Fred J. McCall wrote:
"Eric Chomko" wrote:
:
:Fred J. McCall wrote:
: "Eric Chomko" wrote:
:
: :
: :Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : "Eric Chomko" wrote:
: :
: : :On Feb 16, 1:50 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: : : Pat Flannery wrote:
: : :
: : : :Remember how I said pulling out of the ABM treaty was a dumb move,
: : : :because the Russians would think that any treaty we had with them wasn't
: : : :worth the paper it was written on?
: : : :Well, guess what?:
: : : :http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russ..._Quit_INF_Trea...
: : :
: : : So, if the Russians have no plans to shoot at Europe, what is the
: : : problem?
: : :
: : :So that is why we allowed nukes in Cuba? Oops, we didn't allow them
: : :and we don't have plans to shoot at Cuba either. Counterintel just
: : :isn't your bag is it Freddy?
: :
: : Sense just isn't your bag is it El Chimpko?
: :
: : What, pray tell, does your preceding spew have to do with ANYTHING?
: :
: : : So, if the Russians have no plans to shoot at Europe, what do they
: : : want to get back into the IRBM business for?
: : :
: : : So, who do you think the Europeans will blame for the Russians
: : : building a nuclear arsenal aimed straight at them?
: : :
: : :I guess it all depends where we plan on putting ours.
: :
: : We're talking about US deployment of AN ANTI-MISSILE SYSTEM IN POLAND
: : AND CZECHOSLOVAKIA, you stupid *******. *WE* are not talking about
: : "putting ours" anywhere at all.
: :
: :Yes, yes the Department of Defense doesn't attack, they merely defend.
:
: So you ignore THE FACTS and just bleat. Typical El Chimpko.
:
:What facts? Making the words in a caps doesn't explain them. You are
:vague yet again because you again have nothing real to say.
Eric, what is vague about "We're talking about US deployment of AN
ANTI-MISSILE SYSTEM IN POLAND AND CZECHOSLOVAKIA, you stupid *******.
*WE* are not talking about "putting ours" anywhere at all."?
So US deployment isn't ours? What the hell does that mean? Poland and
Czechoslovakia are customers as opposed to US being its own customer?
You really cannot read and understand simple declarative sentences.
No, you are totally unclear. Why, is what I don't know.
:
: :You have the nerve to call me a stupid ******* yet you believe that we
: :are beyond attacking anyone and merely defend ourselves.
:
: Where did I say that, you stupid *******?
:
:The implication that an anti-missile system would never be used to
:attack, in all caps at that.
How do you 'attack' with an anti-missile system, Eric?
Makes as much sense as saying an airport can only be used for landings
and never takeoffs.
: :Iraq, you stupid *******!
:
: Irrelevant, you dumb ****.
:
:Nope, you old fart.
The only stinking thing here is your intellectual void.
No, your lies stink much worse. There is truth and there is US
sanctioned truth (i.e. propaganda). You speak the latter.
: :Would YOU trust any country putting anti-missile sites around the US
: :as being merely prudent as you seem to think we are in Eastern Europe
: :doing the same damn thing!?
:
: El Chimpko, you dumb ****, look at the FACTS. Such weapons in the
: places described are no good at stopping weapons aimed at the US from
: Russia or China (or even North Korea).
:
:No **** you dumb ass, I was talking about protecting other countries
:from attacks by US! You really think we are beyond attacking anyone
:and that if someone acts as if we might that that action is somehow an
:act of aggression. Your mentality is at the root of the problem.
What are you gibbering on about now? What connection does the
preceding spew have to ANYTHING?
The fact that you implicitly believe we are beyond making attacks and
attacks that are simply wrong. That somehow we are pure. You forget
what Thomas Jefferson said and have somehow been swept into a
Orwellian reality where the government is beyond being questioned.
That in the face of you claiming to being sane simply because you have
a paper to prove it! Sorry I go back to my American roots that
question authority as being implicitly good. In that regard you are
not free but I am.
:Again, would you trust a country placing anti-missile sites around the
:US to protect itself from the US as an act of being prudent as you
:seem to think placing anti-missile sites in Eastern Europe is prudent
n our part as protection for us?
Already answered. Again, you don't read very well.
You said Cuba and Mexico knowing full well that there is no threat to
us from the southern hemishere. You are intellectually dishonest in
the guise of being coy.
: If someone wants to put anti-missile sites in Cuba or Mexico, why,
: more power to them!
:
:Oh really? How about Canada or the Arctic?
Different case. Russia would have better grounds to complain about
that. But that's not what they're complaining about, now is it?
What are they complaining about, McClod?
: :We are so easy because too many people think just like you and not
: :like the enemy. Again, counterintel-challenged aren't you Freddy?
:
: Need to smarten up to work your way UP to 'dumb ****', don't you, El
: Chimpko?
:
:Hey, just because you're a janitor at a nuclear facility doesn't give
:you the right to act so cocky. Perhaps you're a farmer with a silo?
:hahahahahaha
ANY of those would know more than you apparently do.
You have no idea what I do.
You really need to stop laughing at your own 'jokes', El Chimpko. It
just makes you look even stupider (and while that is something of an
achievement, I wouldn't think it would be one you'd be striving
toward).
Looking stupid because you say so is pure victory.
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson