 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
Nobody wants a piece of your Iraq mess, and everybody thinks the Bushies won't call their UN bluff. Well, maybe India might want a junk....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"Hijo de perra!"
Hundsfot?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
Son of a Dog,
methinks
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
Of trying to get a resolution for nothing. He'll have to put up something a bit more enticing than his stupid visage.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DAVOUT
|
 |
AUERSTADT
Jun 2002
time: 05:29
|
|
A friend of mine, janitor at the DoD, found yesterday a crumpled paper in the paper basket of Donald Rumsfeld. It reads as follows:
quote:
D R A F T of a speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations
A few days ago, my good friend and deputy Paul Wolfowitz, whose admiration for the UN is second only to mine, told me: it seems that some misunderstandings have been accumulated between the US and the UN, and you should make an attempt to overcome that. Colin Powell after all comes from the Army, and the militaries are not really convincing when playing the diplomats. You are much more credible.
I therefore came here to tell you the truth, only the truth but all the truth.
I have been reported to say: those who are not with us are against us. This is due to a clerical error; a word is missing, Iraqis. What I have said is: Those Iraqis who are not with us are against us.
It has been said that I had the intent to revise our alliances, and this was interpreted as a will to repudiate some of our oldest allies. This was taken out of context, when I said that, I just wanted to review the list of our allies, in order not to forget any one.
A lot of comments were made on my desire to punish some allies, specifically France and Germany, for not agreeing with us; nothing is more foreign to me than such an idea; I have just to add that I personally insisted for having Jacques and Gerard invited to the ranch for Halloween.
When it became clear that the recruitment of the willings was progressing poorly, I supposedly said that we need not anybody else to do the job, even if the British dropped in the last minute. This is due to a Microsoft failure, in that their b***y word processing program omitted, for reasons still unexplained, a critical part of the sentence, that is : more than our beloved French and German allies. The full sentence becomes: we need not anybody else to do the job more than our beloved French and German allies.
Regarding the reconstruction contracts, you have to consider that I am not alone, and I was put under pressure by one of the highest elected responsible of the White House whose name I am obliged to conceal. I consented to restrict the access to the juicy contracts to US companies with which he had sentimental links. However, I knew from the beginning that their skills where not oriented toward electricity and water, which explains the current situation in Baghdad, situation which will quickly bring the Civil Administrator to grant contracts to more qualified companies.
There are UN detractors who contend that UN always fails and that we can do any nation building without the UN participation. I have spent a great amount of time trying to show they are in error; my arguments are currently decisively reinforced by the situation developing in Iraq, and I want you to believe that I am, and nobody else, your more enthusiastic ally in this case. I seize this opportunity to thank you for the gift of a blue helmet. I hereby promise to keep it close to me and to put it on my head anytime somebody does not express a vociferous support of the UN action.
This is frankly the truth about the misunderstanding that I hope is now clarified. There can be no longer any objection to the participation of the UN in the building of a democracy in Iraq; I am sure that you will share happily the cost and the troubles, so that our invincible soldiers can liberate other people.
My only conclusion will be :
UN ! UN ! UN ! UN !
Donald Rumsfeld
US Defence Secretary
Honorary Blue Helmet
|
This is clearly the way to go.  :
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
Funny, but in some way true. I think if Bush wants some substantial help, he has to go to Canossa.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DinoDoc
Ti Durok. |
Sam poshel na hui.
You made 2 mistakes, it should be "tY" and "durAk". Nice try anyway.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Fez
You lost, serb. |
You're crazy person Fez. You always have only one argument- "F*ck you, you stalinist. I told you that I'm right and it's true."
You can't prove your position with facts and just sounds as broken recorder- "f*ck you, I am right. F*ck you, I'm right not you're. F*ck you...blah...blah...blah...f*ck this...f*ck that...".
Prove me that you fired from AN-94. It's obvious lie and you're obvious liar. Next time you'll tell me that you flight on "Buran" and it's sucks.
Prove me that M-16 is better than AN-94. I really wish to see how you'll do this.
M16A2: Overall length 1006 mm
AN-94: Overall length 943 mm (728 mm with butt folded)
M16A2:Empty weight 3.77 kg
AN-94: Empty weight 3.85 k g
M16A2:Cyclic rate of fire: 800 rounds per minute
AN-94:Cyclic rate of fire: 1800 and 600 rounds per minute variable
M16A2:Maximum effective range: 550 meters
AN-94:Maximum effective range: 700 meters
M16A2: Fire modes: single shot, three rounds burst.
AN-94: Fire modes: single shot, two rounds burst, full auto burst.
AN-94 is 63 mm shorter, 80 gramms heavier, much more accurate, faster and relaible weapon than M16A2. With much greater stopping power and greater body armour penetration, thanks to its unique, extremely accurate 2-rounds burst mode.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
Then prove that it's fiction. Post your data about those rifles and make your own comparison.
Without facts your claim is nothing more than bullsh!t.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Serb
|
|
Siberia, Communist party of Apolyton
Nov 2001
time: 11:29
|
|
Perhaps you blind?
AN-94 shot faster, shot more accurate and shot further than M-16. It's obvious from comparison of both rifles parameters. AN-94 also have 3 fire modes vs. 2 M16's modes. Two rounds burst mode of AN-94 is absolutely unique feature, and it's extremly accurate. Using this mode, a proffesional shooter can place TWO BULLETS into ONE HOLE with one pull of trigger from 100 meters distance. He CAN'T, just CAN'T do the same using ANY OTHER RIFLE IN THE WORLD (including all modifications of M16 of course), because it's just technicaly IMPOSSIBLE. AN-94 two rounds burst mode is absolutely unique feature.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-07-2003 11:54
|