NUKE_CLEVELAND

THEY DONT HAVE ANY RIGHTS TO BEGIN WITH!!!!!!!!! http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=35209&st=0 We've been over this ground before. Please stop trying to assign rights to a group of people who do not have any under ANY treaty or document.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 11:21 PM) C'mon, didn't you see Red Dawn? Our citizens wold kick ass! "Wolverines!!!!!!" LOL!!! That movie was awesome. That was the 80's however. Nowadays teenagers would be 10 times more vicious. Can you imagine the reaction of todays teens if you took away their cell phones internet and pot? Christ, the commies wouldn't stand a chance.

When is this guy just going to shut the hell up? :rolly

QUOTE(Texsox @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 06:24 PM) Then Nuke are you saying the weapons that the average Iraqis have in their homes, isn't having much effect against the US Army? I am assuming they have the run of the mil hunting type rifles. Kip is talking about Iran attacking the US in Iraq. Im assuming he meant an armed incursion by its army. Such an attack would be suicide.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 01:56 PM) And what is to stop the Iranian army from adopting Iraqi insurgent tactics? By sneaking terrorists across the border they already are. If they were going to do serious damage to our Army in Iraq like you talked about then they're gonna need a lot more than they have in their bag of tricks right now.

Right after Baghdad was seized my unit's mission was to clear out Iraqi Army installations just south of the city. It was pretty boring work as all the soldiers turned tail and ran when they heard we were coming so when we rolled in there our orders became to destroy as much of their equipment as we could. It almost got to be a game for us. We would line up Iraqi T-72's side by side then have one of the Abrams tanks roll up and fire a sabot round into them. There was one shot that went completely through 3 of the Iraqi tanks before going wild and off into the distance. It was also kind of funny seeing their vehicles on the sides of the roads with the turrets popped off. Even when they did manage a shot on one of ours 9 times out of 10 it had no effect at all. The old Soviet made equipment those middle eastern countries all have is crap.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 01:25 PM) Just like our army when it went into Iraq. I think not.

QUOTE(Steff @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 11:08 AM) LMAO.. Nuke's letter.. TWIMC... I'd like to work for you. I like to blow s*** up. Yeah, have a picture of an atom bomb going off to add to the effect. LOL!

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 01:17 PM) Actually, Iran could do a lot about it if they wanted to...first they could flatten Israel, second they could literally attack our army in Iraq, and third and most importantly, we couldn't actually flatten the WMD sites in Iran, they're widely dispersed, often underground or in secure locations, and we don't even know where most of them are. If Iran tried anything against Isreal they would be made to wish they hadn't. As for attacking our Army in Iraq they have the same POS equipment the Iraqi Army had. That would be like feeding a tree branch into a wood chipper.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 12:52 PM) d. Syria and Iran know without a shadow of a doubt that right now, the U.S. is in a completely inept position and cannot even hope to thereaten them. The U.S. has no army available for a major occupation right now, and even if it did, the U.S. would be doing so against the will of virtually the entire world. This is why Iran is probably racing right now to obtain a nuclear weapon - we gave them the perfect window to do so. We cannot hope to hurt them right now. Never mind that if Bush wanted to he could flatten all the suspected WMD sites uhh..like this evening and Iran couldn't do anything but sit there and cry to the UN about it. As for Syria, they're still wetting their pants and begging us not to hit them over the Hariri incident in Lebanon and the terrorists that keep coming across the border.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 12:36 PM) Nuke, I well understand that flesh is going to lose to the munitions in all of those cases. But trying to rationalize your comments about the POS insurgents with the images I saw, they must really be recruiting young. 1-2 years old in some cases. There is ZERO regard for collateral civilian casualties here. And if this is such a non-story, then why was the military trying to clean up the evidence of chemical weapon use after the attack, and why was the story about WP not being a munition floated if in fact it is used in such a way? No regard for civillian casualties? That's rediculous. First of all nearly all of em cleared out of the city during the runup to the fight, second, how can you tell which were killed by WP mortar rounds and not, say, caught in a housefire or an RPG explosion. I really don't think that of the few civillians that were left in the city during the fight that they were going to hang around in a trench with a bunch of armed insurgents.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 12:12 PM) I avoided looking at these VERY GRAPHIC and unsettling images for the first few days of this "story" (Why is this not all over the place?). But seeing the results of the chemical weapons attack (that is what it is regardless of how it is officially classified) on countless civilians tells me that there is no level of inhuman barbarism to which we will not sink in this war. We have irrevocably lost any fragment of moral high ground we may have still been clinging to by raining hell onto a city in this way. These are VERY GRAPHIC images of the dead, from the website of embedded journalist Dahr Jamail. http://dahrjamailiraq.com/gallery/view_alb...=album32&page=1 Also, here's a link to a thread on the subject from Daily Kos yesterday that has some eyewitness accounts of how the soldiers firing the WP/Shake&bake mortar rounds never questioned what it was they were firing at or what the effects were. For the sake of their sanity and souls (if you cotton to such), I understand why. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/9/164137/436 Jim. Do you know what 25 MM rounds do to human bodies? Or .50 caliber rounds? or 40 MM grenade rounds? HE rounds? Bombs dropped from planes? They tend to do stuff a lot like what happened to those POS insurgents you have pictured there. This is a non-story if I ever heard of one. If I took a terrorist that was killed by an exploding bomb or caught in a fire and laid him next to someone killed by WP you couldn't tell me the difference.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 11:53 AM) I tried to convince them that there was some value to my HUGE backyard, but they were unconvinced..... I think they thought you were referring to all that unused real-estate between your ears.

Post of the week, month, year and decade!

QUOTE(CubKilla @ Nov 10, 2005 -> 10:55 AM) President Bush May Send Up To 5 Marines For French Assistance President Bush has authorized the Joint Chiefs to begin drawing up a battle plan to pull France's ass out of the fire again. Facing an apparent overwhelming force of up to 400 pissed off teenagers, Mr. Bush doubts France's ability to hold off the little pissants. "Hell, if the last two world wars are any indication, I would expect France to surrender any day now," said Bush. Joint Chiefs head, Gen. Peter Pace, warned the President that it might be necessary to send up to 5 marines to get things under control. The general admitted that 5 marines may be overkill but he wanted to get this thing under control within 24 hours of arriving on scene. He stated he was having a hard time finding even one marine to help those ungrateful bastards out for a third time but thought that he could persuade a few women marines to do the job before they went on pregnancy leave. President Bush asked Gen. Pace to get our marines out of there as soon as possible after order was restored. He also reminded Gen. Pace to make sure the marines did not take soap, razors, or deodorant with them. The least they stand out the better. "No trees were killed in the making of this email......however, a large number of electrons were diverted from where they originally wanted to go." LMFAO!!!!!!

QUOTE(JHBowden @ Nov 9, 2005 -> 11:57 PM) 1. I don't know if anyone mentioned this above, but the national debt is not the deficit. 2. The Democrats clearly have moved to the left. Clinton put the smackdown on Hussein in 1998 unilaterally, and Clinton also helped screw Milosevic in 1999 without UN approval. Now things are a bit different 3. Many of the statements made before the war, for instance, that Iraq developed nuclear weapons fit into a pattern of blatant lies. Despite this, there were good reasons to do Iraq-- a) We f---ed Saddam Hussein. His despotism was a WMD threat in the midtern. Ceteris paribus, the world is a better place in his absence. B) The United States of America has shown a willingness to spend dollars and spill blood to defend itself. There were 3K Americans dead after 9-11; there have been 25-100K Muslims dead up to this point in the Iraq war. As the recent case of France shows, if one simply appeases militants, they will walk all over everyone. c) Our presence in Iraq functions like a giant terror sponge. All the jihadists are going over to their backyard in Iraq to die at the hands of Americans instead of attacking civilians home. This gives truth to the saying "fight them there, or we'll fight them here." There has been no comparable follow up attack since 9-11 on the United States. d) Lastly, our presence in Iraq has strategic value. Iran and Syria sponsor international terror with a passion. If another major attack occurs, they know they're next, no questions asked. As a result, there's a powerful incentive for them, as long as they aren't nuclear, not to support groups aiming terrorism at the USA. Agreed on all points. Despite the fact that there were no WMD's found, the fight is not all for nothing.

You people have WAY too much time on your hands.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Nov 9, 2005 -> 06:05 PM) Eh, they did put God up on charges, Job, anyone, anyone? Needless to say the bastard walked. I just thought it was an interesting article. Job is exactly what I was thinking of when you said that. He got messed up really bad for no other reason than to test his faith. Not to mention various stories of genocide that took place during that period.

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Nov 9, 2005 -> 02:41 PM) France to expel foreign rioters, Nuke's man Sarkozy at work! http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?ty...58&section=news How exactly to you deport someone that's your own citizen? I mean why would whatever country have to accept him? Im assuming that they're going to try and deport them back to places like Morocco and Algeria and the like. Whether or not they'll go for it is another matter. How about they just drop these people off on a deserted island somewhere and forget about all the red tape?

Soxy. Invoking religon into this isin't the greatest idea. If there were liberals as we know em today around during the days of the Old Testament you'd want to put God on trial for war crimes. Im not the biggest bible scholar out there but I know that in the Old Testament God did a whole lot of really nasty stuff to people who didn't worship him properly. Stuff that makes stress positions, sleep deprivation and loud music pale in comparison.

Southsider is just owning everybody in this thread. All bow before him!!!

QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Nov 9, 2005 -> 10:19 AM) Okay, so as many of you know, I'm in college. I am currently majoring in Mechanical Engineering. I'm a freshmen(sophmore after this semester), but I seriously want to change my major. How can you help? Simple. State a major which you like or pick something you majored in and give 3 pros and cons of each. Don't worry about me having to take classes all over again. Everyone is welcome to help. Business: PROS: You're actually employable when you finish. Good money Challenging work environment CONS: Crowded field ( not nearly as bad as lawyers though ) Long hours Having to play politics to get ahead.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,174993,00.html The backlash continues.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 9, 2005 -> 12:23 AM) So wait...you're telling me that terrorists have gained a training ground in Iraq? The article said there was a link to terrorists in Iraq but the camps were found in Syria and Lebanon. That makes sense as Al Zarqawi seems to be rising to the forefront of the radical Islamic movement with Osama Bin Laden hiding under a rock someplace having not been heard from in months. It almost seems that Al Zarqawi was or is being groomed as Bin Ladens successor. It strikes me as odd that terror cells within France would be connected to or taking orders from terrorists in Iraq as the French were the most vocal opponents of the war in the 1st place. Then again maybe it shouldn't. There is no "getting on their good side" so to speak. If you're a non-muslim then you are an infidel and as such you are a target to these people.