 |
| |
|
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999
time: 21:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ThePlagueRat
Ok, intentions were all right.  The war was ended,
but it was still a nuke, and then the Geneva convention came.
This means USA should now disarm themself of nukes,
or face sanctions from the civilized world. It was a warcrime.
And I don't blame no american citizen for it, I just blame the generals and the prez.
Don't you guys see?!
Your administration do the same as Saddam is doing.
Did they really manage to brainwash the US population too?
-<>-<::>-<::>-<:::>-<:::::>-<:::>-<::>-<::>-<>- |
TPR, there is a treaty on point. It is called the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The treaty distinguishes between those powers that have nuclear weapons from those that do not. It calls for the IAEA to supervise compliance with respect to those countries that do not have nuclear weapons. With respect to countries that do have nuclear weapons, such as the United States, France, Great Britain, Russia and China, the treaty calls for a gradual reduction of the the nuclear weapons to zero by mutually negotiated treaties.
The United States and countries directly threatened by nukes seem to be among the only countries concerned about further proliferation. For example: only the United States, the UK, Bulgaria and Spain seemed to be truly concerned about the disarming Saddam Hussein. The whole world is looking to the United States to solve the problem of North Korea. Also, no one seems to be truly concerned about Iran, that is, except for Israel.
Regarding the United States own nuclear weapons, surely you know, that United States has been negotiating significant reductions of its own nuclear stockpile in coordination with Russia. We just signed a treaty that would reduce our own stockpile by a one third, IIRC.
So get off your high horse on this issue. United States is abiding by its treaty obligations. I wish you would ask why countries other than the US, the UK and a few others are not concerned about proliferation. They may be willing to mouth platitudes about disarmament; but they are signularly unwilling to do anything about it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
raghar
|
|
I wish somewhere else.
Oct 2002
time: 05:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Merciless
What are you talking about? The truth is s that we delivered 2 bombs into Khadafi's bedrooms, and he has been quiet since then.
|
Poor girl she was just adopted.
quote:
Iraqis had even more your Russian made SAMs back in 1991, we mopped floor with them. |
There was some order about not attacking Migs 29. isn't it... Well, IR from ground did good job.
quote:
And T72s, supposedly advanced Russian MBTs, were blewn to pieces like target practices. We didn't lose a single M1. |
So you compare old Russian tanks in Arabians hands on open terain with attacking tanks with gun stabilization?
M1 vs tank launched anti tank missiles would be more intersting in 1991. Russians tanks have more advantages than being simple specialized mobile gun
quote:
Finally, you guys struggled so badly and are still struggling against the pathetic Chechens. You need to check your own past military records before bragging about how "great" Russia's military is. |
I'd reccomend do not speak about Chechens less you know some of them personaly and visited Chechnia. There is different view of them depends on how far are you from them. Ask some people from Daghestan.
If you would visit Chechnia I hope you'd not kidnaped for too long. 
{ oup my fault. I responded and didn't read this thread to the end. Some point was possibly done twice. ]
Last edited by raghar on 19-03-2003 at 04:12
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf Hårfagre
Do you mean that you actually believed every word Bush said? Iraq/Al-Queda links and all?
|
I for one believe very little that any politician says. But the alternative that you tacitly suggest is that Saddam is believable and both Bush and secretary Powell are liers. There is no evidence that I am aware of that sugests that Colin Powel is anything but a man of integrity. Do you believe Saddam over his word?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
So you think he has integrity but he is a liar? He made his statements before the UN. Did he lie to the world because he is loyal to Bush while also being a liar?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
I think you've got him wrong Sava. You may remember he was very outspoken against Bush. He saw the evidence that we don't see. He was converted by the facts. He is no one's fool.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-03-2003 03:27
do the DL party! 
" 
I saw that you were from Sweden.
|