Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

THERE ARE NO WMD, THERE WERE NO WMD
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
The Bobster



Joined: 15 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gopher wrote:
On the bomb:

I've seen some evidence that suggests the War Dept. believed that the Japanese warlords wanted to surrender, but they needed to do it in such a way that they would save face.

I think one of the links alludes to this. In this case, "saving face" likely could also mean being unwilling to see the Japanese nation undergo any similar sort of set of atrocities akin to what the Japanese had already done elsewhere. It's a natural impulse to wish for the best deal possible when defeat and ignominious surrender is inevitable.

Quote:
Washington was demanding unconditional surrender, so there was no way to save face. Some strategists were aware of this problem but simply did not know how to deal with the Japanese, so the war was going to go on.

I think it's true that the cultural divide - ignorance of the essential nature of the enemy on the part of both sides - led to a lot of early victories by Japan and a lot of the difficulties during the endgame. There were some other options besides the ones that we adopted that were considered but not tried.

Quote:
I've also read that Russia's last-minute invasion and separation of Manchuria and the Koreas, and it's last-minute declaration of war against Japan, all made ending the war with Japan, with a U.S.-only occupation force, an urgent matter. So this, too, appears to have impacted Washington's thinking.

I assume you're referring to the second bombing of Nagasakl only 3 days later, far too soon for Tokyo to have learned (at that time in history) incredible details of Hiroshima and then gone through the process internally of deciding the right reaction. There's always been a questikon lurking in my mind about that ver short delay ...

Gopher's post deserves more time than I have. I posted quickly this morning as I was on my way to work and now I do the same as i am on my way to bed ... Bucheon Bum, I thnk we might have read the same words and come to different conclusions.

I'll try to get back this later.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 8:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Is American policy neutral toward the Kasmir issue with regard to India and Pakistan or not? Do we support India, as you said or at least implied?


the US is neutral but according to Bin Laden the US supports India. this shows that Bin Laden willl blame the US even if there is nothing to blame the US for.


You seem to be telling us that if the US were just to make some changes in its foreign policy that Al Qaida would leave the US alone - nothing could be farther from the truth.

Al Qadia fights for the Caliphate all the way from Spain to Timor. and then they perhaps would go on from there.

appeasment isn't a solution and you haven't offered any solution , cause you don't have one. You enemy is the US administration not Bin Laden. If you had a choice between getting rid of the Bush government or getting rid of Al Qaida, Khomeni lovers and the Bathists - I am sure you would choose to take out Bush.



Quote:
Is it true, or is it not true that nuke science came out of Pakistan and ended up in Libya, Iran and N Korea?


Sure but not with Musharifs help. What is your point anyway?



Quote:
Say clearly, and with no trace of foofaraw, that Bush's policy in the middle east has NOT been to the greatest advantage of the goals of bin Laden and diametrically OPPOSED to the real interests of America. WHERE have we benefited from all this? I don't see it, and you have never been able to show it.


It is too early to tell.

Khadday disamed, Syria is up aginst the wall. Saddam is not a problem anymore.

If the US gets bases in Iraq then the US will be in a much better position to project power.
Quote:

("Too early to see," I think is what you have said.)


but it is too early to say.




Edited, Hyalucent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Bobster



Joined: 15 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:
You seem to be telling us that if the US were just to make some changes in its foreign policy that Al Qaida would leave the US alone - nothing could be farther from the truth.

As with most people who use the phrase "seem to be telling us," you are, of course, lying. I never said it or implied it.

I said that the US needs to look after the interests of the US, and that engaging in a massive offensive against the ME region only serves the interests of the terror networks and nations that oppose our country and our values. The actions of the Bush administrations have served only to feed the desires of those elements mentioned above, and today the problem of terrorism is much worse than it was before.


Quote:
appeasment isn't a solution and you haven't offered any solution , cause you don't have one.

Appeasement is the exact opposite of what I have proposed. When you base ALL of your actions in opposition to an enemy rather than benefit to yourself you are allowing the enemy to control your actions. Once again, who has gained more by Bush's actions in Iraq? (Clue : The answer is not "the American people."

Now, ask again ... who is the appeaser? Well, it's that guy in the White House, isn't it? After all, HE is the one giving Al Queda everything it wants.

Quote:
You enemy is the US administration not Bin Laden. If you had a choice between getting rid of the Bush government or getting rid of Al Qaida, Khomeni lovers and the Bathists - I am sure you would choose to take out Bush.

You and I have argued this before. I have said that if an invading army with intent to occupy and build military bases intended to last for decades came down the street of my home town, I'd pick up a gun - and as much as i dislike Bush I would work to get him back in the oval Office. You have said you would collaborate and assist that invading army.

I cannot understand how you question my love of country and imply that yours is more.

Quote:
Quote:
Is it true, or is it not true that nuke science came out of Pakistan and ended up in Libya, Iran and N Korea?

Sure but not with Musharifs help. What is your point anyway?

Well, I guess the point is that the US is very selective about who it targets for non-proliferation violations, and that so far the biggest offender is a particular scientist in a country that we consider an ally ... and if Musharraf falls, the result will be yet anoither theocracy and this time they will definitely have nuke tech ... not possibly so like Iran and not defintely so N Korea, and not definitely NOT so with regard to Iraq.

Therefore, our approach to non-proliferation is not only hypocrital but flawed and against our own interests.

Quote:
Quote:
Say clearly, and with no trace of foofaraw, that Bush's policy in the middle east has NOT been to the greatest advantage of the goals of bin Laden and diametrically OPPOSED to the real interests of America. WHERE have we benefited from all this? I don't see it, and you have never been able to show it.

It is too early to tell.

I think I predicted that response. Lame.

[quote]
Quote:
Make a clear statement and do not dissemble. Do that. Or else admit that you are wrong, and the war is wrong, this war that supposed to be over a month after the fall of Baghdad but still claims lives ... say something clear and true, or admit your error. Or admit your lies.





Next April will be 3 years after the invasion. We have known for a while now that it was not connected to 9/11, not in any way tied to the defense of our nation (clue : we are still in danger from terror, surprise, surprise surprse) and most certainly not a humanitarian exercise to benefit the Iraqi people - I mean, hey, the sanctions were bad, but it looks like they are worse off now - and so it seems clear the motive was merely the effort to create personal gain for our country ...

Edited, Hyalucent
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Sat Oct 22, 2005 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I said that the US needs to look after the interests of the US, and that engaging in a massive offensive against the ME region only serves the interests of the terror networks and nations that oppose our country and our values. The actions of the Bush administrations have served only to feed the desires of those elements mentioned above, and today the problem of terrorism is much worse than it was before.




What are you getting at?
that the US ought not to have trade or political relations with states in the region cause Bin Laden and his thugs will be angry and then blow things up if the US doesn't listen to him.

Before that what was the US to do let Saddam have Kuwait?

The problem of terror is worse now than before 9-11?







Quote:
Appeasement is the exact opposite of what I have proposed. When you base ALL of your actions in opposition to an enemy rather than benefit to yourself you are allowing the enemy to control your actions. Once again, who has gained more by Bush's actions in Iraq? (Clue : The answer is not "the American people."



what have you proposed? Why don't you restate it for the record.

this is what I got.


, that the US have no more relations with states in the region cause Bin Laden and his flukys will blow things up if the US doesn't listen. Of course since Bin Laden has goals outsdie the region it would not stop there.

And since Bin Laden is intent on blameing the US for things that the US has nothing to do with doing a few things so he won't be angry is not going to satisfying him anyway.

Quote:
Now, ask again ... who is the appeaser? Well, it's that guy in the White House, isn't it? After all, HE is the one giving Al Queda everything it wants.


I don't think they like being chased around in Afghansitan. And they certainly don't want Iraq to become anything close to democratic nor do they want there to be Shia rule there.





Quote:
You and I have argued this before. I have said that if an invading army with intent to occupy and build military bases intended to last for decades came down the street of my home town, I'd pick up a gun - and as much as i dislike Bush I would work to get him back in the oval Office. You have said you would collaborate and assist that invading army.


that is different than what you said last time.


The Bobster said


Quote:
Well, screw, that. If the invaders from The Scandinavian People's Republic who had just marched down Main Street of Santa Rosa, California, had just deposed the evil Fourth Reicv of President Jeb, (Bush III) I would thank them for their trouble but if they stayed a moment longer than I wanted, I would pick up that gun and drill any one of them between the eyes, especially if i could get away clean to do it again to another one the next day.




and you



Anyway notice that the Shias and the Kurds 80% of Iraq areor not working to bring back Saddam to power.

Quote:

I cannot understand how you question my love of country and imply that yours is more.


I don't worry that the US is too powerful.

Quote:
Well, I guess the point is that the US is very selective about who it targets for non-proliferation violations, and that so far the biggest offender is a particular scientist in a country that we consider an ally
..

Yes, but Musharif is one thing the Ayatollahs or Saddam are another. besides I still don't know your point for bring this up.



Quote:
. and if Musharraf falls, the result will be yet anoither theocracy and this time they will definitely have nuke tech ... not possibly so like Iran and not defintely so N Korea, and not definitely NOT so with regard to Iraq.



Yes that is so I still don't know what your point is. But anyway Saddam was just as bad or worse than the Ayatollahs. Just cause Iraq wasn't a theocracy didn't make it any less a terrible government with evil goals.

Quote:
Therefore, our approach to non-proliferation is not only hypocrital but flawed and against our own interests.



What does that have to do with anything? but anyway Musharif with nukes is not nearly as bad as North Korea or Iran or Saddam with nukes.







What you do advocate is a combination of no solution and appeasement.






Quote:
Next April will be 3 years after the invasion. We have known for a while now that it was not connected to 9/11, not in any way tied to the defense of our nation (clue : we are still in danger from terror, surprise, surprise surprse) and most certainly not a humanitarian exercise to benefit the Iraqi people - I mean, hey, the sanctions were bad, but it looks like they are worse off now - and so it seems clear the motive was merely the effort to create personal gain for our country ...
[i]

The way the mideast was was connected to 9-11.

the US was in danger from terror before the US invaded iraq.

Iraqis will probably not worse off now, and they will have a lot of chances to be better off in the future.

the personal gain you talk of is trying to force mideast regimes and elties to stop inciting violence , teaching hate , funding Al Qaida and planning terror.

Edited, Hyalucent


Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Sat Oct 22, 2005 9:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hyalucent



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: British North America

PostPosted: Sun Oct 23, 2005 10:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Please keep the vitriol at tolerable levels. Please avoid personal attacks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
EFLtrainer



Joined: 04 May 2005

PostPosted: Sun Oct 23, 2005 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051023/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_insurgency_s_future_2;_ylt=Ajjue2m23HfvW3zlpKQPQM5X6GMA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Iraq Insurgency Shows No Signs of Slowdown By HAMZA HENDAWI, Associated Press Writer
50 minutes ago

BAGHDAD, Iraq - With the grim milestone of the 2,000th U.S. military death looming in Iraq, many wonder about the direction of the insurgency that killed most of them.

Experts think the country's increasingly regional-oriented politics will fuel the insurgency and even spread it further inside Iraq. Others put forward a simple, disquieting scenario: So long as U.S. and other foreign troops remain in Iraq, the insurgency will continue.

"It will become more chaotic," predicted Magnus Ranstorp of the Swedish National Defense College in Stockholm, Sweden. "It is obvious that the United States is in Iraq to stay. If this is the case, the Shiites will likely join the Sunnis in the fight."

The 2,000 mark in U.S. military deaths is approaching at a time when Iraqi and U.S. officials are congratulating themselves that the Oct. 15 constitutional referendum and the start of Saddam Hussein's trial four days later passed without major bloodshed and destruction.

They also are upbeat about the growing efficiency and number — 200,000 at present — of Iraq's security forces, although some U.S. commanders say the Iraqis need 18 months to two years before they can fight the insurgency unaided.

Recent operations in western Iraq, especially in towns along the Euphrates River close to the Syrian border, are said to have been effective in disrupting the insurgents' supply lines and reducing the number of car bombs.

Stepped-up security has forced insurgents in recent weeks to largely abandon using car bombs and resort to indirect fire, such as lobbing mortar shells from afar, Interior Minister Bayan Jabr said.

Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, U.S. military spokesman in Iraq, said troops captured more than 300 foreign fighters and killed 100 members of al-Qaida in Iraq the past six months. Other successes include the detention of 600 insurgents in the two weeks before the referendum, said Maj. Gen. William G. Webster, commander of U.S. forces in Baghdad.

But no official predicts a quick victory.

"The insurgents are still there," Lynch cautioned. "They still want to derail the democratic process. They still want to discredit the Iraqi government, so operations continue."

Last week proved to be one of the bloodiest for U.S. troops, with 23 killed, many in restive Anbar province. That raised to 1,996 the number of U.S. military personnel who have died since the war began in March 2003, according to an Associated Press Count.

The insurgents are made up of disparate groups of Sunni Arabs, who lost the privileged status they held under Saddam. But the motives driving them are many, from a nationalist anger over the presence of foreign troops to an urge to create an Islamic state to a desire to regain perks.
The domestic rebels are aided by foreign fighters brought into Iraq by leaders like al-Qaida in Iraq's Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to participate in a self-styled "holy war." The foreign contingent, said by U.S. officials to be mostly Arabs, is widely blamed for dozens of devastating suicide bombings targeting Shiite Muslims and Iraqi security forces.

Iraq's majority Shiites and minority Kurds — the two communities most oppressed under Saddam — have been empowered by the former dictator's ouster and are cooperating with the Americans.

Their areas, in the south and north, are almost entirely free of the violence that grips regions with significant Sunni Arab populations.

But experts contend the fighting could soon begin to take dramatic turns, more heavily influenced by outside events and possibly bringing new factions into the fight.


For example, they say, if Washington and London continue to put pressure on Iran over its nuclear program, Iraq's Shiite neighbor could be tempted to encourage radical Iraqi Shiite factions to stage attacks on U.S. and British forces.

Indeed, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said recently the bombs that killed eight British soldiers in southern Iraq since May were similar to those used by Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite militant group in Lebanon.

Iran, which has close links to Shiite political parties in Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari's coalition government, has denied any involvement.

"The Iranians are instrumental in upping the ante," said Vali Nasr, who lectures on national security affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif. "They have been practicing restraint, but this may already have begun to change."

Nasr said Iraqi Shiites' tolerance of the U.S. military presence flows from Washington's support for the political process that has benefited them the most. But, he said, this could change if it appeared the United States was not leaving Iraq.

U.S. forces already had a taste of simultaneously fighting Sunni Arabs and Shiites. For nearly five months last year, U.S. forces were stretched to the limit, fighting the mainstream insurgency in Sunni areas while struggling to put down two rebellions by Shiite militiamen loyal to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

Syria, another neighbor, could succumb to mounting U.S. pressure to keep Islamic fighters from using its territory to cross into Iraq. But it also could respond by seeking to create more problems for the Americans by helping the militants to join the Iraq war.

"As long as there are Americans in Iraq, Islamists will want to go and fight them," said Dia'a Rashwan, an Egyptian expert on Muslim militant groups.


Could not agree more. Got to get out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
igotthisguitar



Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 8:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Beam weapons almost ready for battle
Directed energy could revolutionize warfare, expert says

AFRL
A laser fires from space toward Earth in this artistic rendering. The Air Force Research Laboratory��s Directed Energy Directorate is conducting research in a wide variety of laser weapons technologies.

• Combat in the cosmos
The militarization of space

Space.com

By Leonard David
Senior space writer
Updated: 12:10 p.m. ET Jan. 11, 2006



LOS ALAMOS, N.M. - There is a new breed of weaponry fast approaching — and at the speed of light, no less. They are labeled "directed-energy weapons," and they may well signal a revolution in military hardware — perhaps more so than the atomic bomb.

Directed-energy weapons take the form of lasers, high-powered microwaves and particle beams. Their adoption for ground, air, sea, and space warfare depends not only on using the electromagnetic spectrum, but also upon favorable political and budgetary wavelengths too.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10805240/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

igotthisguitar wrote:
Beam weapons almost ready for battle
Directed energy could revolutionize warfare, expert says

AFRL
A laser fires from space toward Earth in this artistic rendering. The Air Force Research Laboratory��s Directed Energy Directorate is conducting research in a wide variety of laser weapons technologies.

• Combat in the cosmos
The militarization of space

Space.com

By Leonard David
Senior space writer
Updated: 12:10 p.m. ET Jan. 11, 2006



LOS ALAMOS, N.M. - There is a new breed of weaponry fast approaching — and at the speed of light, no less. They are labeled "directed-energy weapons," and they may well signal a revolution in military hardware — perhaps more so than the atomic bomb.

Directed-energy weapons take the form of lasers, high-powered microwaves and particle beams. Their adoption for ground, air, sea, and space warfare depends not only on using the electromagnetic spectrum, but also upon favorable political and budgetary wavelengths too.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10805240/



Good
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
igotthisguitar



Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 3:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:
igotthisguitar wrote:
Beam weapons almost ready for battle
Directed energy could revolutionize warfare, expert says

AFRL
A laser fires from space toward Earth in this artistic rendering. The Air Force Research Laboratory��s Directed Energy Directorate is conducting research in a wide variety of laser weapons technologies.

• Combat in the cosmos
The militarization of space

Space.com

By Leonard David
Senior space writer
Updated: 12:10 p.m. ET Jan. 11, 2006



LOS ALAMOS, N.M. - There is a new breed of weaponry fast approaching — and at the speed of light, no less. They are labeled "directed-energy weapons," and they may well signal a revolution in military hardware — perhaps more so than the atomic bomb.

Directed-energy weapons take the form of lasers, high-powered microwaves and particle beams. Their adoption for ground, air, sea, and space warfare depends not only on using the electromagnetic spectrum, but also upon favorable political and budgetary wavelengths too.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10805240/



Good


Yep ... kinda thought that would be your knee "jerk" response, being the huge fan of space weapon-i-zation that you are Twisted Evil

Clearly proving the point of course that, for brainwashed warmongers such as yourself, provided they control them, WMD's are really A-OK.

"Do as we say ... NOT as we do."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

igotthisguitar wrote:
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote:
igotthisguitar wrote:
Beam weapons almost ready for battle
Directed energy could revolutionize warfare, expert says

AFRL
A laser fires from space toward Earth in this artistic rendering. The Air Force Research Laboratory��s Directed Energy Directorate is conducting research in a wide variety of laser weapons technologies.

• Combat in the cosmos
The militarization of space

Space.com

By Leonard David
Senior space writer
Updated: 12:10 p.m. ET Jan. 11, 2006



LOS ALAMOS, N.M. - There is a new breed of weaponry fast approaching — and at the speed of light, no less. They are labeled "directed-energy weapons," and they may well signal a revolution in military hardware — perhaps more so than the atomic bomb.

Directed-energy weapons take the form of lasers, high-powered microwaves and particle beams. Their adoption for ground, air, sea, and space warfare depends not only on using the electromagnetic spectrum, but also upon favorable political and budgetary wavelengths too.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10805240/



Good


Yep ... kinda thought that would be your knee "jerk" response, being the huge fan of space weapon-i-zation that you are Twisted Evil

Clearly proving the point of course that, for brainwashed warmongers such as yourself, provided they control them, WMD's are really A-OK.

"Do as we say ... NOT as we do."


Yes the US ought to unilaterally disarm and not try to win even though it has enemies trying to destroy it.

Bin Laden, Stalin , Hitler , Kim Il Sung , Pol Pot and Khomeni and the Klan and Jeff Rense and his supporters are all enemies of the US.

With enemies like that the US must be doing something right.

Judge the US by its ememies. The US has all the right enemies, including U

Anyway you support war just as long as that nation is waging it against the US. You support war you are just with the other side.

No the US ought to not be taking advice from those wish it ill. Sorry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
igotthisguitar



Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mushrooms Clouds Over Las Vegas
US to test 700-tonne explosive

AFP | March 31 2006

The US military plans to detonate a 700 tonne explosive charge in a test called "Divine Strake" that will send a mushroom cloud over Las Vegas, a senior defense official said.

"I don't want to sound glib here but it is the first time in Nevada that you'll see a mushroom cloud over Las Vegas since we stopped testing nuclear weapons," said James Tegnelia, head of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

Tegnelia said the test was part of a US effort to develop weapons capable of destroying deeply buried bunkers housing nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

"We have several very large penetrators we're developing," he told defense reporters.

"We also have -- are you ready for this - a 700-tonne explosively formed charge that we're going to be putting in a tunnel in Nevada," he said.

"And that represents to us the largest single explosive that we could imagine doing conventionally to solve that problem," he said.

The aim is to measure the effect of the blast on hard granite structures, he said.

"If you want to model these weapons, you want to know from a modeling point of view what is the ideal best condition you could ever set up in a conventional weapon -- what's the best you can do.

"And this gets at the best point you could get on a curve. So it allows us to predict how effective these kinds of weapons ... would be," he said.

He said the Russians have been notified of the test, which is scheduled for the first week of June at the Nevada test range.

"We're also making sure that Las Vegas understands," Tegnelia said.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Summer Wine



Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River

PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yep ... kinda thought that would be your knee "jerk" response, being the huge fan of space weapon-i-zation that you are

Clearly proving the point of course that, for brainwashed warmongers such as yourself, provided they control them, WMD's are really A-OK.


I would be interested in hearing your solution to this problem of military development by states that is so broad that it would not end up being solely targeted against military targets.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bulsajo



Joined: 16 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Summer Wine wrote:
igotthisguitarshapedbraintumor wrote:
Yep ... kinda thought that would be your knee "jerk" response, being the huge fan of space weapon-i-zation that you are

Clearly proving the point of course that, for brainwashed warmongers such as yourself, provided they control them, WMD's are really A-OK.


I would be interested in hearing your solution to this problem

You would?
1 is the lonliest number...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee



Joined: 25 May 2003

PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

igotthisguitar wrote:
Mushrooms Clouds Over Las Vegas
US to test 700-tonne explosive

AFP | March 31 2006

The US military plans to detonate a 700 tonne explosive charge in a test called "Divine Strake" that will send a mushroom cloud over Las Vegas, a senior defense official said.

"I don't want to sound glib here but it is the first time in Nevada that you'll see a mushroom cloud over Las Vegas since we stopped testing nuclear weapons," said James Tegnelia, head of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

Tegnelia said the test was part of a US effort to develop weapons capable of destroying deeply buried bunkers housing nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

"We have several very large penetrators we're developing," he told defense reporters.

"We also have -- are you ready for this - a 700-tonne explosively formed charge that we're going to be putting in a tunnel in Nevada," he said.

"And that represents to us the largest single explosive that we could imagine doing conventionally to solve that problem," he said.

The aim is to measure the effect of the blast on hard granite structures, he said.

"If you want to model these weapons, you want to know from a modeling point of view what is the ideal best condition you could ever set up in a conventional weapon -- what's the best you can do.

"And this gets at the best point you could get on a curve. So it allows us to predict how effective these kinds of weapons ... would be," he said.

He said the Russians have been notified of the test, which is scheduled for the first week of June at the Nevada test range.

"We're also making sure that Las Vegas understands," Tegnelia said.



Good
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Summer Wine



Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River

PostPosted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You would?
1 is the lonliest number...


Should I take from your tone of writing that it is targeted at me or at the writer of the original piece?

Learn what others think, give them the opportunity to vent verbally. It may help to limit feelings that would result in venting of a physical nature. I believe in freedom of speech, it is not automatic that I will agree with someone, but I would be interested in listening to what they say, it helps me to understand ways of thinking that I may not have.

It also allows venting. Have you ever had a pressure cooker, it has a similar system. Don't make the mistake of thinking that an inability to express oneself clearly in a way that you understand is a sign of stupidity. Or thinking that ones extreme views is a sign of stupidity, they may not be and they may come back to bite you in the back.

Never stop learning, even if you don't agree with what's being said, never stop learning.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 16, 17, 18, 19  Next
Page 17 of 19

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International