Al Queda has nukes prepositioned in the US!!?!?!

[loup garou]

HOAX

 

[NARtheWang]

Originally posted by: Cyberian

Originally posted by: NARtheWang
Cursed Hippies!!! Ruinin everything! We control the world in nearly everyway... we are the first and third most powerful entities in the world yet we scream and cower likr little girls everytime we are threatened! What's up with that?? we should just wipe them (al Queda &other terrorist organizations) off the face of the earth and be done with it.... We know where they are but can't act due to our stupid beauricrisy!!!! we need a stronger gov't and a more quickly acting failsafe that can override thigs for no more than 24 hrs until at least the president can look at it or an emergency sennios of congress be called....

If you are not joking, you scare me.

What's so scary about that??

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
There is a threat. More than one. A big one is that our neighbor on our right threatens us, and we wish to punch the one on the left for it.

Saddam does NOT equal Bin Laden.
SHOW the link then I can support it.

WTF are we going after Iraq if this true? As pointed out, N. Korea, parts of the old USSR, and others could be providing weapons.

Bin Laden WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE for 9/11 is virtually certain to be alive. Where is the clamor to go after him? Its not there because we cant catch him. It's an embarrasment, so lets throw up another target. Moral cowardice.

Once again, show me

Sorry I have no proof to offer you and I am not sure you would accept any proof given.

You deny Saddam supports terrorists.
You deny Senior Al Queda have been spotted in Bahdgad.
You deny Saddam has violated every term of the Gulf was cease fire.
You deny Saddam is a menace to our troops stationed there and the region.

North Korea is contained and we are cutting off their oil, since they broke their arms agreement.
We are actively working with russia to reclaim "lost" nukes.


Bin Laden is most likely dead. It was announced today that the tape was most likely a fake.

We do have more than one target, and fortunatly we can and do multitask.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
so why hasn't bush premptively launched nukes against all muslim countries?

that would be a workable solution

If a prepositioned nuke went off in the US, that would seem to be a perfectly workable solution.

 

[Hamburgerpimp]

Propaganda

 

[freakflag]

That's horsesh!t.

They obviously really, really hate us, so,
if they had a nuke (even 1) inside the country...
why did they hijack planes with freakin' boxcutters???

Wouldn't they have made thier point more effectively by say, nuking Detroit?
OK, Detroit's a bad example....but do you smell what I'm steppin' in here???

They're just a bunch of lowlife scumbags with a distorted world view, not F-ing James Bond in a turbin.

 

[Hamburgerpimp]

Hold your horseshit. You missed the HOAX Email.

 

[illusion88]

The Article has been Withdrawn...

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider There is a threat. More than one. A big one is that our neighbor on our right threatens us, and we wish to punch the one on the left for it. Saddam does NOT equal Bin Laden. SHOW the link then I can support it. WTF are we going after Iraq if this true? As pointed out, N. Korea, parts of the old USSR, and others could be providing weapons. Bin Laden WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE for 9/11 is virtually certain to be alive. Where is the clamor to go after him? Its not there because we cant catch him. It's an embarrasment, so lets throw up another target. Moral cowardice. Once again, show me

Sorry I have no proof to offer you and I am not sure you would accept any proof given. You deny Saddam supports terrorists. You deny Senior Al Queda have been spotted in Bahdgad. You deny Saddam has violated every term of the Gulf was cease fire. You deny Saddam is a menace to our troops stationed there and the region. North Korea is contained and we are cutting off their oil, since they broke their arms agreement. We are actively working with russia to reclaim "lost" nukes. Bin Laden is most likely dead. It was announced today that the tape was most likely a fake. We do have more than one target, and fortunatly we can and do multitask.

Well the article is a hoax, but the reaction was not. Look I do not hold a grudge against you. I am concerned that many draw upon evidence of limited credibality to justify a genuine action.

I will tell you just what I would like

Convincing evidence of collusion between Al Queda and Saddam. I mean tapes, or other sources showing discussions of attacks against the us. Not hearsay. You cant get a drunk thrown in jail for that. Risking troops deserves more than that. I know such evidence may not exist, but again, if not it is hearsay.

Saddam is a menace to our troops IF WE GO IN. Why wouldnt he be? Invaders get shot at.

I despise the SOB as much as the next guy. What would make me happiest is if he and his senior staff happened to step on a land mine collectively. That would save us and the Iraqis, with which I do not believe we have a good grevience against from having to confront each other.

Saddam has violated agreements. So what stops us from sending in inspectors and if denied access, blowing that particular place to bits? We have the power to NOT have to loose restraint. Full scale war in this situation has not been shown to be justified in light of other military options. We can go anywhere we want in Iraq, excepting Baghdad. Consider all options, and be able to justify them not to the world but our childern. One day they will ask me why we did whatever we do. I do not want to say it was because we were afraid.

 

[SoylentGreen]

You don't know how lucky you are to still be here and that we didn't ruin everything and kill everyone during the cold war.
It ain't over yet, the "star trek" future for mankind is very unlikely.

 

[reitz]

Originally posted by: charrison
Sorry I have no proof to offer you and I am not sure you would accept any proof given.

Whether he'll accept it or not...why not take him up on the challenge? Is it because you know that you have no proof...or do you fear that actively researching the issue might get in the way of your ill-formed fragile opinions?

You deny Saddam supports terrorists.

Iraq last sponsored terrorists over two decades ago. The groups formerly sponsored are no longer in existence. The closest credible, modern link would be the payments Saddam makes to the families of Palestinians killed in the conflict with Israel, which includes the families of suicide bombers as well as those of innocent civilians.

You deny Senior Al Queda have been spotted in Bahdgad.

No one has ever provided any credible evidence of Al Qaeda members in Bagdad, or any portion of Iraq under the control of Saddam Hussein. The CIA has gone on record stating that the supposed meeting between Al Qaeda leaders and Iraqi intelligence in Prague can not be verified and most likely did not happen. The Czech government made a similar statement within the last two months.

You deny Saddam has violated every term of the Gulf was cease fire.

Saddam has not violated "every term" of the cease-fire agreement. I don't see anyone here denying that he's violated the terms that were just reinforced by the Security Council.

You deny Saddam is a menace to our troops stationed there and the region.

How is Saddam a "menace" to our troops stationed in the region? Since the close of hostilities during the Gulf War, has he ever attacked our troops? Has he ever threatened them?

Bin Laden is most likely dead. It was announced today that the tape was most likely a fake.

Bullshit. It is the position of the Bush Regime that the voice on the tape is most likely bin Laden's, pending final analysis of the tapes by the NSA.

We do have more than one target, and fortunatly we can and do multitask.

We do...and currently the Bush Regime is largely ignoring the difficult-to-destroy (and, IMAO more important) targets in favor of a likely cakewalk in Iraq and a domestic approval ratings bonanza.


I've noticed that you're constantly posting your assertions about Iraq in threads here, yet you never support your claims with any sources...Why is that?

 

[bizmark]

Originally posted by: Hamburgerpimp
Hold your horseshit. You missed the HOAX Email.

so we just accept these people's word that it's a hoax? No explanation of why it's a hoax? Their full explanation is "A hoax." Who created this hoax? Has Al-Jazeera denied taking this interview? Has there never been a Mr. Mohammed Al-Asuquf? I need something besides some website's simple pronouncement that it's a hoax. I need some measure of PROOF that it's a hoax. Yes, I realize that I can never get full proof (e.g. I can never talk to the Al-Jazeera reporter himself) and that I'll always be relying on some third party's word (who could be lying), but I still can't take a simple value statement like "It's a hoax" at face value without something to back it up.

As it is, the truthfulness of this is undecidable. All we have is one abstract entity's word vs. another's. One website claims that it's true, and another website claims it's a hoax. Do I have real problems with either story that would lead me to think that one or the other is true? No. On the one hand, this whole nukes-in-the-U.S thing seems fairly believable. On the other, it seems equally believable that the thing is a hoax. So for me, it's undecidable. So it's like I 25% believe that it's a hoax, 25% believe that it's real, and 50% believe that I have no idea.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: NARtheWang
Cursed Hippies!!! Ruinin everything! We control the world in nearly everyway... we are the first and third most powerful entities in the world yet we scream and cower likr little girls everytime we are threatened! What's up with that?? we should just wipe them (al Queda &other terrorist organizations) off the face of the earth and be done with it.... We know where they are but can't act due to our stupid beauricrisy!!!! we need a stronger gov't and a more quickly acting failsafe that can override thigs for no more than 24 hrs until at least the president can look at it or an emergency sennios of congress be called....

where?

 

[CraigRT]

This world sucks because of those terrorists... now people are sitting wondering if they will be alive much longer because of threat of nuclear bombing or something.... SO uncool..... :disgust:

 

[Moonbeam]

Clearly we need to nuke our seven largest cities to prevent those bombs from going off.

 

[SoylentGreen]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Clearly we need to nuke our seven largest cities to prevent those bombs from going off.

Good idea as long as you're in one of them.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

Originally posted by: maladroit
This article is total BS. Why would a terrorist say this? It makes no sense.

To scare the sh!t out of you, in an attempt to get the people to tell their government to give in to the terrorists rather than getting the US blown to pieces?
If they had nukes in the US, they'd have used at least one already. They haven't done that, so they don't have them.

 

[TurtleMan]

sum of all fear ... im moving to new mexico ...

 

[Freejack2]

The sad part is, while this is probably a hoax. Sooner or later there will be some kind of nuclear or chemical attack on a major US city. If these hellspawn have the balls to attack the world trade center and the pentagon, you can bet they will try something else.

 

[tcsenter]

While I think this guy is blowing smoke up everyone's ass about there being nuclear devices already here, it is not a matter of if, but when, Al-Qaeda is able to get a nuclear or radioactive device here and detonate it. Hopefully, we've seriously hampered their efforts in the short term, but that's all we've done.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: tcsenter
While I think this guy is blowing smoke up everyone's ass about there being nuclear devices already here, it is not a matter of if, but when, Al-Qaeda is able to get a nuclear or radioactive device here and detonate it. Hopefully, we've seriously hampered their efforts in the short term, but that's all we've done.

I would support Maharaja's point-of-view on this... if entire countries have been trying unsuccessfully for decades to purchase or develop nukes, does anyone seriously think that a terrorist org. could get one any more easily?

The only way we will ever stop Al-Queda and their spawn is to determine the cause of their hatred. Anything else is, at best, a temporary solution.

 

[bizmark]

Originally posted by: Zakath15
I would support Maharaja's point-of-view on this... if entire countries have been trying unsuccessfully for decades to purchase or develop nukes, does anyone seriously think that a terrorist org. could get one any more easily?

I disagree.... due to the political situation in the world, most countries aren't trying to get their hands on "a nuke". They don't just want a nuke that somebody else put together. It simply wouldn't be worth it. How could they deter aggression if their enemy knows that with one shot they've blown their load?

Countries want a whole nuclear program.... multiple nukes, and a reliable and efficient way of delivering them, all of which can be manufactured and maintained within its borders. It's a matter of materials (a large amount of them -- say at least 25 warheads' worth), testing, effective maintainence, and effective delivery (probably more complicated than the bomb itself, but easier to test for obvious reasons). No government would trust an un-tested nuke, and no government would be happy with just a single nuke or even 3 or 4. Sure they could take the fissile material out of nukes they stole from Russia, but then what would they do with it? It's not at all useful for making more fissile material. They could make more bombs, but they'd be smaller and the total effectivenss would remain the same.

Terrorist organizations have the liberty of doing so. Just one nuke and they're happy. Multiple nukes and they're ecstatic. No need to test it. Even if it doesn't perform up to spec, it'll still have the desired effect.

 

[kherman]

This is worrisome, but... If they are just leaving those nukes "sit around", htey are in for a shock if they try detonating them.

And if something happens, I wil lback the gov't in whatever they do. "See react in kind" WW3 is on!

 

[kherman]

Originally posted by: Skyclad1uhm1

Originally posted by: maladroit
This article is total BS. Why would a terrorist say this? It makes no sense.

To scare the sh!t out of you, in an attempt to get the people to tell their government to give in to the terrorists rather than getting the US blown to pieces?
If they had nukes in the US, they'd have used at least one already. They haven't done that, so they don't have them.

In rsponse to the original post. Al Quada has only one hiding place left.... Iraq. Without Iraq, weeding out Al Quada leadership will be easier.

 

[fronic2]

Originally posted by: Atrail
Suddam hates Bin Laden...
vice versa

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.