Quantcast
If a suitcase nuke went off, would you vote to re-elect Obama?

Forums - General Discussion - If a suitcase nuke went off, would you vote to re-elect Obama?

No Im Canadian. But I like the new guy you got. Good for you.

We dont even have a goverment anymore. :/



Around the Network
HappySqurriel said:

Fear mongering isn’t limited to one end of the political spectrum ...

Where progressive politicians and conservative politicians differ is on what they use to evoke fear and who they try to make afraid. To see progressive fear mongering all you have to do is look at how Global Warming (or Climate Change) is being sold to people ... The most extreme projections from a variety of questionable studies are cherry picked to create the feeling of immanent doom so that people will accept massive changes without question.

 

Back to the OP ... While a nuclear strike in the United States would be awful, I don't think that terrorists really need to go to such extremes to get the kind of reaction they want. Most cities in North America have critical infrastructure (like the electrical power grids) which can be knocked out using a stick of dynamite or a simple denial of service attack ... If this was timed correctly (right as a long deep-freeze started) and was well planned widespread fear could be built quite easily.

You are referring to a fire sale Happy which is extremely hard to pull off given redundent systems for exactly such a scenario.  Thanks, btw, for staying OT and not trashing me as a POS racist, just another one of them, rich, redneck "Repugs".  (I don't know what I did do deserve that)

 



HappySqurriel said:

Fear mongering isn’t limited to one end of the political spectrum ...

Where progressive politicians and conservative politicians differ is on what they use to evoke fear and who they try to make afraid. To see progressive fear mongering all you have to do is look at how Global Warming (or Climate Change) is being sold to people ... The most extreme projections from a variety of questionable studies are cherry picked to create the feeling of immanent doom so that people will accept massive changes without question.

 

Back to the OP ... While a nuclear strike in the United States would be awful, I don't think that terrorists really need to go to such extremes to get the kind of reaction they want. Most cities in North America have critical infrastructure (like the electrical power grids) which can be knocked out using a stick of dynamite or a simple denial of service attack ... If this was timed correctly (right as a long deep-freeze started) and was well planned widespread fear could be built quite easily.

Global warming doesn't cause people to invade other countries...

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

If the issue is Gitmo, I don't support the full closure of the facility, however, I would rather see detainees processed and documented a little faster.  The argument generally goes: "they aren't following the rules so why should we?" when in fact we should be following our own legal system in place at home (with some obvious changes) if we really want anyone to believe we wish to "spread democracy".

 

As another said, in 2012 I will wait and listen to what each candidate has to offer before I decide.  If I could go back to the 2008 election I would change my vote to Obama as it has become clear to me through his words and his early actions that he does more than likely truly have the best intentions for our country at heart.  I'm not saying John McCain didn't, but Barak connects with more people.  He also appears to be going in for a bipartisan approach to the presidency as John Mccain was aiming for which is appealing to me.  If I had it my way, we would have conservative economics, liberal social system, and no gun laws.  But you know what?  The country has decided and chosen Barak Obama as our president, and I will support him unconditionally as our president like I did with George W. Bush and Bill Clinton.  I don't bailout on supporting our president because we get where we get together and that takes more than 1 man.



akuma587 said:
Gitmo and what it stands for has been a rallying point for terrorists. Closing it is one of the best things Obama could do to fight terrorism.

Why am I not surprised that a one of the staunchest Republicans on the board is resorting to fearmongering hypotheticals already?

its called F.U.D and videogame people do this all the time. Its like starting with a premise of "Would you support a failing console like tne PS3"? You're already sounding negative and it sounds like you're just baiting trolls.

 

 



Around the Network
akuma587 said:
HappySqurriel said:

Fear mongering isn’t limited to one end of the political spectrum ...

Where progressive politicians and conservative politicians differ is on what they use to evoke fear and who they try to make afraid. To see progressive fear mongering all you have to do is look at how Global Warming (or Climate Change) is being sold to people ... The most extreme projections from a variety of questionable studies are cherry picked to create the feeling of immanent doom so that people will accept massive changes without question.

 

Back to the OP ... While a nuclear strike in the United States would be awful, I don't think that terrorists really need to go to such extremes to get the kind of reaction they want. Most cities in North America have critical infrastructure (like the electrical power grids) which can be knocked out using a stick of dynamite or a simple denial of service attack ... If this was timed correctly (right as a long deep-freeze started) and was well planned widespread fear could be built quite easily.

Global warming doesn't cause people to invade other countries...

 

You have a point but it is still corruption so a certain few can make loads of money.

 



7 years of 24 have given you way too many ideas



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

megaman79 said:
7 years of 24 have given you way too many ideas

my thoughts exactly. Obama = david palmer?!?!!? omg conspiracy!

Bboid said:
megaman79 said:
7 years of 24 have given you way too many ideas

 

my thoughts exactly. Obama = david palmer?!?!!? omg conspiracy!

 

I cant stand most Fox tv shows. Homeland Security, Terrorism, etc etc. They really are the conservative mouth piece for American media.



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

VERY interesting topic.

Remember those six nukes that were "accidentally" loaded onto a bomber and flown over the U.S. a couple of years ago?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/05/loose.nukes/index.html

 

Here's something that might make you want to look for a lead-lined tinfoil hat:

http://www.kfyrtv.com/News_Stories.asp?news=10465
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070915/BREAKINGNEWS/70915012

^no longer working, they don't care anymore.

http://www.kxmc.com/News/161562.asp
http://www.kxmc.com/getArticle.asp?ArticleId=140988
http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/2007/07/20/news/state/136489.txt
http://www.komotv.com/news/local/9679367.html

http://digitalinsurgents.wordpress.com/2007/09/18/missing-nukes-and-the-death-of-6-minot-air-force-people/

Were all of the nukes truly accounted for?

Tell me this halogamer1989,  what would you do if it turned out that the people you support (a consortium of military contractors) were responsible for nuking the U.S.?

This post goes out to weezy!



Switch: SW-5066-1525-5130

XBL: GratuitousFREEK