These nutcase Satan worshipers with nukes.

Neither the intelligence nor morality to hold back from using them.

Something needs to be done to stop these freaks......and soon.

---

You sort them out Valkie, armed only with karambit and cane (and your step ladder if you feel the need)

Valkie wrote on Nov 20^th, 2021 at 5:33pm:

These nutcase Satan worshipers with nukes. Neither the intelligence nor morality to hold back from using them. Something needs to be done to stop these freaks......and soon.

Ever heard of Pakistan?

more muzzos with nukes.

---

The scumbag convert who is supposed to moderate this forum, believes  the fanatical theocracy that runs Iran has a right to have nuclear weapons.

issuevoter wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 1:14pm:

The scumbag convert who is supposed to moderate this forum, believes  the fanatical theocracy that runs Iran has a right to have nuclear weapons.

And I assume you don't?  How about Israel?  Pakistan, India, the US, France, the UK, China, Russia?  Are they entitled to nukes?   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 8:21pm:

issuevoter wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 1:14pm: The scumbag convert who is supposed to moderate this forum, believes  the fanatical theocracy that runs Iran has a right to have nuclear weapons. And I assume you don't?  How about Israel?  Pakistan, India, the US, France, the UK, China, Russia?  Are they entitled to nukes?   ::) ::)

Not all countries are equal.
Entitled?? In what legal sense? Moral sense?
Realpolitik sense?

Pakistan cheated, as is Iran. India was afraid of fanatical Pakistan.

The Russians and Americans invented it with German Jewish help. Israel is beset by murderous fanatics like Iran.
The Brits and French were victorious (except for the French).
The Chinese? Why do they have nukes? They were starving to death in huge numbers within living memory. Who do they want to deter? Hunger?

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 8:21pm:

issuevoter wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 1:14pm: The scumbag convert who is supposed to moderate this forum, believes  the fanatical theocracy that runs Iran has a right to have nuclear weapons. And I assume you don't?  How about Israel?  Pakistan, India, the US, France, the UK, China, Russia?  Are they entitled to nukes?   ::) ::)

What do you think Brian?

freediver wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 9:07pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 8:21pm: issuevoter wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 1:14pm: The scumbag convert who is supposed to moderate this forum, believes  the fanatical theocracy that runs Iran has a right to have nuclear weapons. And I assume you don't?  How about Israel?  Pakistan, India, the US, France, the UK, China, Russia?  Are they entitled to nukes?   ::) ::) What do you think Brian?

i don't think any nation should be armed with nuclear weapons, Freediver, what do you think? ::) ::)

That's a real nice fantasy you got there Brian.

freediver wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 9:12pm:

That's a real nice fantasy you got there Brian.

Fantasy?  No, truth.  Do you like living under pain of the end of civilisation constantly? ::) ::)

Muzzies with nukes versus Valkie with Karambit and a blithering mouth.

Try to keep up Valkie. You are 23 years behind.

Pakistan which is a Muslim country has had nuclear weapons since 1998.

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 9:10pm:

i don't think any nation should be armed with nuclear weapons, Freediver, what do you think? ::) ::)

I am not freediver. But, I agree with the non-nuclear-weapon stance.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 9:46pm:

Pakistan which is a Muslim country has had nuclear weapons since 1998.

Abdus Salam did a lot of work on their nuclear program he even won a nobel prize.


Quote:

Abdus Salam died on 21 November 1996 at the age of 70 in Oxford, England, from progressive supranuclear palsy. Salam was buried in Bahishti Maqbara, a cemetery established by the Ahmadiyya Community at Rabwah, Punjab, Pakistan, next to his parents' graves.The epitaph on his tomb initially read "First Muslim Nobel Laureate". The Pakistani government removed "Muslim" and left only his name on the headstone. They are the only nation to officially declare that Ahmadis are non-Muslim.[108] Under Ordinance XX of 1984,[110][111] being an Ahmadi, he was considered a non-Muslim according to the definition provided in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan.[112] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdus_Salam

If the Mad Mullahs in Iran who believe Muhammad rode a flying donkey get a nuclear bomb they will use it Israel will be the target.

Get a job and pay some taxes ya dopey bum

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 10:48pm:

Laugh till you cry wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 9:46pm: Pakistan which is a Muslim country has had nuclear weapons since 1998. Abdus Salam did a lot of work on their nuclear program he even won a nobel prize. Quote: Abdus Salam died on 21 November 1996 at the age of 70 in Oxford, England, from progressive supranuclear palsy. Salam was buried in Bahishti Maqbara, a cemetery established by the Ahmadiyya Community at Rabwah, Punjab, Pakistan, next to his parents' graves.The epitaph on his tomb initially read "First Muslim Nobel Laureate". The Pakistani government removed "Muslim" and left only his name on the headstone. They are the only nation to officially declare that Ahmadis are non-Muslim.[108] Under Ordinance XX of 1984,[110][111] being an Ahmadi, he was considered a non-Muslim according to the definition provided in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan.[112] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdus_Salam If the Mad Mullahs in Iran who believe Muhammad rode a flying donkey get a nuclear bomb they will use it Israel will be the target. Get a job and pay some taxes ya dopey bum

Like North Korea used its nuclear warheads?

The only country ever to have used nuclear weapons against another country is dear old USA. One nuclear bomb wasn't enough, they had to use two.

BaronVonRort is an extremist.

Frank wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 8:39pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 8:21pm: issuevoter wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 1:14pm: The scumbag convert who is supposed to moderate this forum, believes  the fanatical theocracy that runs Iran has a right to have nuclear weapons. And I assume you don't?  How about Israel?  Pakistan, India, the US, France, the UK, China, Russia?  Are they entitled to nukes?   ::) ::) Not all countries are equal. Entitled?? In what legal sense? Moral sense? Realpolitik sense? Pakistan cheated, as is Iran. India was afraid of fanatical Pakistan. The Russians and Americans invented it with German Jewish help. Israel is beset by murderous fanatics like Iran. The Brits and French were victorious (except for the French). The Chinese? Why do they have nukes? They were starving to death in huge numbers within living memory. Who do they want to deter? Hunger?

Quite true.

Muzzos are known nutcases, mass terrorist attacks in the name of the sociopath, nutcase, self confessed pedophile coward Mo the mad.

They would have little thought (if thought is possible for a muzzo) in blowing up the world in the name of Mo the mad.

And the world is starting to wake up.......slowly

---

Valkie wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 7:09am:

And the world is starting to wake up.......slowly

I'd doubt Iran will ever be permitted to obtain a nuclear bomb; and not even develop the capacity to build one.

And it won't matter what agreement in its favour Iran comes to with the EU, the US or China.

This is something the Israelis and the Arab states agree on.

Yes, that's right... Even the animosity between the Arab states and the 'Zionist entity' will be put aside to ensure Iran does not ever possess a nuclear bomb.

The Israelis will do the pointy end of the work when needed, covertly aided by Arab states when required.

Islam is not monolithic and not a universally binding religion. No religion is.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 7:19am:

Valkie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:09am: And the world is starting to wake up.......slowly I'd doubt Iran will ever be permitted to obtain a nuclear bomb; and not even develop the capacity to build one. And it won't matter what agreement in its favour Iran comes to with the EU, the US or China. This is something the Israelis and the Arab states agree on. Yes, that's right... Even the animosity between the Arab states and the 'Zionist entity' will be put aside to ensure Iran does not ever possess a nuclear bomb. The Israelis will do the pointy end of the work when needed, covertly aided by Arab states when required. Islam is not monolithic and not a universally binding religion. No religion is.

We can only hope they never get one.

Because you can bet, with the muzzo hatred of the Jews, that they WILL bomb Israel the very first chance they get.

This will start a world war that could see our planet uninhabitable.

Valkie wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 7:33am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:19am: Valkie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:09am: And the world is starting to wake up.......slowly I'd doubt Iran will ever be permitted to obtain a nuclear bomb; and not even develop the capacity to build one. And it won't matter what agreement in its favour Iran comes to with the EU, the US or China. This is something the Israelis and the Arab states agree on. Yes, that's right... Even the animosity between the Arab states and the 'Zionist entity' will be put aside to ensure Iran does not ever possess a nuclear bomb. The Israelis will do the pointy end of the work when needed, covertly aided by Arab states when required. Islam is not monolithic and not a universally binding religion. No religion is. We can only hope they never get one. Because you can bet, with the muzzo hatred of the Jews, that they WILL bomb Israel the very first chance they get. This will start a world war that could see our planet uninhabitable.

I'd say you can bet Iran will never get one.

The Islamic Republic of Pakistan already has nuclear weapons and to-date has not sold or 'loaned' them to any Sunni Arab or Shiite state.

The Israeli Mossad keeps a very close watch on what Iran is doing and building.

And the Sunni Arab states are all in on that... They hate Shiite Muslims more than Israeli Jews.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 7:41am:

Valkie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:33am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:19am: Valkie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:09am: And the world is starting to wake up.......slowly I'd doubt Iran will ever be permitted to obtain a nuclear bomb; and not even develop the capacity to build one. And it won't matter what agreement in its favour Iran comes to with the EU, the US or China. This is something the Israelis and the Arab states agree on. Yes, that's right... Even the animosity between the Arab states and the 'Zionist entity' will be put aside to ensure Iran does not ever possess a nuclear bomb. The Israelis will do the pointy end of the work when needed, covertly aided by Arab states when required. Islam is not monolithic and not a universally binding religion. No religion is. We can only hope they never get one. Because you can bet, with the muzzo hatred of the Jews, that they WILL bomb Israel the very first chance they get. This will start a world war that could see our planet uninhabitable. I'd say you can bet Iran will never get one. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan already has nuclear weapons and to-date has not sold or 'loaned' them to any Sunni Arab or Shiite state. The Israeli Mossad keeps a very close watch on what Iran is doing and building. And the Sunni Arab states are all in on that... They hate Shiite Muslims more than Israeli Jews.

The Pak nukes are under the control of an educated somewhat secular minority. That situation may not remain. The problem is the nut-job factor in Islam, which is significant, as we see on a daily basis.

issuevoter wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 12:10pm:

The Pak nukes are under the control of an educated somewhat secular minority. That situation may not remain. The problem is the nut-job factor in Islam, which is significant, as we see on a daily basis.

There are more nut jobs in the USA which is the only country to have used nuclear weapons, twice.

The USA just got rid of the orange nut job but the scum below the orange nut job is still roiling.

issuevoter wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 12:10pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:41am: Valkie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:33am: NorthOfNorth wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:19am: Valkie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 7:09am: And the world is starting to wake up.......slowly I'd doubt Iran will ever be permitted to obtain a nuclear bomb; and not even develop the capacity to build one. And it won't matter what agreement in its favour Iran comes to with the EU, the US or China. This is something the Israelis and the Arab states agree on. Yes, that's right... Even the animosity between the Arab states and the 'Zionist entity' will be put aside to ensure Iran does not ever possess a nuclear bomb. The Israelis will do the pointy end of the work when needed, covertly aided by Arab states when required. Islam is not monolithic and not a universally binding religion. No religion is. We can only hope they never get one. Because you can bet, with the muzzo hatred of the Jews, that they WILL bomb Israel the very first chance they get. This will start a world war that could see our planet uninhabitable. I'd say you can bet Iran will never get one. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan already has nuclear weapons and to-date has not sold or 'loaned' them to any Sunni Arab or Shiite state. The Israeli Mossad keeps a very close watch on what Iran is doing and building. And the Sunni Arab states are all in on that... They hate Shiite Muslims more than Israeli Jews. The Pak nukes are under the control of an educated somewhat secular minority. That situation may not remain. The problem is the nut-job factor in Islam, which is significant, as we see on a daily basis.

I'll tell you now.
The nutcase muzzos will have not one seconds hesitation in using a nuke if they get one.

Simply because they are all total nutjobs.

The Islamic CULT of DEATH loves to kill, murder and maim.
It's all the way through their toilet paper book.
Kill, kill, kill, rape, kill.

They are under the control of Satan and "just know" that every person on earth, except for Satan worshiping muzzos, MUST DIE.

They will justify murdering millions by any of a thousand reasons, it's just what they do.

Valkie wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 12:38pm:

I'll tell you now. The nutcase muzzos will have not one seconds hesitation in using a nuke if they get one. Simply because they are all total nutjobs. The Islamic CULT of DEATH loves to kill, murder and maim. It's all the way through their toilet paper book. Kill, kill, kill, rape, kill.

Shock, horror! Muslims have seized control of the US nuclear arsenal?

Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 4:20pm:

Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::)

You are just trying to make us all feel better bwyannnmnnn.
Yes we all know muzzos do not have the intellegence or ability to ever make their own.

But they could sell some more drugs or kill off a few more people and steal from their corpses.
Then they could buy a good second hand nuke and strap it to some young child and point the kid at Israel.

Valkie wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 4:25pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:20pm: Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::) You are just trying to make us all feel better bwyannnmnnn. Yes we all know muzzos do not have the intellegence or ability to ever make their own. But they could sell some more drugs or kill off a few more people and steal from their corpses. Then they could buy a good second hand nuke and strap it to some young child and point the kid at Israel.

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png

Anything value to add, other than your usual venom? ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 4:33pm:

Valkie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:25pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:20pm: Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::) You are just trying to make us all feel better bwyannnmnnn. Yes we all know muzzos do not have the intellegence or ability to ever make their own. But they could sell some more drugs or kill off a few more people and steal from their corpses. Then they could buy a good second hand nuke and strap it to some young child and point the kid at Israel. https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png Anything value to add, other than your usual venom? ::) ::)

Bwyannnnnnnnnns back

Hello bwyannnmnnn, missed you.

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 4:20pm:

Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::)

Hatred or not, your position is simply an acceptance of nuclear weapons in the hands  Islamic nut-jobs. One day, you will have to decide which side you are on, and abandon your tiresome equivocation.

Valkie wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 4:38pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:33pm: Valkie wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:25pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:20pm: Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::) You are just trying to make us all feel better bwyannnmnnn. Yes we all know muzzos do not have the intellegence or ability to ever make their own. But they could sell some more drugs or kill off a few more people and steal from their corpses. Then they could buy a good second hand nuke and strap it to some young child and point the kid at Israel. https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png Anything value to add, other than your usual venom? ::) ::) Bwyannnnnnnnnns back Hello bwyannnmnnn, missed you.

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png

Nope, doesn't appear so.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

issuevoter wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 4:42pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:20pm: Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::) Hatred or not, your position is simply an acceptance of nuclear weapons in the hands  Islamic nut-jobs. One day, you will have to decide which side you are on, and abandon your tiresome equivocation.

How does a rejection of nukes for everybody work out into an acceptance for Muslims?   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 1^st, 2021 at 9:43pm:

freediver wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 9:12pm: That's a real nice fantasy you got there Brian. Fantasy?  No, truth.  Do you like living under pain of the end of civilisation constantly? ::) ::)

I'm pretty sure that's what would happen if you ever got close to your fantasy. All the evil little dictators you like to stick up for would suddenly find a great deal more motivation to develop and use nukes if it might turn out they are the only ones to have them.

freediver wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 6:36pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 9:43pm: freediver wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 9:12pm: That's a real nice fantasy you got there Brian. Fantasy?  No, truth.  Do you like living under pain of the end of civilisation constantly? ::) ::) I'm pretty sure that's what would happen if you ever got close to your fantasy. All the evil little dictators you like to stick up for would suddenly find a great deal more motivation to develop and use nukes if it might turn out they are the only ones to have them.

You have evidence that I stick up for any dictator, Freediver? Are you prepared for post your evidence?  Look here is a space to do so.   Lets see it, shall we?


Quote:

::) ::) ::)

Pakistan has nukes because of India (and vice versa).

Iran's mad mullahs want nukes against :
Israel
Sunnis
Great Satan
Little Satan


It takes a Bbwian to pretend that Islamic regimes like Iran take any notice of international standards. If they did they wouldn't have a theocracy building nukes and shouting about death to assorted other countries.
But then Bbwian's role is to voice the spineless apologist angle. And so he does.

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 7:25pm:

freediver wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 6:36pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 9:43pm: freediver wrote on Dec 1st, 2021 at 9:12pm: That's a real nice fantasy you got there Brian. Fantasy?  No, truth.  Do you like living under pain of the end of civilisation constantly? ::) ::) I'm pretty sure that's what would happen if you ever got close to your fantasy. All the evil little dictators you like to stick up for would suddenly find a great deal more motivation to develop and use nukes if it might turn out they are the only ones to have them. You have evidence that I stick up for any dictator, Freediver? Are you prepared for post your evidence?  Look here is a space to do so.   Lets see it, shall we? Quote: ::) ::) ::)

You tried to equate the CCP with the The Taiwanese government.

Can you follow the logic of what might happen if people tried to achieve your fantasy?

Where did I do that, Freediver?   ::) ::)

Everyone is starting to think about it

---

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 5:42pm:

issuevoter wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:42pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:20pm: Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::) Hatred or not, your position is simply an acceptance of nuclear weapons in the hands  Islamic nut-jobs. One day, you will have to decide which side you are on, and abandon your tiresome equivocation. How does a rejection of nukes for everybody work out into an acceptance for Muslims?   ::) ::)

There is nothing about rejection of nuclear weapons in your statement, and would'nt matter if there was. You said: "Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners." This is equivalency, as if Muzzlums were as resposible as any other group. That is acceptance nuclear weapons in the hands of Muzzlum nut-jobs. You just like playing word games, you don't really give a sh1t about world peace.

issuevoter wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2021 at 8:23am:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 5:42pm: issuevoter wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:42pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:20pm: Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::) Hatred or not, your position is simply an acceptance of nuclear weapons in the hands  Islamic nut-jobs. One day, you will have to decide which side you are on, and abandon your tiresome equivocation. How does a rejection of nukes for everybody work out into an acceptance for Muslims?   ::) ::) There is nothing about rejection of nuclear weapons in your statement, and would'nt matter if there was. You said: "Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners." This is equivalency, as if Muzzlums were as resposible as any other group. That is acceptance nuclear weapons in the hands of Muzzlum nut-jobs. You just like playing word games, you don't really give a sh1t about world peace.

Bwyannnmnnn is an islamophile through and through.

Nothing, no matter how bad, a muzzo does is to be reviled or discouraged.
Islam is, in bwyannnnnnn's twisted little mind, the perfect CULT, one which can do no wrong.
I blame it on Muhammad the mad whose teachings were so twisted and violent, that his followers, raised from birth to consider him the perfect man, wish only to follow in his sociopathic footsteps.
Bwyannnmnnn, being a follower, has been deeply indoctrinated into the CULT of DEATH and will never speak ill of the CULT.

And he will celebrate any use of nukes by Islam, regardless of whom is on the receiving end.

Crazed, right-wing, lunatics have killed more people than Muslim nuclear weapons have.

Keep stroking that karambit Valkie.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1539962365/13#13

issuevoter wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2021 at 8:23am:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 5:42pm: issuevoter wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:42pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:20pm: Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::) Hatred or not, your position is simply an acceptance of nuclear weapons in the hands  Islamic nut-jobs. One day, you will have to decide which side you are on, and abandon your tiresome equivocation. How does a rejection of nukes for everybody work out into an acceptance for Muslims?   ::) ::) There is nothing about rejection of nuclear weapons in your statement, and would'nt matter if there was. You said: "Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners." This is equivalency, as if Muzzlums were as resposible as any other group. That is acceptance nuclear weapons in the hands of Muzzlum nut-jobs. You just like playing word games, you don't really give a sh1t about world peace.

You need to read more extensively.  Try the post I made on 01st Dec 2021 at 20:21:58. ::) ::)

Valkie wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2021 at 11:26am:

issuevoter wrote on Dec 3rd, 2021 at 8:23am: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 5:42pm: issuevoter wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:42pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:20pm: Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::) Hatred or not, your position is simply an acceptance of nuclear weapons in the hands  Islamic nut-jobs. One day, you will have to decide which side you are on, and abandon your tiresome equivocation. How does a rejection of nukes for everybody work out into an acceptance for Muslims?   ::) ::) There is nothing about rejection of nuclear weapons in your statement, and would'nt matter if there was. You said: "Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners." This is equivalency, as if Muzzlums were as resposible as any other group. That is acceptance nuclear weapons in the hands of Muzzlum nut-jobs. You just like playing word games, you don't really give a sh1t about world peace. Bwyannnmnnn is an islamophile through and through. Nothing, no matter how bad, a muzzo does is to be reviled or discouraged. Islam is, in bwyannnnnnn's twisted little mind, the perfect CULT, one which can do no wrong. I blame it on Muhammad the mad whose teachings were so twisted and violent, that his followers, raised from birth to consider him the perfect man, wish only to follow in his sociopathic footsteps. Bwyannnmnnn, being a follower, has been deeply indoctrinated into the CULT of DEATH and will never speak ill of the CULT. And he will celebrate any use of nukes by Islam, regardless of whom is on the receiving end.

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png

Any of any value to add?  No, it doesn't appear so.  Tsk, tsk.  ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2021 at 6:19pm:

issuevoter wrote on Dec 3rd, 2021 at 8:23am: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 5:42pm: issuevoter wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:42pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 4:20pm: Nuclear weapons are associated with weapons of last resort.  Their acquisition invariably come about by hard effort and learning on the part of various regimes. They learn that they need to be responsible and act appropriately or they will earn the ire of the world.  There may be a time when we have an irresponsible use of nuclear weapons but its now going to happen for the foreseeable future.  Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners.  Valkie in his hatred of all Muslims refuses to see that.  Tsk, tsk... ::) ::) Hatred or not, your position is simply an acceptance of nuclear weapons in the hands  Islamic nut-jobs. One day, you will have to decide which side you are on, and abandon your tiresome equivocation. How does a rejection of nukes for everybody work out into an acceptance for Muslims?   ::) ::) There is nothing about rejection of nuclear weapons in your statement, and would'nt matter if there was. You said: "Nuclear weapons force their owners to act in a particular manner, even Muslim owners." This is equivalency, as if Muzzlums were as resposible as any other group. That is acceptance nuclear weapons in the hands of Muzzlum nut-jobs. You just like playing word games, you don't really give a sh1t about world peace. You need to read more extensively.  Try the post I made on 01st Dec 2021 at 20:21:58. ::) ::)

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png

Anything of any value to add?  No, it doesn't appear so.  Tsk, tsk.   ::) ::)

Bwyannnnnnnnnns back.

here we go again

Its just too easy to find stuff about the cult of death.

---

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2021 at 8:30pm:

Where did I do that, Freediver?   ::) ::)

In the Paul Keating thread.

Can you follow the logic of what might happen if people tried to achieve your fantasy of no-one having nuclear weapons?

How do nukes "force" their owners to behave in a certain way?

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 9:56am:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 2nd, 2021 at 8:30pm: Where did I do that, Freediver?   ::) ::) In the Paul Keating thread.

In your imagination...

Quote:

Can you follow the logic of what might happen if people tried to achieve your fantasy of no-one having nuclear weapons?

I can follow the existing logic but I am following an alternative logic.   Nuclear weapons are pointless unless used and if used destroy everything.

Quote:

How do nukes "force" their owners to behave in a certain way?

Can you explain the way they are presently employed? ::) ::)

Quote:

I can follow the existing logic but I am following an alternative logic.

Are they contradictory? Or have you not thought it through yet?


Quote:

Nuclear weapons are pointless unless used

Crap. Inventing your own reality is not logic Brian. It is just you dribbling poo.

How do nukes "force" their owners to behave in a certain way?

Although it pains me to say it.

Bwyannnmnnn does have a point.
Weapons, all weapons, do influence some owners because they think that, if they use them first, they can prevent someone using them against them.
This is, of course, a cowards way of thinking, and usually results in people shooting, blowing up and generally killing people for no good reason other than they are afraid.

The justification these cowards use is we need bigger, stronger weapons because the other guy is making bigger, stronger weapons and we need to be on top.

A weapon should only ever be used as a last possible resort.
Pre-emptive is another way to say "cowards punch"

Unfortunately, there are many cowards with weapons and bombs who are only to willing to use them.
And not enough honest people with weapons to retaliate in time to save more lives.

More people have been murdered by Israeli IDF and by crazed right-wing extremists than by Muslim nuclear weapons.

More people have been murdered with a karambit than have been killed by Muslim nuclear weapons.

https://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1539962365/13#13

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 12:01pm:

Quote: I can follow the existing logic but I am following an alternative logic. Are they contradictory? Or have you not thought it through yet? [quote]Nuclear weapons are pointless unless used

Crap. Inventing your own reality is not logic Brian. It is just you dribbling poo.

How do nukes "force" their owners to behave in a certain way?[/quote]

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png

Do you have anything substantial to add or are you just going to peddle your bullshit, Freediver?   You'd be laughed out of any class that studies nuclear strategy for being a loser...   ::) ::)

How do nukes "force" their owners to behave in a certain way?

What is your "alternate logic"? Is that like Trump's "alternative facts"?

Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective?

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 4:48pm:

Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective?

Gas, biological weapons.

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 4:21pm:

How do nukes "force" their owners to behave in a certain way? What is your "alternate logic"? Is that like Trump's "alternative facts"?

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 5:05pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 4:48pm: Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective? Gas, biological weapons.

Wasn't gas used in Syria? Many countries still possess, or may possess, chemical weapons.

It is yet to be determined that, while the covid leak was almost certainly an accident, the military may have had a role in overseeing the technology being researched.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 5:25pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 5:05pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 4:48pm: Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective? Gas, biological weapons. Wasn't gas used in Syria? Many countries still possess, or may possess, chemical weapons. It is yet to be determined that, while the covid leak was almost certainly an accident, the military may have had a role in overseeing the technology being researched.

And the jury is still out on covid......

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 5:25pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 5:05pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 4:48pm: Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective? Gas, biological weapons. Wasn't gas used in Syria? Many countries still possess, or may possess, chemical weapons. It is yet to be determined that, while the covid leak was almost certainly an accident, the military may have had a role in overseeing the technology being researched.

Gas has been outlawed by international agreement.  Biological weapons have been outlawed by international agreement.  The UN enforces both agreements, sometime by wars...   ::) ::)

Is there anyone who agrees with Brian who doesn't turn into a dribbling imbecile when asked for a simple explanation?

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 9:17pm:

Is there anyone who agrees with Brian who doesn't turn into a dribbling imbecile when asked for a simple explanation?

https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png

Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   ::) ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 6:57pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 5:25pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 5:05pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 4:48pm: Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective? Gas, biological weapons. Wasn't gas used in Syria? Many countries still possess, or may possess, chemical weapons. It is yet to be determined that, while the covid leak was almost certainly an accident, the military may have had a role in overseeing the technology being researched. Gas has been outlawed by international agreement.  Biological weapons have been outlawed by international agreement.  The UN enforces both agreements, sometime by wars...   ::) ::)

And yet the Syrian government, a state actor, used chemical weapons (including Chlorine gas) during its civil war.

duplicate (can't delete).

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 6^th, 2021 at 8:24am:

And yet the Syrian government, a state actor, used chemical weapons (including Chlorine gas) during its civil war.

It is probably from stocks left over from the chemical weapons supplied by the USA to Iraq and were complicit in Iraq' use of chemical weapons.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/exclusive-cia-files-prove-america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran/


Quote:

Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran The U.S. knew Hussein was launching some of the worst chemical attacks in history -- and still gave him a hand. By Shane Harris and Matthew M. Aid KARIM SAHIB/AFP/Getty Images KARIM SAHIB/AFP/Getty Images AUGUST 26, 2013, 2:40 AM The U.S. government may be considering military action in response to chemical strikes near Damascus. But a generation ago, America’s military and intelligence communities knew about and did nothing to stop a series of nerve gas attacks far more devastating than anything Syria has seen, Foreign Policy has learned. In 1988, during the waning days of Iraq’s war with Iran, the United States learned through satellite imagery that Iran was about to gain a major strategic advantage by exploiting a hole in Iraqi defenses. U.S. intelligence officials conveyed the location of the Iranian troops to Iraq, fully aware that Hussein’s military would attack with chemical weapons, including sarin, a lethal nerve agent. The intelligence included imagery and maps about Iranian troop movements, as well as the locations of Iranian logistics facilities and details about Iranian air defenses. The Iraqis used mustard gas and sarin prior to four major offensives in early 1988 that relied on U.S. satellite imagery, maps, and other intelligence. These attacks helped to tilt the war in Iraq’s favor and bring Iran to the negotiating table, and they ensured that the Reagan administration’s long-standing policy of securing an Iraqi victory would succeed. But they were also the last in a series of chemical strikes stretching back several years that the Reagan administration knew about and didn’t disclose. U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture. You can support Foreign Policy by becoming a subscriber. SUBSCRIBE TODAY “The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew,” he told Foreign Policy. According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story. In contrast to today’s wrenching debate over whether the United States should intervene to stop alleged chemical weapons attacks by the Syrian government, the United States applied a cold calculus three decades ago to Hussein’s widespread use of chemical weapons against his enemies and his own people. The Reagan administration decided that it was better to let the attacks continue if they might turn the tide of the war. And even if they were discovered, the CIA wagered that international outrage and condemnation would be muted.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Dec 6^th, 2021 at 10:24am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 6th, 2021 at 8:24am: And yet the Syrian government, a state actor, used chemical weapons (including Chlorine gas) during its civil war. It is probably from stocks left over from the chemical weapons supplied by the USA to Iraq and were complicit in Iraq' use of chemical weapons.

Could be.

But it indicates that the most effective weapons, even if deemed or declared 'immoral', will not prevent their possession by state and non-state actors.

On that, the possession of high-powered weapons by American private citizens is also here to stay. Anyone who does not believe that may as well be listening to Lennon's vapid 'Imagine' on an infinite loop.

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 5:05pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 4:48pm: Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective? Gas, biological weapons. MLK

Not by thug regimes that cheat and lie.

Iran
North Korea
China
Pakistan
Russia (Novichok)

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 4:48pm:

Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective?

Yes. Truth!

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 6^th, 2021 at 8:24am:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 6:57pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 5:25pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 5:05pm: MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 4:48pm: Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective? Gas, biological weapons. Wasn't gas used in Syria? Many countries still possess, or may possess, chemical weapons. It is yet to be determined that, while the covid leak was almost certainly an accident, the military may have had a role in overseeing the technology being researched. Gas has been outlawed by international agreement.  Biological weapons have been outlawed by international agreement.  The UN enforces both agreements, sometime by wars...   ::) ::) And yet the Syrian government, a state actor, used chemical weapons (including Chlorine gas) during its civil war.

They haven't been used in international conflict for many decades.  We have gone to war over their use and stockpiling.  The point of the 1925 Convention was that they couldn't be used against people in other countries,  which is why Iraq believed they were allowed to use them against Kurds...   ::)

Bbwian "Comical Ali" Ross:

"They haven't been used in international conflict for many decades.  We have gone to war over their use and stockpiling.  The point of the 1925 Convention was that they couldn't be used against people in other countries,  which is why Iraq believed they were allowed to use them against Kurds...   



;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6^th, 2021 at 1:15pm:

which is why Iraq believed they were allowed to use them against Kurds...

Strange logic. As if murder is only illegal if it's committed outside of your official residence.

Were the Syrians under the same misapprehension?

I think my point still stands. The Iraqis and the Syrians, having possession and access to the most effective weapon, used it.

Laugh till you cry wrote on Dec 6^th, 2021 at 1:03pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 4:48pm: Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective? Yes. Truth!

Truth, as they say, is usually the first casualty in conflict, so not much of a weapon.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 6^th, 2021 at 1:59pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6th, 2021 at 1:15pm: which is why Iraq believed they were allowed to use them against Kurds...  Strange logic. As if murder is only illegal if it's committed outside of your official residence. Were the Syrians under the same misapprehension? I think my point still stands. The Iraqis and the Syrians, having possession and access to the most effective weapon, used it.

The 1925 Convention prohibiting the use of chemical weapons was flawed,  which allowed countries to produce and store these weapons and if they desired to use them.  It has been replaced by a newer convention which prohibits their manufacture and storage.   The US has been leaning on the Syrians to relinquish such weapons.  ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6^th, 2021 at 2:27pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 6th, 2021 at 1:59pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6th, 2021 at 1:15pm: which is why Iraq believed they were allowed to use them against Kurds...  Strange logic. As if murder is only illegal if it's committed outside of your official residence. Were the Syrians under the same misapprehension? I think my point still stands. The Iraqis and the Syrians, having possession and access to the most effective weapon, used it. The 1925 Convention prohibiting the use of chemical weapons was flawed,  which allowed countries to produce and store these weapons and if they desired to use them.  It has been replaced by a newer convention which prohibits their manufacture and storage.   The US has been leaning on the Syrians to relinquish such weapons.  ::)

I can accept that enough state actors consider chemicals weapons to be immoral enough for them to be, in principle, worth the effort to police their prohibition, but it is an irrational proscription based on direct experience of the survivors of WW1 and, of course, those graphic images seared into our collective memory of the effects of agent orange and other chemical weapons used in Vietnam.

However, by the same standard, carpet bombing of cities should be equally immoral. Creating a city firestorm through conventional bombing should also be considered immoral. High-powered automatic weapons should be considered less moral than lower capability arms.

There is also the fact that chemical weapons are no longer the final determiner of superior strength. That category is nuclear weapons. However, where state actors cannot obtain nuclear weapons and the state's existential need is great and they possess chemical weapons, it is a certainty that they would use them.

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6^th, 2021 at 2:27pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 6th, 2021 at 1:59pm: Brian Ross wrote on Dec 6th, 2021 at 1:15pm: which is why Iraq believed they were allowed to use them against Kurds...  Strange logic. As if murder is only illegal if it's committed outside of your official residence. Were the Syrians under the same misapprehension? I think my point still stands. The Iraqis and the Syrians, having possession and access to the most effective weapon, used it. The 1925 Convention prohibiting the use of chemical weapons was flawed,  which allowed countries to produce and store these weapons and if they desired to use them.  It has been replaced by a newer convention which prohibits their manufacture and storage.

Why bring up and prattle about the 1925 agreement if it is well and truly long replaced, Bbwian 'Comical Ali' Ross?

Laugh till you cry wrote on Dec 6^th, 2021 at 1:03pm:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 4:48pm: Has there been a weapon or substance of military use in human history that has been abandoned because it is too effective? Yes. Truth!

Not according to Brianetics.


Quote:

They haven't been used in international conflict for many decades.

Have there been any symmetric conflicts in that period?


Brian Ross wrote on Dec 5^th, 2021 at 9:34pm:

freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2021 at 9:17pm: Is there anyone who agrees with Brian who doesn't turn into a dribbling imbecile when asked for a simple explanation? https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/223/yawning-face_1f971.png Oh, dearie, dearie, me.   ::) ::)

What about someone whow agrees with him and shares his inability for cogent argument?

Another effective weapon that has degenerated not so much as a weapon of mass destruction, as a weapon of mass terror: drones.

These highly effective weapons include the added bonus of not putting their operators in harm's way.

However, they are so carelessly used that the terror they generate among people who gather for weddings, parties and others reasons like religious services, should make them eligible for being deemed immoral.

When an Afghan boy was asked what scares him the most, he replied, 'the blue sky'.