologies that would make them a legitimate nuclear threat on the world scale.
-
Sorry. Any threat is too much of a threat. Even if it's only a "small" nuke. If they suitcase that shit, that means thousands of dead Americans. I'm not down with that.
And if you allow them to build small nukes, they will continue to evolve until they have large nukes.
My standards are simple - any nation that fires missiles toward us, makes threats, and sets off a nuke of any size - they're certainly a threat worthy of the Bush doctrine.
You have countries with unstable governments sitting on 10,000,000,000 tons or more of nuclear yield that would actually hit their target, and you're creaming your pants over North korea being able to produce 500 tons of yield a year?
Do you not see the difference?
Since you obviously don't, North Korea could spend the next year working on a bomb that would do a bit less damage than the first day of "shock and awe" did....to a few whales off the Pacific coast.....wait another 13 months and do it again (they wouldn't have that option)....or some goat herder named Pavlic could end up at the right place and the right time in a government upheaval and have his oxen haul away a single nuclear warhead that would take North Korea 200,000 YEARS to produce at their current rate.
A group of tribesman yielding yak femurs and carrying goat-skin shields could do more damage to the typical Alaskan town than North Korea could by way of ICBM nuclear attack.
-
Doison = great posts.
-
I've seen you consistently make this claim over the years yet I can't think of any time that you've actually provided proof of said claim of yours.
Nothing comes up on a quick google search either so please enlighten me.
If I remember right, it was July 4, 2007 or 2008...
-
So they fired AT Hawaii...trying to hit the US with a missile attack...but failed to make the distance?
Why doesn't ANY report on the issue say that?
I took a shit towards China this morning. It failed to make the distance too.
Did I now officially attempt a turd-missile attack on China?
AHAHHAHAHHAKLJSHDKLJASL:KHAHFHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHA HHAHH
LMFAO
ahhahaha one of the best posts ive read LOL classic
-
Damn, Doison dropping the hammer all over this thread. Great posts. 8)