Void the election results: is it possible at all?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Who said anything about US bombing a nuclear plant? That was the Isrealies. :whazzat:

In what demention are you living where you think it would be in the interest of the United States to nuke Spain? Or ANY country for that matter, especially in Europe. That is just silly. Believe me we aren't that broken up about the election or foriegn policies over there. These wepons are deterents. Besides, melting down a city is not quite as popular to just killing everyone without colateral damage. A neutron bomb is much more scary. :devilr: :apathic:
 
You don't think you would be in more danger if you tried to hold the attacker until police arrive withOUT using threat of deadly force?
The goal is to have police handle the situation, but you can keep better order if you have threat of deadly force until police arrive. You will be more successful if the perp thinks you are going to waste them. The goal is not to shoot the bad guy, or even shoot at all, but if I am in bed and someone breaks into my home, they are potentially threatening my life. Different situation.

We obviously have different mentalities. Here, violence offences are more severely punished than robberies without violence, so thieves avoid violence in order to make their life easier in case they are caught. If you steal less than $360 worth of stuff without violence, the worst punishment you can ever receive is a fine.

The life and the sanity of the thieves and the people robbed is always worth more than the stolen stuff, so injuring the thieves is not acceptable.

Also, the longest time anybody may be jailed here in practice is 20 years, so criminals doesn't turn so desperate and start killing people when they are just going to be caught.

Your laws are exactly like those islamic ones that punish thieves by cutting their hands (ie: uncivilised). You may find our laws too indulgent, but then again, our crime figures are lower than yours so our system in practice works better (and it's particularly efficient in avoiding people being killed).
 
CBS240 said:
Who said anything about US bombing a nuclear plant? That was the Isrealies. :whazzat:

Bush suggested it yesterday, in a speech from his ranch in Texas. I wonder how could such a paranoid man was allowed to become president.


CBS240 said:
In what demention are you living where you think it would be in the interest of the United States to nuke Spain? Or ANY country for that matter, especially in Europe. That is just silly. Believe me we aren't that broken up about the election or foriegn policies over there. These wepons are deterents. Besides, melting down a city is not quite as popular to just killing everyone without colateral damage. A neutron bomb is much more scary. :devilr: :apathic:

Oh, think that USA bombing Europe is as likely as Iran bombing USA (ie: unlikely). Your government has lost the point a long time ago, they are paranoid, they see threats and dangers everywhere, and worst of all, war makes them even richer because they are directly involved in weapon industry!!.

However, things are not seen in the same way outside USA. Most people in other countries is starting to quietly think that USA is the actual threat nowadays, since you have true massive destruction weapons and a crazy government that enjoys war and has already fooled us once into supporting a stupid war.

Clinton was known as a sensible guy, though, but Bush has already lost all his popularity and credibility outside USA, particularly after we saw those 'new democracy in Iraq' sports from USA TV. What a pile of lies!!
 
I am certainly no fan of Bush, particularly on the domestic front. You don't seem to understand that it really doesn't matter which party or person you vote for over here. They are just empty suits pandering to just about the same agenda, more and more there is no difference in which empty suit is voted into office. The only good thing is that they can't agree on the next way to screw the American citizen, wether it be inflated government spending programs, social security for non citizens, or lack of boarder control.
We could vote Dem, be taxed more and screwed now, or vote Rep, be sold out and screwed later. Either way, I don't count on more responsible spending plans any time soon that is for sure.:apathic: :bawling:

Pretty soon we will have to IMPORT the Vasciline...:rolleyes:


Clinton lost respect here when he allowed to help the Chinese into space by giving them missile guidence technology in promise they wouldn't us it to improve their wepons. Of course we still have Chinese nuclear missiles pointed at us except that now they will not fail to hit their targets over here. Thanx alot Bill....let's keep trusting the comunists...:xeye: :rolleyes: :mad:
 
Ex-Moderator
Joined 2002
CBS240 said:
Clinton lost respect here when he allowed to help the Chinese into space by giving them missile guidence technology in promise they wouldn't us it to improve their wepons.

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable strategy to me. If the Chinese have more accurate missiles, they will need to build less of them to feel safe, and the damage to the US if they were ever fired would be less. Also, more accurate missiles tend to be used as counterbattery weapons, targeting US nukes rather than cities.


That, to me, sounds like a good president. Taking a little hit in public support, in order to potentially save millions of lives.
 
CBS240 said:

Clinton lost respect here when he allowed to help the Chinese into space by giving them missile guidence technology in promise they wouldn't us it to improve their wepons. Of course we still have Chinese nuclear missiles pointed at us except that now they will not fail to hit their targets over here. Thanx alot Bill....let's keep trusting the comunists...:xeye: :rolleyes: :mad:


I am always amused when Americans moan about others having nuclear weapons. How can any talking head from a country with thousands of devices and so bomb-happy as to create shoulder launched nuclear warheads complain about others and keep a straight face. It is like listening to the world's leading steroid and HGH abuser complaining that someone else has been spotted eating an energy bar.
 
Speaking of talking heads,...where is Waldo? It seems we see less and less of him now, and not just because he is on a 5 WEEK vacation :bigeyes: in the midst of a war. Most Americans could only dream of a 5 week vacation. This all going on at the same time as the free for all cheap labor market continues to flow across the Mexican boarder. :apathic: This has become an issue with many citizens especially in those boarder states as more and more health care and free education goes out to people who are here ILLEGALY and don't contribute and refuse to join this society. 'Free' over here dosn't mean that is is actually free. Someone pays for it. It just seems like the political hot potato that gets tossed around but never eaten. To many big busness appeasers I guess. Same old rhetoric... "I will crack down on illegal imigration...blah blah blah". Then later when asked about it, Mr. Bush studders out "uh...uh...evil doers will face justice...uh":confused: ---WHAT!!?? Mr. Bush? Imigration issues?? Kinda makes you wonder what is really going on.

I think I saw a glimps of Waldo on TV just the other day but lasted about 10 seconds. You see Mr. Bush is on a 5 WEEK vacation :bigeyes: playing his fiddle while the country burns!:whazzat: (irritated):mad: :smash: :dodgy:
 
SY said:
Al, we are in agreement regarding the Shakespearian approach.

It's easy to know which unit to use when speaking with Continentals. With the English, I never know what to use and normally have to ask. We've had a longstanding joke here that drugs were actually a government plot to force kids to learn the metric system. When I was a lad, every teenager knew that there were 28 grams in an ounce, excpet in New York, where the conversion factor was 25.

What weighs more, an ounce of feathers or an ounce of gold?


That's because the buds are fresh in California....and the street trash they try and sell you in NY is old and dried out. Typical.

:D
 
rfbrw said:


You mean they don't own a gun or a F150?


All you need is aid from some "good ol' boys" AKA rednecks...:D :D :clown:
 

Attachments

  • self defence.jpg
    self defence.jpg
    8 KB · Views: 98
So..........Aparently Mr. Bush gambled and the people of New Orleans lost. I heard that there was a federal budget created to rebuild and sure up the levies around New Orleans at the request of the city and state of LA in case the BIG one hits. However, Mr. Bush decided this money would be better spent in Iraq liberating people who, for the most part, would like nothing better than to stab us in the back.:whazzat: At some point Mr. Bush's "bad luck" can no longer be considered bad luck as it seems to be more like bad decisions. It seems Mr. Bush values law breakers(illegal imigration) and the people on the other side of the world more than the citizens of his country. Not trying to bash Mr. Bush but he is making it very hard not to say something!:smash: :dodgy:
 
I'm the furthest thing from a Bush supporter, but that accusation being bandied about strikes me as pretty unfair. There are typically about 100 times as many "urgent" projects seeking public funds as there are public funds. If this had been funded and, say, some waterway in St. Louis wasn't, and a flood hit there next summer, the same people would have been screaming that he screwed the poor people of St. Louis.

Hindsight is soooooo easy.

I would note, BTW, that the characterization of the money being spent in Iraq is not accurate. Total domestic discretionary spending has increased at a rate that dwarfs what Clinton did (this is one reason I'm not a very big fan of Mr. Bush).
 
Rich people from New Orleans used their money to escape to a safe place far before their lifes were endangered.

Poor people from New Orleans must stay in the place because they couldn't afford travelling and they had nowhere else to go. Now their dead rotten bodies float in the flooded streets.

There is nothing wrong with that, that's how capitalism works. A socialistic government like the ones we have in Europe would have been fully responsible for evacuating everybody (poor and rich), and shall it failed to do so it would have been responsible for all deaths. This makes a *big* difference.
 
diyAudio Editor
Joined 2001
Paid Member
Would they have forced people to evacuate? One of the problems-I'm not saying all, is that people were told to leave and they didn't. There were shelters close by that they could go to and they didn't go. People are very attached to their homes and possesions, which they believe that they can protect from the weather and looters better if they stay. People feel safer in their homes they have long lived in even if rationally they should get right out. People there have been through many hurricane warnings where not much happened, so don't take them seriously.

Possibly in Europe the police would have been so organized that they could have forced everyone to leave.

Possibly that's another cultural issue. Our police are very reluctant to force people to do what is "best" for them by force, when it is the general population...Its also pretty much impossible to make that many people do ANYTHING.
 
Eva said:
There is nothing wrong with that, that's how capitalism works. A socialistic government like the ones we have in Europe would have been fully responsible for evacuating everybody (poor and rich), and shall it failed to do so it would have been responsible for all deaths. This makes a *big* difference.

Tell that to the 10,000 elderly people in France during the summer of '03. Ooops, sorry, you can't, they're dead. No-one evacuated them, neither their socialist government nor their own families on holiday.

The socialism of poster slogans and college clubs is a lovely thing and totally unrelated to the actual world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.