Infammatory Post? Surely not!Follow

Thank Bob things have changed since then.

The world should be thankful actually. For all the junk we have laying around with the ability to annihilate most of the earth's population, I think we've shown remarkable restraint. I can't imagine most countries out there who, if they had the dangerous toys we do, would be able to resist using those goodies on anybody and everybody they took a dislike to.

Besides, killing gooks and A-rabs is like stepping on ants or zapping them with a magnifying glass-- you know there's always a ton more out there to replace the ones you just offed.

I can think of a few: Russia, China, France, the UK, Israel, India, Pakistan, South Africa.

Soon, maybe North Korea too!

But still, well done for only using them twice.

Some moronic poster who should educate himself before spewing random crap?

If I am moronic, punch holes in my arguement. If you're arguments are better than mine, then I will be happy to succed since I'm not above changing my opinion due to persuasion.

(and if you were not refering to me, then slap me around and tell me to shut up)

Holy hell! Can't you see the sarcasm in my first post. And even when I switched to devils advocate, you still didn't see it.

I used to be in the military in a position where I was privy to alot of info about world military strength and capibility that most people on this thread will never know. The situation is a hell of a lot more complicated than anyone has even come close to posting.

Yes, it is true that governments can change, overnight in some cases, but that doesn't mean that the new gov't will use it's nuke powers. Most people who come into power aren't stupid enough to use them right off the bat *with the exception of some fanatics*.

Now, a good example of sarcasm is my comment on France. Anyone with half a brain would know that France has more than wine. Do you think they are on the UN security councel b/c they are pretty.

Unless China strikes oil, they won't attack many middle eastern countries. They are more dependant on the us economy than you know. *Being in the Finance world now, trust me, I know these things*. You would be suprised how many european countries have considerable interest in the Middle East. Hell, you would be suprised how much interest the U.S. has in the Middle East *which benefits them more with OPEC controling it and not the U.S. directly so quit the war for oil arguement before it even starts).

As far as the Pakistan-India situation goes, they have more than each other for enemies. While true one side may use nukes on the other side (in which case the both sides have the capibility to detect the launch) neither side would be there in the end.

No matter how many U.S. presidents shakes hands with good ole Russia, they are still, and will probably always be, a threat.

South Africa could start their programs back up, as well as the many countries that have the capability to start a new one quickly, but it is in their best interest not to **** the rest of the world off to bad (economy and stuff). De Beers (who S.A. obvousily has an interest in) is currently trying to work a deal with the U.S. state department to drop U.S. charges against them for breaking anti trust laws (look it up, it's true). If S.A. started a nuke war, how far do you think that would go.

These are just a few of the issues the world faces when it comes to the Nuclear Arena. And none of the ones I stated are quite as simple as the explination I gave.

Putting all that aside, you do make a convincing arguement with the information you have (which, trust me, is very little *no disrespect intended*). But it falthers when looking at the grander scale (as I'm sure some of mine would b/c I don't have all the info I would need to construct a sound agrument.)

Other than that...have a good day.

Varus?

What?

What?

I wasn't sure if you were a complete idiot, or if you were being sarcastic.

I'm still unsure, to be honest.

Anyway, what is the point of your posts? Other than showing you can be sarcrastic while at the same time being privy to most of the world's secrets?

I don't consider your first post "an opinion".

I'm just kinda bored.

And moody.

The only thing that could enhance the fUcktardness of cpcjlc's e-******* would be use of the word "nucular".

That said, the prowess of his illiteracy (I'm assuming he'll hide behind a self-diagnosis of Dyslexia) makes me thing he would accidentally misspell Nucular as either 'Nuclear' or 'cUntwaffle'

Anywho.

I have a mole on my ******* that has an uncanny resemblance to a silhouette of George Bush fisting Oprah Winfrey in front of a Hologram of Christ feeding the 5,000 (but with Filet-o-Fish TM instead of loaves and fishies)

What a conundrum!! I know that has to be worth a decent bit of cash on eBay, but would I be happy carrying me love spuds around in an alternative receptacle?

Life is a cruel and impertinent mistress

Oh, and cpcjlc. FUck off you cUnt.

PS. Which of you fUcking admins thought that greying out the new swear filter workaround would make you more attractive to wimmins? Eh? Eh?

May you rot in cyber-hell, and I call you all poopy-heads, nincompoops and numpties. (Except DF coz she's teh snugglez0rz)

Tell you what. Until you come up with a revelent rebutal of my arguement..blow me.

After you do..perhaps we will discuss it further.