Go Back   Computer Forums > Welcome To Computer Forums .org > Social Lounge | Off Topic
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today

Closed Thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 09-05-2007, 03:26 AM   #11
Fully Optimized
D-Lew's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,793
Send a message via AIM to D-Lew
Default Re: NEw president!!

Originally Posted by Dudemcbob0876 View Post
By David Swanson

The administration of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney is set on a course that leads directly to a third world war. And a third world war leads almost inevitably to most of us dying horrible deaths. And we're not talking about it.

The White House has made clear it is seriously considering attacking Iran with massive bombing aimed at destroying the nation's military and changing its government. Iran will certainly retaliate. If attacked, and possibly even if not attacked, Israel will join in the fighting. The resistance in Iraq will intensify dramatically. Controlling the oil of Iran and Iraq will be out of the question short of thorough genocide. Anti-American furor will sweep the Muslim world. The nuclear nation of Pakistan will be a prime target for an Islamic revolution.

If we don't have a world war on our hands immediately, one will be very hard to avoid. We will have taught every nation, again, that the only path to safety is acquisition of nuclear weapons. We will have isolated the United States from most of the world, including many of our traditional allies. Terrorist attacks against American targets will come, and the United States will retaliate, again, not with law enforcement but with additional aggressive warfare.

If the United States attacks Iran, we will be openly at war with the world in a nuclear age. If the thought isn't terrifying, something's wrong with our ability to fear. Our politics is almost always driven in the wrong direction by fear of the wrong things. I'd love for once to see fear knock some sense into us.

The founders of the United States feared these moments for us. To protect us, they gave Congress the sole power to declare war. The current Congress, building on the misdeeds of others in recent decades, has given up its power. In fact, we've reached the point where Congress cannot easily take it back. Were Congress to declare with a veto-proof majority that Bush must not bomb Iran, is anyone sure Bush would listen?

Back at the start of this Congress, eight months ago, some of the new committee chairs from the progressive caucus spoke on a panel organized by the Institute for Policy Studies. Congressman John Conyers, the new chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said on this occasion that he would take up the impeachment of Bush and Cheney if they attacked Iran. Congressman Dennis Kucinich at the time was saying the same thing. He has since introduced articles of impeachment against Cheney (H Res 333) that include the charge of threatening aggressive war against Iran (which happens to be a crime). Currently 20 Congress Members support H Res 333, but none of them with any sense of urgency. None of them are lobbying their colleagues to sign on or to introduce their own articles of impeachment. Nobody in Congress, and certainly not the leadership, is pushing hard for impeachment as the means to prevent an attack on Iran.

But impeachment is the only leverage the Congress has over an outlaw executive branch. Conyers recently said that he opposes impeachment because he carries the Constitution in one hand and a calculator in the other, and he uses the calculator to tell himself he doesn't "have the votes" to pass impeachment. Of course, by that argument, he should take his name off his bill for single-payer health care, his bill for slavery reparations, etc. But, more importantly, an impeachment effort can serve a purpose short of successfully impeaching anyone. A serious movement to impeach Gonzales helped show him the door. A serious movement to impeach Bush and Cheney is the only way Congress can deter an attack on Iran or end the prolonged attack on Iraq. If articles of impeachment had 100 cosponsors, Bush and Cheney would understand that attacking Iran would move that number to 218.

Has Bush even told the Congressional leadership of his plans to attack Iran? If he has not, will they have the decency to feel indignation? And will they do so BEFORE the bombing? If he has told them, then Congressional leaders have a duty to the citizens of this nation to immediately expose and oppose such plans. Congress exists to determine our nation's course of action, not to be informed of it. Any member of Congress who has been informed of new plans for illegal war and not spoken out should be tried as an accomplice in war crimes.

As the White House continues to leak news of its likely attack on Iran, our demand must be for impeachment now, not after the slaughter when we have all been made less safe than ever. And we must not get caught up in the nonsense questions in the media over exactly who lied about exactly how many nuclear facilities in Iran. If possessing some particular number of nuclear reactors, or for that matter nuclear bombs, justified other nations in launching aggressive war, then any nation would be justified in attacking the United States. Nothing, in fact, can justify a war of aggression, legally or morally, because such a war is certain to be worse than whatever might be found to try to justify it.

We cannot, of course, be certain at this point that Bush and Cheney will attack Iran. Whether they do or not, the task of Congress remains the same: impeach these dictators and end the occupation of Iraq. But if our nation continues on this path of unchecked executive power and military aggression, the path of Afghanistan and Guantanamo and Iraq, then expanded war is inevitable, and that means war that eventually hits the United States. The clearest I can possibly frame our situation is as a choice between one word and another. We are unlikely to get neither or both. We are likely to get one or the other. Impeach or die.
That's a lot of "if"s.
Bush caused Katrina, too. For real.

D-Lew is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 03:38 AM   #12
Golden Master
MikeReiner's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,053
Send a message via AIM to MikeReiner Send a message via MSN to MikeReiner Send a message via Yahoo to MikeReiner
Default Re: NEw president!!

I'm not even gonna read the rest of this thread.

You're on crack. If nuclear war broke out, one of two things would happen.

One, the world would blow up.

Two, the enemy nation would be up in flames and it would be the shortest war in history.

I don't think you realize just how much nuclear power the US has...

Not to mention all the satellites and things we have that would destroy any incoming missiles and nukes from other nations..

Project star wars scared the soviets shitless in the 80s.

MikeReiner is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 04:21 AM   #13
Fully Optimized
blackjack's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,945
Send a message via MSN to blackjack
Default Re: NEw president!!

I don't think it would ever happen either, everybody knows the firepower of a nuclear weapon, theres no winners, nothing to gain as there would be nothing left worth having, food and water supplies would be infected by radiation and that would not matter anyway as there wouldn't be enough of the human race left to care. Yes there will always be conflict as one nation strives to out do another, or for religion or color, anything really its in our nature to disagree, I hope for total peace and the UN is doing its best, we are gradually disarming Nuclear weapons and rightly so, Its a start and may it continue but first and for most we must NEVER GIVE UP in the strive for peace Amen.
Compaq Presario CQ5305K-m Intel® Pentium® Dual Core E5300 (2.6 GHz), Windows® 7 Home Premium 64 bit, 2048 MB , Hard drive: 320 Gb, with 18.5 Widescreen
blackjack is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 06:45 AM   #14
Golden Master
mammikoura's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,459
Send a message via MSN to mammikoura
Default Re: NEw president!!

Originally Posted by MikeReiner View Post
Not to mention all the satellites and things we have that would destroy any incoming missiles and nukes from other nations.
and which satellites and "things" would that be. I'm pretty sure USA has 1 missile shield station thingy being built to Alaska. Which would probably be able to stop most of the incoming missiles from that direction. Then you are left with like.. umm.. 70% of the country unprotected. Also satellites don't really work since it's pretty easy to destroy satellites.

But as you said, ww3 will probably never come. And if it does, it's going to be pretty much over in a week or two. Almost everyone will be dead by then.
Missile shields can be pretty effective at stopping the missile from reaching it's target. But it will also destroy the missile.
And then the fallout will have 3x bigger radius since the bomb exploded so high.
No damage due to the explosion, but a huge area affected by the fallout.

And even if people manage to survive from the fallout, animals & plants probably won't.

As many people have said before, a nuclear was = everyone dies.
As Einstein once said "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
mammikoura is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 06:49 AM   #15
Fully Optimized
esa193's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,210
Send a message via AIM to esa193
Default Re: NEw president!!

3 times over? lol
try 3000 times over
one old hydrogen bomb thats currently lost and off the coast of florida
(a fight bomber had to drop with intact with its safety's on becouse it was hit by a side plane) could take out all of Florida and the nuclear fall out could spread as far as ny
now think of how many bombs they say this country and times in by 10 becouse the government never gives really numbers becouse of security issues
antec 900, q6600, 4G, 500G, 160G, 9800gtx, 780i, 47in 1080ptv, 5.1 surround sound

MacArthur wrestling pwns!
esa193 is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 07:14 AM   #16
Fully Optimized
troy's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 2,410
Default Re: NEw president!!

I think as a majority the world doesn't want a nuclear war. If it were to come to that, I could see a lot of countries uniting to take it down. I doubt WW3 is around the corner, although the Iraq war has been referred to as WWIII by a few people, and so have a few other wars.
Desktop: Dell Dimension E510, 2.5GB RAM, Intel P4 3.0GHZ, 250GB HDD, Windows Vista Premium. Might not be the best, but the old girl is still running good.
troy is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 10:35 AM   #17
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,505
Default Re: NEw president!!

Well, for those who dont think I know how much nuclear power the US has. About 9,000 nuclear wepons last checked.(Known to public) We have a nuclear wepon that if you launched it in california, over here in New Jersey if you happened to be looking west you would go blind. And, I think it might not be a next world war but one day someone will be stupid enough to press the big red button. For the info, after the cold war the us and russia signed a treaty that they can not build more nuclear wepons. But they can replace them, those rules have long been broken. Parts of russia still believe that the soviet union should come back, something kind of scary. And if the terroist get a nuclear wepon it will be launched asap. And that is one reson we are at war. And, even if ww3 isnt around the corner the way the US and china acts it will come. But people in my generation can prevent it and have peace in the world. But that is a ways to go.
Dark Night is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 01:23 PM   #18
Site Team
root's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,070
Default Re: NEw president!!

it's not called nuclear Armageddon for nothing you know.

and in case you hadn't realised world war three already started, except it's not fought with drawn out battle lines and everyone wearing uniforms and buying weapons,

people are doing what they can, they fight for their country and their god. they steal planes and use them, they tie bombs to themselves and blow up trains and cars etc.

and in retaliation the other side pretend like their playing by the book and invade countries and levy sanctions, and become and occupying force. kill civilians and drive the hatred deeper causing more attacks in this unorganized attacks.

apocalyptic view yes, but I don't see it changing in my lifetime,

I live in Britain, I was born in 1982, shortly after the Falklands war, I've never known 'peace' in my lifetime, there has always been the army of my country at war with someone. and yet in the same time I've never known war either. I live an easy life with little hardship.

and as for missile shield allowing you to do what you want...
1, the only country openly developing a missile shield is USA
2, missile shields don't work against commuter planes,
3, missile shields don't work against bombs that detonate above a country showering waste onto that place.
4, missile shields don't prevent suicide bombs or stuff like that -I mean how many drugs and illegal immigrants are currently in America! now what if those drugs were explosives and the illegal immigrants suicide bombers.

a fresh new president won't change a thing,
the damage is pretty much done... just life what you can till you die, and if you're lucky, you'll get to die naturally.

the only way to avoid war is to make sure everyone puts down their weapons.
until that happens the best way to avoid war is a good old fashion Mexican standoff. we all stand completely still pointing guns at each other, except they're nukes, rather than six shooters.
I didn’t fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian…
Im sick of people saying 'dont waste paper'. If trees wanted to live, they'd all carry guns.
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; The inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
root is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 01:26 PM   #19
Golden Master
Brookfield's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 10,056
Default Re: NEw president!!

IMO, Dudemacbob0876 should never have started this thread, but we have a polIcy of freedom of speech at CF, & he's entitled to his own opinion, but this is a hugely contentious subject, & already most, if not all members posting here have shown that his views are seriously flawed, so yes, discuss it by all means, but if the discussion turns to verbal abuse or flaming, either I or ArrizX will close this thread, [I'm pretty sure that ArrizX will concur] so guys, please keep it cool, if you feel like blasting him, don't post, it's as simple as that, thanks.
Brookfield is offline  
Old 09-05-2007, 03:14 PM   #20
Daemon Poster
sek3o1's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,150
Default Re: NEw president!!

no blasting at all just sharing our veiws!!!

we as humans are warring ppl we squabble over everything, but i dont think were so stupid to wipe everyone out.

dell xps 700 pent d 3.8 ghz duel 7900 gtx
4gigs 800 ram
sony vaio core 2 duo t7600 radon mobility x1600
2 gigs of ram
sek3o1 is offline  
Closed Thread

« lmao funny | skype »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0