Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Section 8 · Oct 12, 2003, 02:47 am

Egyptians aren't evil, because others were keeping slaves. So if everyone started murdering others, than you would accept that as being not evil. You said that the "rogoue nations" wouldn't get any symphathy from you. What about all the innocents killed in a nuclear explosion. What about the young kids, the mothers, and the fathers. That would ultimately encourage anti-western ideas, affirming the belief that western powers use their weapons for destruction and murder.

G. Adams · Oct 12, 2003, 07:45 pm

America keeps bringing up the idea of using mini nukes to blow up underground bunkers in the middle east. if they did that, would you then support middle eastern terrorism against the US and their allies?

Fallen Angel · Oct 13, 2003, 02:25 am

Using mini nukes is going a bit far for terrorists, I would say the US will start using one soon on a country that sponsors terrorists, like Syria or Pakistan.
Nukes will probably start being used in the next year or so, it will cost too much to invade every country that harbors terrorists.

Section 8 · Oct 13, 2003, 11:01 am

FA, do you even know what your talking about. Millions apon millions would die if that ever happened, most of them innocent.

G. Adams · Oct 13, 2003, 01:24 pm

Quote:

Originally posted by @--
Using mini nukes is going a bit far for terrorists, I would say the US will start using one soon on a country that sponsors terrorists, like Syria or Pakistan.
Nukes will probably start being used in the next year or so, it will cost too much to invade every country that harbors terrorists.

I was talking about the US using them, as it has threatened repeatedly it would. And my question was, if the US did use these mini nukes against a middle eastern country, would you then support terrorism against the US? As that is the only response these countries could muster.

Fallen Angel · Oct 13, 2003, 11:27 pm

Maybe they wouldnt be nuked in the first place if they didnt use terrorist activitys to attack western countrys, G.Adams.

Section 8 · Oct 13, 2003, 11:29 pm

Isn't nuking a coutry the same as terrorism. Execpt for the fact that millions more die. I thought we had learned from Hiroshima. I might be considered anti-western by todays standards even though I follow some of the policies by american philosophers such as Norm Choamsky.

Fallen Angel · Oct 13, 2003, 11:59 pm

No, a country's government that sponsors terrorism brings its own punishment on its people, blame them not the nukes.

Section 8 · Oct 14, 2003, 12:01 am

Hmmmmmmm, I would indefinently blame the one's who authorized the murders. Anyways, this would only raise anti-western and pro-terrorist sentiment to an all time high.

Fallen Angel · Oct 14, 2003, 12:13 am

But never anti terrorist sentiment right?

Section 8 · Oct 14, 2003, 12:16 am

After the US nuked the shit out of middle eastern countries, I would believe sympathizers would form and their would be a decrease of anti-terrorist sentiment. Of course this depends on how you define terrorist, even great men like Ernesto Guervara are considered terrorists.

Fallen Angel · Oct 14, 2003, 12:25 am

I don't think the world would really care if countrys like Pakistan, Iran Syria or Eygpt even got hit with a nuke, like I said they want to go around blowing the crap out of anyone they please, but don't expect any punishment, it is them that are causing the trouble in the middle east and elsewhere, not the US.

Section 8 · Oct 14, 2003, 12:32 am

The world wouldn't care?! At least 50 million die and no one cares. Do you care that probably only 5% of the lives lost will be innocents. The US are the real terrorists.

Fallen Angel · Oct 14, 2003, 12:49 am

The terrorists could easily wipe out 50 million in your own country ,and probably will soon, but that doesnt seem to bother you much does it?

Section 8 · Oct 14, 2003, 01:04 am

What the hell? Where do you get your reasoning? The most they've killed is 3000 and that's all that they needed to kill. There won't be anymore large scale terrorist attacks, as terrorist lack high grade nuclear weapons. Are you considering that US citizens lives are worth more than middle easterners.

Fallen Angel · Oct 14, 2003, 03:43 am

They could easily have wiped out a lot more, they do have acess to nuclear bombs, one such device known as a suitcase nuke could be left on a train and timed to go off at the most populated area or important area of the city.
A biological weapon could be used against you in your country, the only real defence is to strike back harder than they can, so other terrorist organisations have second thoughts.
Do you think 50 million American lives are more important than 50 million Middle Eastern ones?
Provided Israel is left out of the equation, I would as an ally support the American lives being saved over the middle eastern ones.

G. Adams · Oct 14, 2003, 01:40 pm

FA, you ignored my question again, would you support terrorist action against the United States if it used nuclear weapons against the middle east?

Fallen Angel · Oct 14, 2003, 09:57 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (G. Adams,)
FA, you ignored my question again, would you support terrorist action against the United States if it used nuclear weapons against the middle east?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

No.
I don't think the US will strike first in a nuclear exchange, and I pity any middle eastern countrys people, that has a terrorist sponsoring government stupid enough to start a nuclear attack on the US or her allies, or her interests(includes US armed forces, allies anywhere).

Section 8 · Oct 14, 2003, 10:00 pm

You pity the people, yet you support the killing of them by the millions. This is called hypocrisy.

Fallen Angel · Oct 14, 2003, 11:40 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Section 8,)
You pity the people, yet you support the killing of them by the millions. This is called hypocrisy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

No, this is called reality Section 8.

Oct 12, 2003, 07:45 pm	#22 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,163	America keeps bringing up the idea of using mini nukes to blow up underground bunkers in the middle east. if they did that, would you then support middle eastern terrorism against the US and their allies? Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Oct 14, 2003, 01:40 pm	#37 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,163	FA, you ignored my question again, would you support terrorist action against the United States if it used nuclear weapons against the middle east? Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Oct 14, 2003, 09:57 pm	#38 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (G. Adams,) FA, you ignored my question again, would you support terrorist action against the United States if it used nuclear weapons against the middle east?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No. I don't think the US will strike first in a nuclear exchange, and I pity any middle eastern countrys people, that has a terrorist sponsoring government stupid enough to start a nuclear attack on the US or her allies, or her interests(includes US armed forces, allies anywhere).

Oct 14, 2003, 11:40 pm	#40 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Section 8,) You pity the people, yet you support the killing of them by the millions. This is called hypocrisy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No, this is called reality Section 8.

Oct 12, 2003, 02:47 am	#21 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	Egyptians aren't evil, because others were keeping slaves. So if everyone started murdering others, than you would accept that as being not evil. You said that the "rogoue nations" wouldn't get any symphathy from you. What about all the innocents killed in a nuclear explosion. What about the young kids, the mothers, and the fathers. That would ultimately encourage anti-western ideas, affirming the belief that western powers use their weapons for destruction and murder.

Oct 13, 2003, 02:25 am	#23 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	Using mini nukes is going a bit far for terrorists, I would say the US will start using one soon on a country that sponsors terrorists, like Syria or Pakistan. Nukes will probably start being used in the next year or so, it will cost too much to invade every country that harbors terrorists.

Oct 13, 2003, 11:01 am	#24 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	FA, do you even know what your talking about. Millions apon millions would die if that ever happened, most of them innocent.

Oct 13, 2003, 11:27 pm	#26 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	Maybe they wouldnt be nuked in the first place if they didnt use terrorist activitys to attack western countrys, G.Adams.

Oct 13, 2003, 11:29 pm	#27 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	Isn't nuking a coutry the same as terrorism. Execpt for the fact that millions more die. I thought we had learned from Hiroshima. I might be considered anti-western by todays standards even though I follow some of the policies by american philosophers such as Norm Choamsky.

Oct 13, 2003, 11:59 pm	#28 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	No, a country's government that sponsors terrorism brings its own punishment on its people, blame them not the nukes.

Oct 14, 2003, 12:01 am	#29 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	Hmmmmmmm, I would indefinently blame the one's who authorized the murders. Anyways, this would only raise anti-western and pro-terrorist sentiment to an all time high.

Oct 14, 2003, 12:13 am	#30 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	But never anti terrorist sentiment right?

Oct 14, 2003, 12:16 am	#31 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	After the US nuked the shit out of middle eastern countries, I would believe sympathizers would form and their would be a decrease of anti-terrorist sentiment. Of course this depends on how you define terrorist, even great men like Ernesto Guervara are considered terrorists.

Oct 14, 2003, 12:25 am	#32 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	I don't think the world would really care if countrys like Pakistan, Iran Syria or Eygpt even got hit with a nuke, like I said they want to go around blowing the crap out of anyone they please, but don't expect any punishment, it is them that are causing the trouble in the middle east and elsewhere, not the US.

Oct 14, 2003, 12:32 am	#33 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	The world wouldn't care?! At least 50 million die and no one cares. Do you care that probably only 5% of the lives lost will be innocents. The US are the real terrorists.

Oct 14, 2003, 12:49 am	#34 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	The terrorists could easily wipe out 50 million in your own country ,and probably will soon, but that doesnt seem to bother you much does it?

Oct 14, 2003, 01:04 am	#35 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	What the hell? Where do you get your reasoning? The most they've killed is 3000 and that's all that they needed to kill. There won't be anymore large scale terrorist attacks, as terrorist lack high grade nuclear weapons. Are you considering that US citizens lives are worth more than middle easterners.

Oct 14, 2003, 03:43 am	#36 (permalink) (top)
Fallen Angel Igneous Magma Location: Sydney,Australia. Posts: 333	They could easily have wiped out a lot more, they do have acess to nuclear bombs, one such device known as a suitcase nuke could be left on a train and timed to go off at the most populated area or important area of the city. A biological weapon could be used against you in your country, the only real defence is to strike back harder than they can, so other terrorist organisations have second thoughts. Do you think 50 million American lives are more important than 50 million Middle Eastern ones? Provided Israel is left out of the equation, I would as an ally support the American lives being saved over the middle eastern ones.

Oct 14, 2003, 10:00 pm	#39 (permalink) (top)
Section 8 Hot Lava Location: Spokane, WA Posts: 782	You pity the people, yet you support the killing of them by the millions. This is called hypocrisy.