For all you Michael Moore lovers.

Tylanner

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2004
5,481
2
81
I actually think he is quite a clever man.

But his stuff has been the lefts ammunition for the past four years :/
 

AFB

Lifer
Jan 10, 2004
10,718
3
0
WTF are you talking about? This is a good deal for both of them. Usama gets to stick around and Moore still has someone to make movies about.
 

0marTheZealot

Golden Member
Apr 5, 2004
1,692
0
0
OBL has said that no one can keep us safe. He has never been scared of Bush. A Bush victory is probably a victory for OBL, as his policies and inflammatory language will likely send more recruits towards Al Qaeda.

BTW, Kerry would have done EXACTLY everything Bush would have done (foreign policy-wise). I'd suspect much of the bullsh!t and deceit would be gone/masked better though.
 

FuzzyBee

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2000
5,172
1
81
Originally posted by: amdfanboy
Moore still has someone to make movies about.

That doesn't surprise me, considering he's more concerned about himself than the welfare of the country.
 

Risiko

Member
Mar 23, 2004
68
0
0
Yeah but maybe he'll only bomb the red states this time (he did say that each state must make a decision) :p.

JK :D
 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,340
1
81
If he were to say nuke Dallas or maybe Oklahoma City or another population center in red territory I don't think any country other than the UK would come to our aid this time. The Bush regime has truly asked for it over the last several years.

Honestly though, I think it more likely that the nukes landing in this country would originate here, under command of the Bush regime than for Osama to do anything. And it is certainly more likely that the Bush regime is complicit in 9/11 than Osama is.
 

AFB

Lifer
Jan 10, 2004
10,718
3
0
Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Originally posted by: amdfanboy
Moore still has someone to make movies about.

That doesn't surprise me, considering he's more concerned about himself than the welfare of the country.

I think that covers about 90% of the population
 

T2T III

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
12,899
1
0
Originally posted by: glugglug
If he were to say nuke Dallas or maybe Oklahoma City or another population center in red territory I don't think any country other than the UK would come to our aid this time. The Bush regime has truly asked for it over the last several years.

Honestly though, I think it more likely that the nukes landing in this country would originate here, under command of the Bush regime.
Huh? You really think that if nukes were to hit the U.S., they would have originated in the U.S.? What kind of sadist are you trying to make Bush out to be?

Have you ever worked around nukes? Have you ever realized what kind of controls exist for these weapons and how they have "maps" to follow for their destination.

I didn't get a Hollywood education on nukes, but I did work around them while in the military. :)



 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,352
11
0
Originally posted by: glugglug
If he were to say nuke Dallas or maybe Oklahoma City or another population center in red territory I don't think any country other than the UK would come to our aid this time.
Terrorists goals:

1) Large loss of life
2) Direct impact on the economy

Therefore, they will be targeting the NY and CA.

 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Hmm, while the political concept of MM being a traitor is pretty played out, I think both of them would be happier. MM has someone to keep making movies about, and Osama has remembered as well as the rest of us (should have) that it's been over 3 years since 9/11 and we've yet to capture Osama, and Bush even said he's not too concerned about where Osama is.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not too fond of either of them (less so with Osama, obviously, I'm not Ann Coulter here). But the concept that they are sad Bush got elected? Not too likely :)
 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: glugglug
If he were to say nuke Dallas or maybe Oklahoma City or another population center in red territory I don't think any country other than the UK would come to our aid this time.
Terrorists goals:

1) Large loss of life
2) Direct impact on the economy

Therefore, they will be targeting the NY and CA.

If they were looking for large losses of life 9/11 why didn't they hit the buildings at high noon?
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: Forsythe
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: glugglug
If he were to say nuke Dallas or maybe Oklahoma City or another population center in red territory I don't think any country other than the UK would come to our aid this time.
Terrorists goals:

1) Large loss of life
2) Direct impact on the economy

Therefore, they will be targeting the NY and CA.

If they were looking for large losses of life 9/11 why didn't they hit the buildings at high noon?

Also, in Tom Clancy's latest book, Teeth of the Tiger (God awful book, by the way, don't get it), the terrorists target smaller big cities (like Des Moines) shopping malls because the whole point of terrorism is to terrorize (obviously). Large loss of life and huge impact on the economy are unrealistic goals because terrorists are pretty small fish compared to our country. But causing terror is pretty easy, killing 3,000 people (a small fraction of the total deaths each year) set off shockwaves that are still affecting our country, even 3 years later. Anyways, the smaller areas are targetted because terror is more effective when people don't think it only happens to people in big cities.

Like I said, the book was pretty bad, but Clancy makes a good point. When Iowans suddenly don't feel immune to terrorist attacks, the terrorists have that much more power. Just my opinion, but it seems to make sense.
 

Forsythe

Platinum Member
May 2, 2004
2,825
0
0
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: Forsythe
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: glugglug
If he were to say nuke Dallas or maybe Oklahoma City or another population center in red territory I don't think any country other than the UK would come to our aid this time.
Terrorists goals:

1) Large loss of life
2) Direct impact on the economy

Therefore, they will be targeting the NY and CA.

If they were looking for large losses of life 9/11 why didn't they hit the buildings at high noon?

Also, in Tom Clancy's latest book, Teeth of the Tiger (God awful book, by the way, don't get it), the terrorists target smaller big cities (like Des Moines) shopping malls because the whole point of terrorism is to terrorize (obviously). Large loss of life and huge impact on the economy are unrealistic goals because terrorists are pretty small fish compared to our country. But causing terror is pretty easy, killing 3,000 people (a small fraction of the total deaths each year) set off shockwaves that are still affecting our country, even 3 years later. Anyways, the smaller areas are targetted because terror is more effective when people don't think it only happens to people in big cities.

Like I said, the book was pretty bad, but Clancy makes a good point. When Iowans suddenly don't feel immune to terrorist attacks, the terrorists have that much more power. Just my opinion, but it seems to make sense.

I dont' know what to read of why they didn't attack at noon or some other place. But it sure makes me wonder. Any ideas?
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
Originally posted by: Risiko
Yeah but maybe he'll only bomb the red states this time (he did say that each state must make a decision) :p.

JK :D

Well he can bomb them - there is obviously not much other than a wasteland out there.
 

T2T III

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
12,899
1
0
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
Originally posted by: Risiko
Yeah but maybe he'll only bomb the red states this time (he did say that each state must make a decision) :p.

JK :D

Well he can bomb them - there is obviously not much other than a wasteland out there.

Waste land? Those are the areas people are retreating to when they've had enough fill of crime and high real estate prices that we experience in the coastal states.

 

PatboyX

Diamond Member
Aug 10, 2001
7,024
0
0
ha ha. i enjoy comics.
i dont really get the whole MM hatred thing. i mean, he does essentially the same thing hannity, rush, coulter, drudge, savage, etc do but does it in movie form. which, tends to work well for our society. so he gets big and there is heat for a while and then he sort of disappears for a few years.
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
Originally posted by: PatboyX
ha ha. i enjoy comics.
i dont really get the whole MM hatred thing. i mean, he does essentially the same thing hannity, rush, coulter, drudge, savage, etc do but does it in movie form. which, tends to work well for our society. so he gets big and there is heat for a while and then he sort of disappears for a few years.

You are exactly right, PbX - MM is no better, or worse, than the Conservative Junta out there. But, as Bill Clinton found out, Republicans/Conservatives/Neocons have the big MONEY and RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISTS out there that make them "more elitist" and more "powerful" than everyone else. They have the money and holy-rollers to pull off their crusades.

That makes them "more righteous". *cough*
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,198
4
76
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: glugglug
If he were to say nuke Dallas or maybe Oklahoma City or another population center in red territory I don't think any country other than the UK would come to our aid this time.
Terrorists goals:

1) Large loss of life
2) Direct impact on the economy

Therefore, they will be targeting the NY and CA.

Texas has 2 of the largest cities in the country.

*edit* Largest cities in the US
 

Rustynuts

Member
May 25, 2004
128
0
0
[/quote]

If they were looking for large losses of life 9/11 why didn't they hit the buildings at high noon?[/quote]

Maybe cause everyone would be at lunch?
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
I believe Texas is next on Osama's crosshairs.

Isn't it great, we re-elected a guy that allowed (diverted our resources to a worthless cause, Iraq) Osama to regroup, recoup, and continue to hold us in fear of his next strike?!!
 

Rob9874

Diamond Member
Nov 7, 1999
3,314
1
0
Originally posted by: Strk
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: glugglug
If he were to say nuke Dallas or maybe Oklahoma City or another population center in red territory I don't think any country other than the UK would come to our aid this time.
Terrorists goals:

1) Large loss of life
2) Direct impact on the economy

Therefore, they will be targeting the NY and CA.

Texas has 2 of the largest cities in the country.

*edit* Largest cities in the US

Got data from this decade? Is Dallas still in the Top 10?
 

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
I believe Texas is next on Osama's crosshairs.

Isn't it great, we re-elected a guy that allowed (diverted our resources to a worthless cause, Iraq) Osama to regroup, recoup, and continue to hold us in fear of his next strike?!!
Nobody cares anymore. Terrorism was so 2001. You have a better chance of getting hit by a bus than dying in a terrorist attack.