Re: SPAMMERS

[HolyMasamune]

Why do you think so many countries hate the US? Maybe it's because we have people like bush running our country and waging war without proof (isn't there something like...one's innocent until proven guilty ?). I mean if the UN is going to handle it, bush should just back off and let them do their thing instead of showing off his military power. All that's going to do is make more countries hate the US. Plus, even the popular vote was against bush...he shouldn't have been president

Btw, don't respond to this saying "I smell a democrat"

[LBK Rules]

Ok, I sense a liberal.

[Reed B.]

I smell the triumph of derailing this thread like a penny on a railroad track.
To kick both sides while they're down, the only reason the US didn't oust Saddam is because we followed the UN charter, which said, in essence, to end aggression against Kuwait, not depose Hussein.

-Reed
"Will the UN serve its purpose, or will it be irrelevant?"
"There's a difference?"

[LBK Rules]

Ever since reading Left Behind (www.leftbehind.com), I have NEVER liked the GC, I mean UN.

[MRL180YTL2002]

That's because we play policeman of the world, trying to dictate to people on what you can and cannot do.

[MRL180YTL2002]

Help STOP SPAM: Try the new...

I laugh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Reed B.]

Originally posted by MRL180YTL2002
That's because we play policeman of the world, trying to dictate to people on what you can and cannot do.

If we intervene: "AMERICA! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING?!"
If we don't intervene: "AMERICA! WHY AREN'T YOU HELPING?!"

[JJG13]

Originally posted by Reed B.
If we intervene: "AMERICA! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING?!"
If we don't intervene: "AMERICA! WHY AREN'T YOU HELPING?!"

Exactly.
We pressure Iraq and everyone says we should stay home, that Saddam is really a misunderstand person that would never try to develope weapons of mass destruction.
Now with North Korea everyone asks "Why aren't we doing anything?"

It might not solve any problems but if you just nuked the better part of Asia...

<random thought/>
...It would eliminate the need for lighting
...They would glow in the dark
...The Russian submarine force already does
...maybe you could start nuclear fusion
...maybe you could drill a big hole to the center of the earth with 400 meagaton hydrogen bombs
...maybe we should have made the panama canal like that
...you would save the cost af those bullet the ground pounders use
...it wouln't solve anything because all the funds are in Swiss banks
...and the houses are in South America
...entropy is constantly increasing
...im sounding like a word association
</random thought>

can't we all just get along?

no.

[LBK Rules]

Originally posted by mgreenley
It might not solve any problems but if you just nuked the better part of Asia...

<random thought/>
...It would eliminate the need for lighting
...They would glow in the dark
...The Russian submarine force already does
...maybe you could start nuclear fusion
...maybe you could drill a big hole to the center of the earth with 400 meagaton hydrogen bombs
...maybe we should have made the panama canal like that
...you would save the cost af those bullet the ground pounders use
...it wouln't solve anything because all the funds are in Swiss banks
...and the houses are in South America
...entropy is constantly increasing
...im sounding like a word association
</random thought>

can't we all just get along?

no.

ROTFL

/me think mgreenley has had to much expresso.

[Noah]

Well, I would like to point out that it is the responsibility of the United states to uphold the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That document gaurantees basic human rights for all people, and in recent years the trend has been more and more to enforce it, including sending intervention into areas where it was not wanted. I believe that it is the responsibility of the United states as the nation with the most available military to intervene. (10 Army divisions, 12 carrier battle groups, 12 air force fighter wings, and 3 marine expeditionary forces, according to January 2003 issue of Proceedings) On the other hand, this should be done as part of an international force. Only with the support of the international community should such a thing be undertaken, and that is not something that Bush had when he began deploying troops to the middle east.

On the plus side, it looks like the pentagon might finally get to test its stated ability to fight two wars independant of each other at the same time... bets on how long until the first announced deployment of manpower/equipment to N. Korea?

[MRL180YTL2002]

Actually for starters its 11 carriers. The 12th, the U.S.S. John F. Kennedy (CV-67), is partially manned by reservists. She counts, but not all that much. In actuallity the Navy itself should have at least 15 deployable carriers and the 16th to serve as a training platform for naval aviators undergoing training to try the real thing. (Sea Classics December 2000). Also the Navy be increased to about 600 ships of all types (especially patrol craft and minesweepers) and I know the 600 ship navy is the Cold War figures (see Lehman Jr., John F.. “The 600-Ship Navy”. The Maritime Strategy. Ed. James A. Barber Jr.. Annapolis: U.S. Naval Institute, 1986. ), but it really extends to today as we still have interests all over the globe. All war plans developed encompassed a two front war...if World War Three broke out against the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact verus N.A.T.O. we'd be fighting on a possible three. The Atlantic and Europe, the Middle East (oil), and the Pacific. So the plans are made with that in mind....the personnel and assets being available is a whole other ball game. And beside, we technically should already have at least one CVBG (Carrier Battle Group) up off of Korea along with an ARG (Amphibious Readiness Group) not counting nearby prepositioned marine and army equipment in Korea itself and all those island bases we still maintain like the Marianas, a few SSNs (Submarine- Nuclear, generally refered to as an attack boat/sub), an army divsion (or two, most likely infantry or mechanized infantry) and not counting whatever the Air Force has up there (I think a wing). The Korean War never ended, they just signed a cease fire agreement.

Personally, I do not want to know what will happen if we fight on two fronts againt two different "enemies." And also they better let the military fight it without political restrictions like they did in Vietnam. (See Tillman, Barrett and Nichols III, Commander John B., United States Navy (Retired). “Fighting Unwinnable Wars” Proceedings April 1986: 78-86.)

[hixofthehood]

I'd just like to say that aircraft carriers are cool, and war is not. That is all. You may resume.

[MRL180YTL2002]

I thought this thread was about S.P.A.M. and there's another thread about this war with Iraq thing somewhere in Chit-Chat.

I agree, but as you can see SPAM is the cause of all of this, so why not kust start eating turkey?