blank My CNCSeries
Username:
Password:
blank
(Register)
Content Overview Files Database Tiberium Wars Section Red Alert 3 Section Zero Hour Section Generals Section Yuris Revenge Section Red Alert 2 Section Renegade Section About CNCSeries
» FAQ · History
» Staff · Contact Us

Header
blank
» Forum » Debate Forum » Opinion on Bush


Previous Thread In Forum Previous Thread ¦ Next Thread Next thread in forum
Page 7 of 8«--12345678--»
thecommanderIcon...13:33 03.01.06 

NS creator


 Reps: 193

#66, 164 Posts


blank

Originally posted by Waraddict...

Originally posted by bigguy563...


You do realise that there are hundreds of sources a terrorist organisation can get nuclear weaponry in the world? Iraq not being one of them, think former Soviet Empire nuclear facilities which are completely abandoned and without security, in other words, if NBCs (Nuclear Biological Chemical weapons, WMD is an incorrect abstract statement) getting into the hands of a terrorist organisation is your fear, chances they already have them.




Here you seem to imply that there are a lot of places terrorists can get NBCs or whatever else you want to call them. If such places can provide for terrorists, surely there would be more than one. So basically in one post you say numerous organizations could have multiple, and another that those organizations have only one. The American Democratic Party would be proud. Tongue



You're not thinking very logically, again you're thinking of terrorists as one single group, my point was that dozens of terrorist organisations probably have nuclear bombs from places like abandoned former soviet union missile silos, but each probably don't have more then one. Besides, that's just a guess, what I am only hilighting is that this scenario is a hundred times more plausable then your irrational fear of Saddam supplying islamic terrorists with one single nuclear bomb. And as for your Democrat remark, its really bloody typical for a Democrat to point at an irrelevant inconsistency in their apponent's arguement when they feel they can't support their own view properly.


in case that u dont knew this fact:
the soviet union and the u.s. have enough nuclear bombs 2 kill all humans on this planet.
so if the terrorists have nuclear wepons they sure have more then 1 bomb.
 
WaraddictIcon...14:55 03.01.06 

 Reps: 253

#8, 84 Posts


blank

Originally posted by thecommander...

Originally posted by Waraddict...

Originally posted by bigguy563...


You do realise that there are hundreds of sources a terrorist organisation can get nuclear weaponry in the world? Iraq not being one of them, think former Soviet Empire nuclear facilities which are completely abandoned and without security, in other words, if NBCs (Nuclear Biological Chemical weapons, WMD is an incorrect abstract statement) getting into the hands of a terrorist organisation is your fear, chances they already have them.




Here you seem to imply that there are a lot of places terrorists can get NBCs or whatever else you want to call them. If such places can provide for terrorists, surely there would be more than one. So basically in one post you say numerous organizations could have multiple, and another that those organizations have only one. The American Democratic Party would be proud. Tongue



You're not thinking very logically, again you're thinking of terrorists as one single group, my point was that dozens of terrorist organisations probably have nuclear bombs from places like abandoned former soviet union missile silos, but each probably don't have more then one. Besides, that's just a guess, what I am only hilighting is that this scenario is a hundred times more plausable then your irrational fear of Saddam supplying islamic terrorists with one single nuclear bomb. And as for your Democrat remark, its really bloody typical for a Democrat to point at an irrelevant inconsistency in their apponent's arguement when they feel they can't support their own view properly.


in case that u dont knew this fact:
the soviet union and the u.s. have enough nuclear bombs 2 kill all humans on this planet.
so if the terrorists have nuclear wepons they sure have more then 1 bomb.



'THE' Terrorists?
 
thecommanderIcon...18:25 03.01.06 

NS creator


 Reps: 193

#66, 164 Posts


blank

Originally posted by Waraddict...

Originally posted by thecommander...

Originally posted by Waraddict...

Originally posted by bigguy563...


You do realise that there are hundreds of sources a terrorist organisation can get nuclear weaponry in the world? Iraq not being one of them, think former Soviet Empire nuclear facilities which are completely abandoned and without security, in other words, if NBCs (Nuclear Biological Chemical weapons, WMD is an incorrect abstract statement) getting into the hands of a terrorist organisation is your fear, chances they already have them.




Here you seem to imply that there are a lot of places terrorists can get NBCs or whatever else you want to call them. If such places can provide for terrorists, surely there would be more than one. So basically in one post you say numerous organizations could have multiple, and another that those organizations have only one. The American Democratic Party would be proud. Tongue



You're not thinking very logically, again you're thinking of terrorists as one single group, my point was that dozens of terrorist organisations probably have nuclear bombs from places like abandoned former soviet union missile silos, but each probably don't have more then one. Besides, that's just a guess, what I am only hilighting is that this scenario is a hundred times more plausable then your irrational fear of Saddam supplying islamic terrorists with one single nuclear bomb. And as for your Democrat remark, its really bloody typical for a Democrat to point at an irrelevant inconsistency in their apponent's arguement when they feel they can't support their own view properly.


in case that u dont knew this fact:
the soviet union and the u.s. have enough nuclear bombs 2 kill all humans on this planet.
so if the terrorists have nuclear wepons they sure have more then 1 bomb.



'THE' Terrorists?


oops ^^"
 
ripailaIcon...18:44 03.01.06 


 Reps: 103

#499, 78 Posts


blank
guys...you should stop...this bush thing is getting out off hand....and who cares about bush....i dont...and he doesnt even know what we are saying about him...just forget it...
my last post in this topic...Tongue Tongue Tongue
 
bigguy563Icon...22:08 03.01.06 

reputed member


Reps: 924

#34, 545 Posts


23:20 04.01.06 - Edited

Yeah, I think we should really lay this topic to rest, or at least stop quoting posts that have already quoted about three other different posts.
 
thecommanderIcon...13:18 04.01.06 

NS creator


 Reps: 193

#66, 164 Posts


blank
like my father say: maybe yes, maybe not whats for sure maybeGrin
 
Apocalypse_TankIcon...07:38 01.06.07 

Chaplain of CNC


 Reps: 254

#359, 219 Posts


07:39 01.06.07 - Edited

George W. Bush in conclusion is stupid, cant make the right decisions, starts wars for no reason (or because he wants oil) and is gay


END OF STORY
 
bigguy563Icon...13:35 01.06.07 

reputed member


Reps: 924

#34, 545 Posts


blank
Just because you believe something that makes it the end of story eh?

I'm not sure you've noticed, but Bush is married with two children and against gay marriage, so I think we can rule out he's gay.

Starting wars for no reason? How about these reasons:

Afghanistan: Al Qaeda attacks us and murdered 3000 of our citizens. The Taliban gave them sanctuary and Bush decided to do what we should've done 8 years earlier. He sent the message that it is not ok for a nation to harbor terrorists.

Iraq: Saddam repeatedly violated both the Gulf War treaty, and multiple UN resolutions. He lied about his programs, misled and turned away weapons inspectors again and again. However, since the UN is run by cowards they didn't have the guts to do anything about it. Bush did. Second, Saddam had numerous connections to terrorist organizations, and supported terrorism in general. Third, Saddam was a dictator who held power for two and a half decades. He murdered between 750000 and 1 million of his own people.

Can he make the right decisions?
Going into Iraq and Afghanistan was the correct decision, as has been his handling of the American economy. He has been a strong leader in the War on Terror.

Is he stupid?
You're probably only saying this because he is a less than stellar speaker. That doesn't mean he's stupid. Get to know someone before you come to conclusions like that.

So unless you're going to come up with facts to support your arguments, I would advise against coming to this part of the forum.
 
Apocalypse_TankIcon...10:49 03.06.07 

Chaplain of CNC


 Reps: 254

#359, 219 Posts


10:51 03.06.07 - Edited

...........................so, i was only putting in MY opinion, i dont really give a damn.
 
matsmiffIcon...08:31 29.08.07 

Please replace avatar!
 Reps: 99

#1119, 68 Posts


blank
What George dont get is, if he is constantly publicly threatening Iran (like he did yesterday) they will never back down and lose face.

Lets say china/russia were threatening the US in the same way would the US back down? Nooooooooo

We need talk lots of long talk between iran and the US not aggressive rhetoric which is all we are getting from Bush and Armadinnerjacket or whatever his name is.
 
SpygonIcon...16:29 29.08.07 

Defence Specialist


 Reps: 478

#1127, 404 Posts


blank
i agree threatening the middle east countries will just piss them off and make them do something stupid proper talks will help everybody come to a settlement where everybody is happy
 
Apocalypse_TankIcon...08:31 30.08.07 

Chaplain of CNC


 Reps: 254

#359, 219 Posts


blank

Originally posted by Spygon...
i agree threatening the middle east countries will just piss them off and make them do something stupid proper talks will help everybody come to a settlement where everybody is happy

yea, its about time they finished fighting about nothing.
 
bigguy563Icon...15:34 01.09.07 

reputed member


Reps: 924

#34, 545 Posts


blank
The thing is just because people are talking doesn't mean their getting anywhere.
 
SpygonIcon...16:48 01.09.07 

Defence Specialist


 Reps: 478

#1127, 404 Posts


blank
yeh but its a good starting point and better than threaten to go invade there country as that will just scare the middle east and they will then do something stupid like nuke someone.
 
CabalIcon...23:44 01.09.07 

 Reps: 54

#553, 41 Posts


blank
I don't really like bush, myself I prefer a nice shaved pus...

Oh! THAT BUSH.

Yea, he is a moronic war mongering retard.
 


Post A ReplyAdd New Thread
Page 7 of 8«--12345678--»
Navigation:

CNCSeries.Com