And that's where your logic becomes misleading, there aren't that many terrorists in contrast to non-terrorists. The odds of dying in a terrorist attack are infinitesimal.your guys premise is completly wrong because you have to compare the same amount of Horses to terrorists
if you take 10 terrorists and compare them to 10 horses the terroists will do much more killing than the horses so your analogies are completely incorrect and misleading
heres an example, more people die of terrorists every year than even hydrogen bombs!!!!!
now if I made that statement it would be misleading too
cuz there are way more terrists around killing than there are hydrogen bombs around killing.
just like there are about a quadzillion more people taking baths than there are terroists in the world
=============================================somwhat
the great thing about politics forums is we can argue our points in a public spectical without someone ending up trying to throw fists
cuz in reality you cant really agrue like this in front of somones face cuz it would be too harsh in person
I garantee if we all got together to hang out it would be much more cordial
A decent "doomsday" nuclear/EMP scenario by Bruce Beach via IronGeek, worth a read.Just to finish it off, don't get all caught up in atomic explosions. the weapon of choice will be an EMP bomb and it will take only ONE to be completely successful. Russia, China, Iran have working EMP bomb programs. I give the EMP bomb high probability, it's very attractive in its simplicity and SHORT flight time (only a half arc is required).
out.
boogy boogy boogy
There are some dangers to following only yourself. I mean, what if you're a bellicose halfwit?
HAHAHAHAHA~lol, I'm afraid there are a few of those around, wouldn't want to mention any names, Might find myself caught up in that mess.There are some dangers to following only yourself. I mean, what if you're a bellicose halfwit?
Pronunciation: \ˈbe-li-ˌkōs\ Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English, from Latin bellicosus, from bellicus of war, from bellum war Date: 15th century : favoring or inclined to start quarrels or wars
heu it's politics, i'm democratic and black but when u go into that outside world u can't go out ur house and say u're republican without being called a racist or an uncle tombellicose
One entry found.
Main Entry: bel·li·cose
heard the word before, never really new what it meant, thanks.
ok ive noticed this too, that i like to quarrel on here that fact is not lost on me.
the weird thing is in my day to day interaction im the type who just lets the stupid be stupid and never get into arguments.
so then i think then why am I all always bustin perverbial caps in here?
and I think I know why
the only time I must retort is when others are inflametory to my ideals and badgering others
I guess im just a man of passion
im your best buddy, would stick by you no matter what and respect your opinion, but the second I am challanged i must hit back guns a blazin
tell me I cant, and then ill do it. just to spite you
just the way im wired, you say you live by the potato then I instantly think well whats so wrong with the po-tot-o? Why it gotta be potato?
i see someone gettin slapped around i want to defend them
i see a forum riddled with one sided views I try to rebut the majority to speak out for the minority
like if this forum was full of rabid conservatives shutting down and cussing liberals I would come to the liberals defense and battle the ungracious outnumbering conservatives even if im not a liberal myself, i just like to raz the establishment and the balance the inbalance
so you see i thrive off of the enemies power, the less power the enemy has the more I empathise with them.
Proverbs: Don't cut off your nose to spite your face
A warning against spiteful revenge which results in one's own hurt or loss. The metaphorical phrase to cut off one's nose to spite one's face is very frequently found. Cf. medieval L. male ulciscitur dedecus sibi illatum, qui amputat nasum suum, he who cuts off his nose takes poor revenge for a shame inflicted on him; mid 14th-cent. Fr. qui cope son nès, sa face est despechie, the man who cuts off his nose spites his face.
which at this time seems unlikly
The stock market would crash...the market fell 5% yesterday, thats a drop...a nuclear explosion is going to crash the market. It would be temporary...to the tune of a decade or so. I don't think you understand how fucked our economy is as it is...Do you realize what wouldve happened if the gov't hadnt intervened? And thats just from banks failing.Things continues to deflate despite all of the hyperinflationary tactics of the fed. A nuclear attack would throw us into an all out deflationary spiral as everybody pulled their money out of the market. Lowering the interest rate to 0 certainly wouldnt help, creating money out of thin air would make things worse. The impending war would bankrupt us.
Well in this depression, a lot of people are going to be starving. Once again, times have changed. During the first great depression, the majority of people were self sufficient. NOw practically no one is self sufficient. If the market crashed, thousands of stores would close, food would be very scarce. If huge corporations fail, millions of jobs go out the window.
yeah because charities will be able to keep their heads above water when multi million dollar corporations are failing. And everyone will be so eager to volunteer for no money when they are out of a job and have no food. And I dont think volunteers are capable of completely rebuilding a major city.
If we're already in a downward spiral, then a bomb wouldn't make much of a difference, would it?
The majority of people haven't been self-sufficient since the mid 19th century. Sure, more people were self-sufficient, but most lived in cities like they do today. And during the Great Depression, food was cheap and plentiful, in fact that was part of the problem.
Most people would still have jobs and food, like during the depression. And that would be a scenario where other countries would probably chip in too, as far as money.
I agree NewGrowth. I never accept anything at face value. I need proof.I don't have to follow a blind majority I could care less in fact. My opinions are based on logical observation and interpretation. Not blind idealism that fails to see the reality of situations people and things in an unbiased manner.
Stay tuned for further transmissions . . . .
