Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
0 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bush Is Back (part 2)!
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 164 (165927)
12-07-2004 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by jar
12-07-2004 2:11 PM


Re: Military Spending
And why did the allies win????

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by jar, posted 12-07-2004 2:11 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by coffee_addict, posted 12-07-2004 3:11 PM JESUS freak has not replied
 Message 87 by jar, posted 12-07-2004 7:33 PM JESUS freak has not replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 107 of 164 (166250)
12-08-2004 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by MangyTiger
12-07-2004 8:33 PM


Left over
Saddam was supposed to disarm completly, not just stop making WMD. We recieved info that he did not compleatly disarm, and we were right. Wherever the shell was from, it was against the treaty

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by MangyTiger, posted 12-07-2004 8:33 PM MangyTiger has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by berberry, posted 12-08-2004 1:55 PM JESUS freak has not replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 108 of 164 (166252)
12-08-2004 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by coffee_addict
12-07-2004 10:07 PM


Re: Military Spending
No, though we did have more production capeabillity, we used our tech in production aircraft, and used it corectly. For example, the Messersmit 262 jet fighter would have stopped all of our bombers, but hitler wanted these planes to be used as bombers, despite their short range. Our P-38, (in my opinion the best plane in the war) used what was then brand new engines, ideas, and componats to create the US's first long range fighter. And yes the german tanks were better than ours, (though about equal to the russians or soviets) and so we were losing the ground war in europe for a while because though we had more tanks, the germans were better.
In responce to outsourcing and boeing, though the bush family got their money from overseas, thats were they started out, because thats where the oil is. Also, boeing was padding the price of the tankers, and yes, it would be treason to buy from airbus, which is why we didn't, though the europeans did.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by coffee_addict, posted 12-07-2004 10:07 PM coffee_addict has not replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 110 of 164 (166259)
12-08-2004 2:05 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by MangyTiger
12-07-2004 10:33 PM


Re: Military Spending
No, it isn't good be out sourcing military eqipment, but lets say a war with china happened. The gooks would get their but kicked. Why?
1. China has a huge army, I know this, but while this is a major threat to russia, this army is not a threat to us because they have almost no transport capability to get their tanks over.
2. China does have the biggest air force, but it is also the least capable. About one third of their fighters are J-6, copies of the russian MIG-19 from vietnam, which our F-4s would have kiked but if they had been allowed to.
3. The PLAN is a oxymoron execpt for their carrier which has a few (very few compared to ours) Suokki-33 (the carrier based version of the Suokki-27 Flanker multi role fighter
4. Though they have nukes, we could take them out the very first day with B-2s or FB-22 out of Guam filled with GBU-28 Super Penetrators or mini nukes, any that got off would be clobbered by our ABL-1
End story, we still kick but despite clinton.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by MangyTiger, posted 12-07-2004 10:33 PM MangyTiger has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by CK, posted 12-08-2004 2:13 PM JESUS freak has not replied
 Message 122 by Dr Jack, posted 12-09-2004 5:23 AM JESUS freak has replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 115 of 164 (166316)
12-08-2004 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by CK
12-08-2004 3:04 PM


Re: Military Spending
no, it was (and still somewhat is) slang for a comunist, luke the gook was a commen nickname for the enemy in either the korean of vietnam war, I can't remember which

This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by CK, posted 12-08-2004 3:04 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by CK, posted 12-08-2004 5:11 PM JESUS freak has replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 116 of 164 (166318)
12-08-2004 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by jar
12-08-2004 5:05 PM


Re: Military Spending
Even if I had used this word to defame someone, (I mainly used it because it was shorter than comunist [and a lot easier to spell])you did just about the same thing by classifying me as a fundamentalist Christian.
If I ofended anyone, I am sorry

This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by jar, posted 12-08-2004 5:05 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by jar, posted 12-08-2004 5:18 PM JESUS freak has not replied
 Message 126 by nator, posted 12-09-2004 10:23 AM JESUS freak has replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 118 of 164 (166322)
12-08-2004 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by CK
12-08-2004 5:11 PM


Re: Military Spending
I am not condoning their actions in any way.
"Gook" is a name for comi enemy soliders, and not for villigers who have no choice. The arab WARRIORS I can understand calling something, just as a nickname, but again, muslims as a whole have done nothing wrong, and calling them a nickname would be like calling a black a niger.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by CK, posted 12-08-2004 5:11 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by CK, posted 12-08-2004 5:15 PM JESUS freak has not replied
 Message 123 by Silent H, posted 12-09-2004 5:33 AM JESUS freak has not replied
 Message 142 by Coragyps, posted 12-10-2004 9:32 AM JESUS freak has not replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 128 of 164 (166564)
12-09-2004 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Dr Jack
12-09-2004 5:23 AM


Re: Military Spending
First, if a missle got past the ABL-1, thanks to bush we have a missle sheild as a last defence, and we can always post a couple aegis crusiers (see tom clancy's book, The Bear and the Dragon) around the target citys as well as patriot PAC-3. Because the chinese missles are just a copy of our old titian 2 city buster missles that we got rid of in the 80s,we know that the silos have to be oriented in the direction of the target, which means we can get a pretty good idea of where it is targeted. Also, like our old titian 2's, the missles are liquid fueled meaning that If they had no warning about our attack, the missles would not be fueled.
Second, it is not us that would attack China, though they have gone against multiple treatys. We could probaly beat them atacking single hadedly, but it would be a bloody war.
If there is to be a war, china would attack us, and that is not going to happen. If they do, we whoop their buts, so they lose either way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Dr Jack, posted 12-09-2004 5:23 AM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by CK, posted 12-09-2004 2:27 PM JESUS freak has replied
 Message 141 by Dr Jack, posted 12-10-2004 9:20 AM JESUS freak has not replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 129 of 164 (166566)
12-09-2004 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by nator
12-09-2004 10:23 AM


Re: Military Spending
please see previous, first, american chinese citizans are americans, and secondly, gook is used refer to military and leaders of china, again once more, not it's people

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by nator, posted 12-09-2004 10:23 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by berberry, posted 12-09-2004 2:29 PM JESUS freak has replied
 Message 140 by nator, posted 12-09-2004 5:47 PM JESUS freak has replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 133 of 164 (166611)
12-09-2004 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by CK
12-09-2004 2:27 PM


Re: Military Spending
no, it is the story line of the bear and the dragon, and (I have cheched) pretty tech acurate

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by CK, posted 12-09-2004 2:27 PM CK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by CK, posted 12-09-2004 4:57 PM JESUS freak has replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 135 of 164 (166614)
12-09-2004 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by berberry
12-09-2004 2:29 PM


Re: Double Standards
thats because you can't acces your linked website WITHOUT A MEMBERSHIP Check these things out before you post links to them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by berberry, posted 12-09-2004 2:29 PM berberry has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by CK, posted 12-09-2004 5:04 PM JESUS freak has not replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 136 of 164 (166615)
12-09-2004 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 131 by berberry
12-09-2004 2:29 PM


Re: Double Standards
thats because you can't acces your linked website WITHOUT A MEMBERSHIP Check these things out before you post links to them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by berberry, posted 12-09-2004 2:29 PM berberry has not replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 138 of 164 (166618)
12-09-2004 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by CK
12-09-2004 4:57 PM


Info Check
you can get specs of the Titan 2 either in The US War Machine (written in 78, but very good book, and I believe they have made an updated edition, though I have not read it) or at GlobalSecurity.org. then go to weapon systems of WMD I read about china's in either popular science or popular mechanics, I don't remember, but I'll check and get back to you tomorrow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by CK, posted 12-09-2004 4:57 PM CK has not replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 143 of 164 (166923)
12-10-2004 9:46 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by nator
12-09-2004 5:47 PM


Re: Military Spending
fine if your so offended by it, I won't use it again

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by nator, posted 12-09-2004 5:47 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by nator, posted 12-10-2004 9:50 AM JESUS freak has not replied

  
JESUS freak
Inactive Member


Message 146 of 164 (166973)
12-10-2004 2:00 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by contracycle
12-10-2004 11:55 AM


Re: Military Spending
sure, but in the middle east, at least in a lot of places, if your not muslim, they kill/imprision you

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by contracycle, posted 12-10-2004 11:55 AM contracycle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by nator, posted 12-10-2004 4:22 PM JESUS freak has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024