[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>
Well, it's a little something called M.A.D. you dimwit. Mutually Assured Destruction. If any country fires an ICBM with a nuclear payload at us, they know that they we will simply launch back and everyone dies. That's what got us through the cold war you ninny. Yes, I said ninny. Now, take away M.A.D. with the star wars defense system. All of a sudden we no longer have a stand off. We have a wounded animal backed into a corner with the big bad US hovering over them. You know what happens when you corner a wounded animal, right? They lash out with ridiculous bible quotes. But seriously folks, M.A.D. is very important to our safety and bushikins doesn't seem to get that.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Waahhh, you hurt my poor feelings.
I understand M.A.D. as well as anyone else. However, what I do not understand is why the US should be content to know that if someone were to launch a first strike on us that we could do the same to them. I would be much happier if I knew that they struck first, we eliminated the first strike and dealt with them thorugh the use of fighter jets, ground troops, and a judicious amount of retaliatory carpet boming of the conventional sort. If they continued with the nuclear assault then we nuke em. However, you seem content that if you are glowing int he dark, at least they are too. Seems that they would be even less likely to attack if their atacks had little if any chance of success. Besides, we offered the system to Russia and our allies. So the balance of power is not shifted on that one. Let's try it again, this time without the personal digs, hmmm?
I understand M.A.D. as well as anyone else. However, what I do not understand is why the US should be content to know that if someone were to launch a first strike on us that we could do the same to them. I would be much happier if I knew that they struck first, we eliminated the first strike and dealt with them thorugh the use of fighter jets, ground troops, and a judicious amount of retaliatory carpet boming of the conventional sort. If they continued with the nuclear assault then we nuke em. However, you seem content that if you are glowing int he dark, at least they are too. Seems that they would be even less likely to attack if their atacks had little if any chance of success. Besides, we offered the system to Russia and our allies. So the balance of power is not shifted on that one. Let's try it again, this time without the personal digs, hmmm?</strong><hr></blockquote>
They don't fire the goddamn missiles because they will be destroyed as well. If ditch m.a.d. they will definitely try something more desperate. Of course the fearful reactionary side of me wants the system. However, we can't let our fears control our actions. Star wars is not the answer. I don't claim to know what the long term solution is, but I can definitely say that star wars is not. *cough* we don't know what happens after we die so quit making up stories because you are scared *cough*
Anyway, it's not our allies (russia mainly) we are worried about. We need to worry about North Korea, China, and if any of those middle eastern tyrannical dictaroships if they get a hold of ICMBs.
[ 05-20-2002: Message edited by: Exercise in Frivolity ]</p>
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>They don't fire the goddamn missiles because they will be destroyed as well. If ditch m.a.d. they will definitely try something more desperate. Of course the fearful reactionary side of me wants the system. However, we can't let our fears control our actions. Star wars is not the answer. I don't claim to know what the long term solution is, but I can definitely say that star wars is not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Once more. I understand M.A.D., you don't have to repeat yourself. What could be more desperate than nuking the USA? The WTC attacks? Sorry, but no. We're talking millions of lives compared to thousands. Bio-Warfare? Maybe, but if it comes in on a missile it can be shot down in space. Another bonus of Star Wars. I am not seeing the drawbacks here for the US.
[quote]<strong> *cough* we don't know what happens after we die so quit making up stories because you are scared *cough*</strong><hr></blockquote>
And you were doing so well staying on topic. Where did I bring up the afterlife here? This obsession with me is getting a bit tiring. If you want to stalk me around the forums that is your own deal. However, you don't see me following you around do you? No.
i don't know of one single historian or global-political analyst that thinks in terms of MAD anymore. it's a very outmoded justification fer not mothballing the rest of the ICBM subfleet. Star Wars is unworkable fer a lot of reasons... but not on the grounds of disrupting some fantasy balance of terror that's nigh on 50 years old.
that's just plain silliness,
cuss
p.s. how does MAD hold any sway over the North Koreans?
Surely Star Wars is obsolete because... when the nuclear device arrives its more likely to turn up in a truck, or as cargo than it is to fly thousands of miles across continents.
Now the cold war is over its the nutters with its remnants that we should fear and they have neither the technology or the patience to bother with product development. They'll go route one first chance they get.
blah blah blah what could be more desperate than a nuke blah blah blah<hr></blockquote>
Like whatever his name is said earlier...if ICBMs won't strike, then we are looking at nukes delivered in other ways. That's what we need to focus on. Keep MAD alive. Focus on shoring up our security in other areas.
[quote]blah blah blah you're going off topic blah blah blah<hr></blockquote>
I don't believe the topic was "Discuss how Exercise in Frivolity goes off topic." Dotard.
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>Like whatever his name is said earlier...if ICBMs won't strike, then we are looking at nukes delivered in other ways. That's what we need to focus on. Keep MAD alive. Focus on shoring up our security in other areas. </strong><hr></blockquote>
We are looking at that anyhow. Why make it easy for it to happen both ways? The point is to defend against one in such a way that you can better focus on the other. You decide which is which. It is not like they are mutually exclusive.
[quote]<strong>I don't believe the topic was "Discuss how Exercise in Frivolity goes off topic." Dotard.</strong><hr></blockquote>
They why do you keep going there?</strong><hr></blockquote>
God you're a moron. You bitch about me going off topic but that bitching itself is off topic. You are nothing but an evolutionary mistake and a whiny hypocrite.
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>
God you're a moron. You bitch about me going off topic but that bitching itself is off topic. You are nothing but an evolutionary mistake and a whiny hypocrite.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I am done taking you seriously. In fact, I am done posting replies to you in general. If it makes you feel better to slam me in topics then I won't ruin your fun. I have turned quite a few cheeks here and have decided you are not worth the effort of trying to hold a converstaion with. Any replies will be ignored. I will not respond to anything you have to say in any religious threads. It is a waste of my time and serves no purpose. When you grow up and learn that everyone is worth respecting, even if you disagree with them, then you might find that they are more willing to listen to what you have to say. As for me I have better things to do than argue with you anymore, hope that does not ruin your plans for the rest of the week.
So please, have fun. God bless you, and go in peace.
I am done taking you seriously. In fact, I am done posting replies to you in general. If it makes you feel better to slam me in topics then I won't ruin your fun. I have turned quite a few cheeks here and have decided you are not worth the effort of trying to hold a converstaion with. Any replies will be ignored. I will not respond to anything you have to say in any religious threads. It is a waste of my time and serves no purpose. When you grow up and learn that everyone is worth respecting, even if you disagree with them, then you might find that they are more willing to listen to what you have to say. As for me I have better things to do than argue with you anymore, hope that does not ruin your plans for the rest of the week.
So please, have fun. God bless you, and go in peace.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This kind of attitude that "everyone deserves respect" is what's wrong with America today. Everyone does NOT deserve respect. Respect is earned. You haven't earned my respect. You've earned my disdain. It's not because we disagree. I have a great deal of respect for many people I disagree with. I disrespect you for your hypocrisy. You claim the moral high ground yet sling mud in less obvious ways that the average moron wouldn't understand. I'm surprised that you are even capable of such deft insults. If you didn't want to reply to me anymore, you could simply *gasp* NOT REPLY. This kind of formal announcement is just for show. You are nothing more than the average attention whore.
[quote]Originally posted by Exercise in Frivolity:
<strong>You claim the moral high ground yet sling mud in less obvious ways that the average moron wouldn't understand.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm here! An average moron. The only mud that I can see NoahJ slinging in this thread is a minor jibe about "growing up", and frankly I'm a little disappointed in him for lowering his standards.
However, it's not a patch on the personal attacks you've racked up in this thread.
Please try to show some dignity and post responses to his arguments rather than immature insults.
<strong> [quote]This kind of formal announcement is just for show. You are nothing more than the average attention whore.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm here! An average moron. The only mud that I can see NoahJ slinging in this thread is a minor jibe about "growing up", and frankly I'm a little disappointed in him for lowering his standards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
in response to...
[quote]
Originally posted by ME!
<strong>You [noah] claim the moral high ground yet sling mud in less obvious ways that the average moron wouldn't understand.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Heh. Funny. "I don't see any other mudslinging..." laf, I wonder why...Anyway, did you happen to see me limit this statement to this particular thread? Nope. Try again.
Anyway, to get back on topic (which you and noah so rudely hijacked...for shame, for shame)
I wouldn't be surprised if the greenpeace boat rammed them on purpose. However, I wouldn't condemn the entire association based on what was most likely the unilateral actions of a few extremists. Until there is evidence demonstrating otherwise, I simply don't care about a dumb boating accident.
Comments
that's cold war thinking... and the cold war is over. we'll share the technology and there's nothing MAD about shooting down missiles.
death to all hippies,
cuss
p.s. most of the MAD stuff is in mothballs anyway. what corner? what rat?
<strong>
Well, it's a little something called M.A.D. you dimwit. Mutually Assured Destruction. If any country fires an ICBM with a nuclear payload at us, they know that they we will simply launch back and everyone dies. That's what got us through the cold war you ninny. Yes, I said ninny. Now, take away M.A.D. with the star wars defense system. All of a sudden we no longer have a stand off. We have a wounded animal backed into a corner with the big bad US hovering over them. You know what happens when you corner a wounded animal, right? They lash out with ridiculous bible quotes. But seriously folks, M.A.D. is very important to our safety and bushikins doesn't seem to get that.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Waahhh, you hurt my poor feelings.
I understand M.A.D. as well as anyone else. However, what I do not understand is why the US should be content to know that if someone were to launch a first strike on us that we could do the same to them. I would be much happier if I knew that they struck first, we eliminated the first strike and dealt with them thorugh the use of fighter jets, ground troops, and a judicious amount of retaliatory carpet boming of the conventional sort. If they continued with the nuclear assault then we nuke em. However, you seem content that if you are glowing int he dark, at least they are too. Seems that they would be even less likely to attack if their atacks had little if any chance of success. Besides, we offered the system to Russia and our allies. So the balance of power is not shifted on that one. Let's try it again, this time without the personal digs, hmmm?
<strong>
Waahhh, you hurt my poor feelings.
I understand M.A.D. as well as anyone else. However, what I do not understand is why the US should be content to know that if someone were to launch a first strike on us that we could do the same to them. I would be much happier if I knew that they struck first, we eliminated the first strike and dealt with them thorugh the use of fighter jets, ground troops, and a judicious amount of retaliatory carpet boming of the conventional sort. If they continued with the nuclear assault then we nuke em. However, you seem content that if you are glowing int he dark, at least they are too. Seems that they would be even less likely to attack if their atacks had little if any chance of success. Besides, we offered the system to Russia and our allies. So the balance of power is not shifted on that one. Let's try it again, this time without the personal digs, hmmm?</strong><hr></blockquote>
They don't fire the goddamn missiles because they will be destroyed as well. If ditch m.a.d. they will definitely try something more desperate. Of course the fearful reactionary side of me wants the system. However, we can't let our fears control our actions. Star wars is not the answer. I don't claim to know what the long term solution is, but I can definitely say that star wars is not. *cough* we don't know what happens after we die so quit making up stories because you are scared *cough*
Anyway, it's not our allies (russia mainly) we are worried about. We need to worry about North Korea, China, and if any of those middle eastern tyrannical dictaroships if they get a hold of ICMBs.
[ 05-20-2002: Message edited by: Exercise in Frivolity ]</p>
<strong>They don't fire the goddamn missiles because they will be destroyed as well. If ditch m.a.d. they will definitely try something more desperate. Of course the fearful reactionary side of me wants the system. However, we can't let our fears control our actions. Star wars is not the answer. I don't claim to know what the long term solution is, but I can definitely say that star wars is not.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Once more. I understand M.A.D., you don't have to repeat yourself. What could be more desperate than nuking the USA? The WTC attacks? Sorry, but no. We're talking millions of lives compared to thousands. Bio-Warfare? Maybe, but if it comes in on a missile it can be shot down in space. Another bonus of Star Wars. I am not seeing the drawbacks here for the US.
[quote]<strong> *cough* we don't know what happens after we die so quit making up stories because you are scared *cough*</strong><hr></blockquote>
And you were doing so well staying on topic. Where did I bring up the afterlife here? This obsession with me is getting a bit tiring. If you want to stalk me around the forums that is your own deal. However, you don't see me following you around do you? No.
that's just plain silliness,
cuss
p.s. how does MAD hold any sway over the North Koreans?
Now the cold war is over its the nutters with its remnants that we should fear and they have neither the technology or the patience to bother with product development. They'll go route one first chance they get.
p.s. how does MAD hold any sway over the North Koreans?<hr></blockquote>
Believe it or not...they want to kill us and *gasp* NOT DIE THEMSELVES!
blah blah blah what could be more desperate than a nuke blah blah blah<hr></blockquote>
Like whatever his name is said earlier...if ICBMs won't strike, then we are looking at nukes delivered in other ways. That's what we need to focus on. Keep MAD alive. Focus on shoring up our security in other areas.
[quote]blah blah blah you're going off topic blah blah blah<hr></blockquote>
I don't believe the topic was "Discuss how Exercise in Frivolity goes off topic." Dotard.
Have you ever heard of PETA...
People Eating Tastey Animals?
bloodthirsty bastards! let's nuke 'em first!
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
<strong>Like whatever his name is said earlier...if ICBMs won't strike, then we are looking at nukes delivered in other ways. That's what we need to focus on. Keep MAD alive. Focus on shoring up our security in other areas. </strong><hr></blockquote>
We are looking at that anyhow. Why make it easy for it to happen both ways? The point is to defend against one in such a way that you can better focus on the other. You decide which is which. It is not like they are mutually exclusive.
[quote]<strong>I don't believe the topic was "Discuss how Exercise in Frivolity goes off topic." Dotard.</strong><hr></blockquote>
They why do you keep going there?
<strong>
They why do you keep going there?</strong><hr></blockquote>
God you're a moron. You bitch about me going off topic but that bitching itself is off topic. You are nothing but an evolutionary mistake and a whiny hypocrite.
<strong>
God you're a moron. You bitch about me going off topic but that bitching itself is off topic. You are nothing but an evolutionary mistake and a whiny hypocrite.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />
<strong>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
:stupid no smiley: </strong><hr></blockquote>
No? Sorry. Yes.
<strong>
No? Sorry. [unintended affirmative word]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apology accepted.
I am done taking you seriously. In fact, I am done posting replies to you in general. If it makes you feel better to slam me in topics then I won't ruin your fun. I have turned quite a few cheeks here and have decided you are not worth the effort of trying to hold a converstaion with. Any replies will be ignored. I will not respond to anything you have to say in any religious threads. It is a waste of my time and serves no purpose. When you grow up and learn that everyone is worth respecting, even if you disagree with them, then you might find that they are more willing to listen to what you have to say. As for me I have better things to do than argue with you anymore, hope that does not ruin your plans for the rest of the week.
So please, have fun. God bless you, and go in peace.
<strong>
Apology accepted.
I am done taking you seriously. In fact, I am done posting replies to you in general. If it makes you feel better to slam me in topics then I won't ruin your fun. I have turned quite a few cheeks here and have decided you are not worth the effort of trying to hold a converstaion with. Any replies will be ignored. I will not respond to anything you have to say in any religious threads. It is a waste of my time and serves no purpose. When you grow up and learn that everyone is worth respecting, even if you disagree with them, then you might find that they are more willing to listen to what you have to say. As for me I have better things to do than argue with you anymore, hope that does not ruin your plans for the rest of the week.
So please, have fun. God bless you, and go in peace.</strong><hr></blockquote>
This kind of attitude that "everyone deserves respect" is what's wrong with America today. Everyone does NOT deserve respect. Respect is earned. You haven't earned my respect. You've earned my disdain. It's not because we disagree. I have a great deal of respect for many people I disagree with. I disrespect you for your hypocrisy. You claim the moral high ground yet sling mud in less obvious ways that the average moron wouldn't understand. I'm surprised that you are even capable of such deft insults. If you didn't want to reply to me anymore, you could simply *gasp* NOT REPLY. This kind of formal announcement is just for show. You are nothing more than the average attention whore.
<strong>You claim the moral high ground yet sling mud in less obvious ways that the average moron wouldn't understand.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm here! An average moron. The only mud that I can see NoahJ slinging in this thread is a minor jibe about "growing up", and frankly I'm a little disappointed in him for lowering his standards.
However, it's not a patch on the personal attacks you've racked up in this thread.
Please try to show some dignity and post responses to his arguments rather than immature insults.
<strong> [quote]This kind of formal announcement is just for show. You are nothing more than the average attention whore.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just thought this warranted repeating in the light of <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=001254" target="_blank">this</a> thread.
freedom!
cuss
<strong>
Just thought this warranted repeating in the light of <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=6&t=001254" target="_blank">this</a> thread.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What's wrong with the thread? Are you *gasp* offended??? Well, if you are...good.
<strong>
I'm here! An average moron. The only mud that I can see NoahJ slinging in this thread is a minor jibe about "growing up", and frankly I'm a little disappointed in him for lowering his standards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
in response to...
[quote]
Originally posted by ME!
<strong>You [noah] claim the moral high ground yet sling mud in less obvious ways that the average moron wouldn't understand.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Heh. Funny. "I don't see any other mudslinging..." laf, I wonder why...Anyway, did you happen to see me limit this statement to this particular thread? Nope. Try again.
Anyway, to get back on topic (which you and noah so rudely hijacked...for shame, for shame)
I wouldn't be surprised if the greenpeace boat rammed them on purpose. However, I wouldn't condemn the entire association based on what was most likely the unilateral actions of a few extremists. Until there is evidence demonstrating otherwise, I simply don't care about a dumb boating accident.