NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/24/missile.d...e.ap/index.html Good stuff, now to finish working the bugs out of the land based system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 shut it nuke.... you know positive news has been outlawed in these parts.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 "We don't really need a missile defense shield. What we need is a boxcutter shield." - David Cross Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Feb 24, 2005 -> 10:01 PM) shut it nuke.... you know positive news has been outlawed in these parts.... Well, that's just not true. Here, the positive news of the day regarding our missle programs: Canada Opts Out of US Defense Shield TORONTO - Prime Minister Paul Martin said Thursday that Canada would not join the contentious U.S. missile defense program, a decision that will further strain brittle relations between the neighbors but please Canadians who fear it could lead to an international arms race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 I question the timing of this test. "Lets show those canooks what our bottle rockets can do!" --George w. Bush But whatever, this is very unimportant in the scheme of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted February 25, 2005 Author Share Posted February 25, 2005 QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Feb 24, 2005 -> 11:14 PM) I question the timing of this test. "Lets show those canooks what our bottle rockets can do!" --George w. Bush But whatever, this is very unimportant in the scheme of things. Actually this is one in a series of tests of the Aegis cruiser based system and a viable theater missile defense is very significant in the grand scheme of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 24, 2005 -> 11:23 PM) Actually this is one in a series of tests of the Aegis cruiser based system and a viable theater missile defense is very significant in the grand scheme of things. c'mon nuke, it's not like there's a ranking democrat that's actually supported this idea.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigHurt35 Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Feb 24, 2005 -> 11:58 PM) c'mon nuke, it's not like there's a ranking democrat that's actually supported this idea.... Clinton doesn't have actual "convictions," so he doesn't count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 24, 2005 -> 11:23 PM) Actually this is one in a series of tests of the Aegis cruiser based system and a viable theater missile defense is very significant in the grand scheme of things. The company I work for makes part for the Aegis program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 24, 2005 -> 11:23 PM) Actually this is one in a series of tests of the Aegis cruiser based system and a viable theater missile defense is very significant in the grand scheme of things. Okay that would have been nice to know in the article or any of the other articles I read. And compared to the search for a cure for Aids and Cancer, or slowing global warming it is very insiginificant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted February 25, 2005 Share Posted February 25, 2005 QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Feb 25, 2005 -> 10:02 AM) Clinton doesn't have actual "convictions," so he doesn't count. You're correct, he was acquitted of all charges *rimshot* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Feb 25, 2005 -> 04:37 PM) And compared to the search for a cure for Aids and Cancer, or slowing global warming it is very insiginificant. And just what is Canada doing towards accomplishing those goals that the US is not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Feb 26, 2005 -> 12:30 AM) And just what is Canada doing towards accomplishing those goals that the US is not? - Canada is a signatory to the Kyoto accord. We are not. - Canada has affordable ARV and cancer chemotherapeutics. We do not. Or was this a rhetorical question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 24, 2005 -> 07:46 PM) http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/24/missile.d...e.ap/index.html Good stuff, now to finish working the bugs out of the land based system. Considering Russia would be our only arms competitor and that they have already developed a warhead that would bypass our SDM, cool. But then again, anything that is Russian and flies often doesn't do what it is supposed to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted February 26, 2005 Author Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(Cerbaho-WG @ Feb 25, 2005 -> 11:52 PM) Considering Russia would be our only arms competitor and that they have already developed a warhead that would bypass our SDM, cool. But then again, anything that is Russian and flies often doesn't do what it is supposed to. For the 90th time. The purpose of a national missile defense is to defend against a missile attack from a rouge nation like N. Korea & Iran and the like. In the case of N. Korea they have a ballistic missile in development that can hit the continental U.S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Feb 25, 2005 -> 11:30 PM) And just what is Canada doing towards accomplishing those goals that the US is not? Is that my point? No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Feb 26, 2005 -> 07:34 AM) Is that my point? No. Your point was that somehow the pursuit of a missle defense system was not a worthy one, and that the US should be doing other things, such as those mentioned. Maybe when North Korea launches a rouge nuke at the US, and due to their crappy targeting systems it appears that it would take out Ottowa instead, we should just let it drop? Canada is being a wuss in this. Publicly 'withdraw' from the missle defense shield, while knowing that if a missle WAS heading towards Canada, that the US would try to stop in anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Feb 26, 2005 -> 05:48 AM) - Canada is a signatory to the Kyoto accord. We are not. - Canada has affordable ARV and cancer chemotherapeutics. We do not. Or was this a rhetorical question? Assuming you live long enough to get an appointment to see a doc and get the drugs, that might be a good thing. As for Kyoto, it will be dead in 5 years, when all the nations that thought it was a good thing, see how it totally f***s their economy and productivity. European countries are so far behind in their 'goals' that it would take a miracle for them to meet their targets for reduction. Kyoto was a good idea, bad execution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted February 26, 2005 Author Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Feb 26, 2005 -> 12:57 PM) Your point was that somehow the pursuit of a missle defense system was not a worthy one, and that the US should be doing other things, such as those mentioned. Maybe when North Korea launches a rouge nuke at the US, and due to their crappy targeting systems it appears that it would take out Ottowa instead, we should just let it drop? Canada is being a wuss in this. Publicly 'withdraw' from the missle defense shield, while knowing that if a missle WAS heading towards Canada, that the US would try to stop in anyway. LOL. Excellent point. I wonder if the Canadian government would be so scrupulous about us getting permission for launching an interceptor missile over their airspace in such a scenario. It certainly would be poetic justice in such a situation though if we did let such a missile drop. Such missiles only take 20 minutes or so to reach the continent from N. Korea, we could easily say that the line was busy and we couldn't get through to ask permission to launch the interceptor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted February 26, 2005 Author Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Feb 26, 2005 -> 01:00 PM) Assuming you live long enough to get an appointment to see a doc and get the drugs, that might be a good thing. As for Kyoto, it will be dead in 5 years, when all the nations that thought it was a good thing, see how it totally f***s their economy and productivity. European countries are so far behind in their 'goals' that it would take a miracle for them to meet their targets for reduction. Kyoto was a good idea, bad execution. LOL The euros will have a tougher time too. Their unemployment is already north of 10% in nearly all EU countries I wonder how much worse it'll get from here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Feb 26, 2005 -> 12:57 PM) Your point was that somehow the pursuit of a missle defense system was not a worthy one, and that the US should be doing other things, such as those mentioned. Maybe when North Korea launches a rouge nuke at the US, and due to their crappy targeting systems it appears that it would take out Ottowa instead, we should just let it drop? Canada is being a wuss in this. Publicly 'withdraw' from the missle defense shield, while knowing that if a missle WAS heading towards Canada, that the US would try to stop in anyway. I haven't yet made my mind up about missile defense and whether we should have pulled out yet. So my point was not to say it's not a worthy pursuit, but that it takes a backseat to things that I believe have higher risks to mankind. And I'll always trust the Liberals to take better care of me than Republicans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted February 26, 2005 Share Posted February 26, 2005 no United States - no Canada know United States - no Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Feb 26, 2005 -> 07:52 PM) I haven't yet made my mind up about missile defense and whether we should have pulled out yet. So my point was not to say it's not a worthy pursuit, but that it takes a backseat to things that I believe have higher risks to mankind. And I'll always trust the Liberals to take better care of me than Republicans. What better way to take care of you than to stop an incoming missle from blowing your ass all over the frozen tundra? And why don't you start taking care of yourself, instead of loking for government to do it for you? I don't want libs or conservatives taking care of me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted February 27, 2005 Author Share Posted February 27, 2005 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Feb 26, 2005 -> 06:36 PM) What better way to take care of you than to stop an incoming missle from blowing your ass all over the frozen tundra? And why don't you start taking care of yourself, instead of loking for government to do it for you? I don't want libs or conservatives taking care of me. My point exactly. The purpose of government is to govern not to play nursemaid to everyone who lives under it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 26, 2005 -> 06:37 PM) My point exactly. The purpose of government is to govern not to play nursemaid to everyone who lives under it. While I agree I don't think we'd have consistent views as to what qualifies as playing nursemaid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.