View Poll Results: Per the question in the thread

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, and I supported Afghanistan

    12 27.27%
  • Yes, and I supported Iraq

    0 0%
  • Yes, and I supported both

    10 22.73%
  • Yes, and I supported neither

    1 2.27%
  • No, and I supported Afghanistan

    4 9.09%
  • No, and I supported Iraq

    1 2.27%
  • No, and I supported both

    5 11.36%
  • No, and I suppported neither

    5 11.36%
  • Undecided, leaning towards yes

    3 6.82%
  • Undecided, leaning towards no

    3 6.82%
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 101

Thread: Attack within Pakistan

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    I don't take orders from you, if you don't want to discuss this like a grown up and just want to continue your usual extreme and absurd comments then that is not my fault.
    No ... you bury your head in the sand and HOPE the enemy doesn't get nukes.

    You would rather wait for some Islam-o-nazi terrorist lunatic to use a nuke to commit mass-murder before you are willing to do anything.

    This is unacceptable where nuclear weapons are concerned.

    If you cannot see this, you are BLIND.

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Juvenile name-calling aside, I find it funny that you can make this claim after the previous president - hardly a liberal wuss - essentially drove our foreign policy into the ditch. Recent history simply does not match up with this.
    Spare me your liberal rhetoric.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Furthermore, what makes you think that American leaders understand Pakistan's problems better than Pakistani leaders do?
    I think we know the damage nuclear weapons can do and I think we're acting to prevent Taliban ****bags --- WHO ARE ALLIED WITH AL QAEDA --- from seizing those weapons and proving them to Al Qaeda.

    If you cannot make the connection, you are NOT QUALIFIED to discuss the topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Oh noes, you're typing in caps. That must mean your argument is more logically sound than mine.
    My argument is more sound than yours because I am in touch with reality and I know how the world works. You clearly do not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    You need not worry about the Taliban forcibly seizing the weapons from the Pakistani military. The Pakistani military has kicked the Taliban's ass pretty much every time they've directly engaged in combat.
    Yes, they are, BECAUSE WE TOLD THEM IF THEY DIDN'T ACT WE WOULD. We do not want Al Quack getting nukes. We WILL NOT allow Talibastards anywhere even close to nukes.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    How would you like it if, for example, a foreign country bombed the **** out of Kansas to get rid of the Westboro Baptist Church, or bombed the **** out of Michigan to get rid of Tim McVeigh's buddies...without our elected government's permission?
    This is liberal rhetoric and an irrelevant comparison. In any event, the Westboro Baptist Church is not a heavily armed terrorist group that is trying to seize control of territory is not theirs.

    You are wrong -- your comparison is ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    You misunderstand what "seizing nuclear weapons" entails. Let's say that hypothetically, the Taliban mounted some huge offensive against a nuclear facility and somehow managed to overtake the Pakistani military. It's not as though they would suddenly be able to press a button and destroy a major city within the hour. A nuclear weapon is an extremely complicated machine. There are too many safeguards in place for that, and no one in the Taliban would have much experience with the nukes anyway. It would take them, at a minimum, a year to even figure out how it works and how to operate it. That would be plenty of time for us to act if necessary. Our military undoubtedly has contingency plans in place that could be carried out within a day or two, let alone an entire year.
    You know NOTHING about how nuclear weapons work.

    Once they seized the nuclear arsenal -- they could break down the warheads and give the warheads to Al Qaeda for use in construction of a dirty bomb.

    They are NOT GOING TO LAUNCH THEM!

    They will give (or sell) the components to Al Qaeda, Iran, Syria, or whomever else wants to buy them.

    If you had even the first clue what you were talking about, you would realize that.

    You are NOT QUALIFIED to discuss this subject.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Like I said, I am completely in favor of assisting the Pakistani government. But American boots on the ground is neither helpful to the Pakistanis nor desired by the Pakistanis.
    You are not qualified to determine what is and is not useful in preventing Taliban ****bags from seizing power and nuclear weapons.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    It is emotion-filled, logic-free rhetoric like this that makes it obvious that you should have absolutely no say in foreign policy. Fortunately, the people in charge of our foreign policy seem less driven by emotion than you.
    There is plently of logic in what I am saying. It's just dismissed because the liberal mind cannot seem to accept that freaks who want nukes must be stopped BEFORE THEY GET NUKES or millions will die.

    People who think like I do made certain that terrorist have not been able to pull of attack on American soil for over half a decade. People like you, who clearly have no idea what they are talking about, need to stop preaching nieve rhetoric.

    Wexxman --- brown-nosing is lame --- even for you.

  3. #73
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    No ... you bury your head in the sand and HOPE the enemy doesn't get nukes.
    They aren't going to. They are loosing without your invasion plans.
    You would rather wait for some Islam-o-nazi terrorist lunatic to use a nuke to commit mass-murder before you are willing to do anything.
    Nope, I'd just rather that was a reasonable possibility first and then I'd take cautious, gradual steps not leap to a massive invasion.

    [
    This is unacceptable where nuclear weapons are concerned.

    If you cannot see this, you are BLIND.
    Not an argument.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  4. #74
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    09-20-16 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,420

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    No ... you bury your head in the sand and HOPE the enemy doesn't get nukes.

    You would rather wait for some Islam-o-nazi terrorist lunatic to use a nuke to commit mass-murder before you are willing to do anything.

    This is unacceptable where nuclear weapons are concerned.

    If you cannot see this, you are BLIND.
    Vader how would you propose replacing the Pakistani government after Pakistan decends into anarchy as a result of foriegn incursion?

  5. #75
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Spare me your liberal rhetoric.
    Let's see...my previous post was filled with facts about foreign policy. Your latest post is filled with more insults and hysteria, and almost no facts or reasoning at all. That being the case, I will address the only point you made that is even remotely grounded in reason:

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader
    You know NOTHING about how nuclear weapons work.

    Once they seized the nuclear arsenal -- they could break down the warheads and give the warheads to Al Qaeda for use in construction of a dirty bomb.

    They are NOT GOING TO LAUNCH THEM!

    They will give (or sell) the components to Al Qaeda, Iran, Syria, or whomever else wants to buy them.
    OK, first of all, the Taliban regards Syria as a secular "infidel" nation (which it is, in many respects). They hold Iran in even lower esteem: The Islamic Republic is a mortal enemy of the Taliban. If the Taliban ever DID become a nuclear power, it's much more likely that Damascus or Tehran would be a target rather than a customer. But in any case, the Taliban will not become a nuclear power, which brings me to my next point:

    You are severely underestimating how complex a nuclear weapon is. They can't just take over a nuclear facility, and have the nuke on a truck to Osama Bin Laden a few hours later who then takes it to a random city and sets it off. The Taliban is not exactly a highly-educated crack team of scientists who understand nuclear physics...and even if they were, they would have to overcome all of the safeguards first.

    Even if somehow they managed to seize a nuke, it would be over a year before there is any chance they could use it or "break down the warheads" (whatever that means) to give to al-Qaeda.

    Look at it this way: If someone gave YOU a nuclear weapon, would you have the faintest idea how to set it off? They don't have big red "DETONATE" buttons on them.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 05-16-09 at 10:09 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  6. #76
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Red_Dave View Post
    Vader how would you propose replacing the Pakistani government after Pakistan decends into anarchy as a result of foriegn incursion?
    Stop with your liberal spewage.

    We are not talking about replacing the Pakistani govenment. We are talking about preventing it from falling by driving the Taliban out of the area.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Let's see...my previous post was filled with facts about foreign policy. Your latest post is filled with more insults and hysteria, and almost no facts or reasoning at all. That being the case, I will address the only point you made that is even remotely grounded in reason:
    Keep living on planet denial.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    OK, first of all, the Taliban regards Syria as a secular "infidel" nation (which it is, in many respects). They hold Iran in even lower esteem: The Islamic Republic is a mortal enemy of the Taliban. If the Taliban ever DID become a nuclear power, it's much more likely that Damascus or Tehran would be a target rather than a customer. But in any case, the Taliban will not become a nuclear power, which brings me to my next point:

    You are severely underestimating how complex a nuclear weapon is. They can't just take over a nuclear facility, and have the nuke on a truck to Osama Bin Laden a few hours later who then takes it to a random city and sets it off. The Taliban is not exactly a highly-educated crack team of scientists who understand nuclear physics...and even if they were, they would have to overcome all of the safeguards first.

    Even if somehow they managed to seize a nuke, it would be over a year before there is any chance they could use it or "break down the warheads" (whatever that means) to give to al-Qaeda.

    Look at it this way: If someone gave YOU a nuclear weapon, would you have the faintest idea how to set it off? They don't have big red "DETONATE" buttons on them.
    HAve you ever considered the idea that just the idea of the Taliban having nuclear weapons is just plain bad. I don't want them to ever even have the chance to even BREATHE on nuclear device of ANY kind.

    In regard to the Taliban breaking down the warheads; you are correct. They would need help. The more likely scenario is that they would set them off by tampering and cause a nuclear catastrophy. This is just as unacceptable as handing them over to Al Quack or the various other nations who shouldn't have them.

    I am not a nuclear weapons expert. I have enough common sense to avoid scewing with a nuclear weapon. The Taliban does not... and therein lies a problem.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 04:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    They aren't going to. They are loosing without your invasion plans.
    Nobody was talking about an invasion. You assumed that ... and guess what the makes you!

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    Nope, I'd just rather that was a reasonable possibility first and then I'd take cautious, gradual steps not leap to a massive invasion.
    And ... you would be wrong. We cannot wait for the Taliban to get the nukes BEFORE we take action. That is not how things work.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    Not an argument.
    Nothing you've said is an argument. You're all for the burrying your head in the sand while the Taliban get their hands on nuclear weapons.

    This is a nieve, foolish, course of action that WILL NEVER COME TO PASS because people like myself will step up and prevent it.

  9. #79
    Dorset Patriot
    Wessexman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Sydney, Australia(but my heart is back in Dorset.)
    Last Seen
    04-04-14 @ 01:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    8,233

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    Nobody was talking about an invasion. You assumed that ... and guess what the makes you!
    You talk about it all the time mate.


    And ... you would be wrong. We cannot wait for the Taliban to get the nukes BEFORE we take action. That is not how things work.
    They are not likely to get these short range nukes, they have been beaten back, they were never likely to get them.
    Nothing you've said is an argument.
    Yes it is, it had relevant premises, logic and conclusions. It wasn't just accusing people of burying their heads in the sand without really showing how and what this means.


    This is a nieve, foolish, course of action that WILL NEVER COME TO PASS because people like myself will step up and prevent it.
    Not an argument. But if you want to fly to Pakistan I won't stop you.
    "It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

  10. #80
    Sage
    Infinite Chaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:49 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,350

    Re: Attack within Pakistan

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    -- Again ... you have no clue what you're talking about. We're NOT TALKING ABOUT THE PAKISTANIS HANDING IT OVER VOLUTARILY!!!! HELLO MCFLY?

    We're talking about the Taliban SIEZING THOSE WEAPONS FROM THE PAKISTANI GOVERNMENT!!!!!
    That would happen much faster if US troops went into Pakistan - invited or uninvited. Better in this instance not to radicalise the local population against you.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vader View Post
    -- Actually ... the Pakistanis dislike the Taliban more than we do. Therefore, if Taliban members are being killed I doubt the Pakistanis will give much of a damn that we're killing terrorists inside their country --
    Pakistan served as safe harbour for the Taliban who invade each spring into Afghanistan killing US, UK and Canadian troops. However, there will be some Pakistanis who do dislike the Taliban (whatever name you wish to call them) and many are in power - better to strengthen their arm than undermine them and see them removed by preemptive action.

Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •