Why did you quote that line to make that point? lmao.
Anyways - I don't think we have thousands - that would be over kill. But you gotta have bigger guns than your untrustworthy counterparts.. right?
bipper
Printable View
Why did you quote that line to make that point? lmao.
Anyways - I don't think we have thousands - that would be over kill. But you gotta have bigger guns than your untrustworthy counterparts.. right?
bipper
the start agreements and the ones made after now limit the us nuclear aresenal to 2500 operatioal warheads.
the us also failed to meet the chemical weapon agreements set to it.
Did the US agree to that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
yeppity. bush asked for the deadline of the chemical weapons agreement to be moved forward 2 years because he was failing to meet it on time.
the start agreements and the ones that came after (slot etc.) were signed by the us government and russia.
Did Russia meet them, out of curiosity?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
both are miles short of the 2200 sort agreement (2200 not 2500 sorry for the mistake). however it is of note that even though both were failing putin a few years ago asked for an even further reduction to 1500. bush declined.
america's arsenal is though due to grew with the development of micronukes.
What does it matter.. we have guns - we dont really use em. Yeah i could see if we were untrustworthy - which we don't see ourselves as :p
Sides - When you might be expected to bail frace out of another war, or slam down tyrany across the globe - you might need an insurrance policy.
But wow - we are still on the top and number one... We must be doing somthing wrong!
The bail france thing was a bit rude, but i think its more rude to treat the people you were once allies with, and whom proved their valour to you several times, with such disrespect. it stinks like cheese... bad cheese. Would they treat us so badly if we became a third world? Would they help us? Doubt it.
Bipper
oh dear the french wouldn't follow america into committing a war crime. what a crying shame that was. i mean how dare they not break international law? the government should know better and just bulldoze over all the treaties and laws made to prevent aggressive wars in this world. the cheek of them.
america is wholly trust worthy being involved in more wars than any other. being more aggressive than any other. and currently breaching it's own signed treaties on everything from war crimes, human rights, nukes, wars etc.
"Would they treat us so badly if we became a third world? Would they help us? Doubt it." and america always helps out the third world which is why it ignored the niger crisis in october.
Whoa there. If America wan't in one of those war chances are you'd be screwed by Hitler. Rev. War was out freedom. Civil War helped to work up to even more freedom for different races. Oh ya we tried to help out in Vietnam. Don't complain about treaties either. Other countries have broken more and by far worse ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
Because we cant save the world when certain people are always against us.
But hey wouldn't we be evil if we jumped into niger *ponders* by your standards .. yup. Seems hypocritical. America itself fights to give people freedom. WE can only do so much. If that means clearing up saddam and getting oil for our president ( or whatever the unninformed blame it on ) well - we will. And we will solve issues while we are there.
Have some respect for human life cloud - I know you have little respect for embryos but we have soilders over there dying for freedoms cause. We all get somthing outta the war. ITs an all win situation - minus for the innocence killed - but thier own people do most of that.
But you sit infront of you computer and laub insults at america, and nit pick at everything. Enjoying the spoils of progress that you are so against!
Bipper ARgs
about the hitler thing. before the second world war america was quite isolationistic. it had had a few wars, phillipines, canada, mexico ww1 etc. but didn't like to do much else. after the second world war and the start if the cold war. it became a habit it fight wars by proxy. and with the creation the jewish state in israel to control portions of the middle east.
i don't think there are worse treaties to break than those on human rights, wars and weapons. except global warming but america refuses to sign them anyway so never mind.
"but thier own people do most of that." that's why the american army isn't equipped with planes and tanks and guns. because they're all peace loving tree hugging hippies in camo. bombings were not in baghdad before the illegal war. they are now. what changed between now and then? america decided to break international law and fight an agressive war. that is why their own people are now just a teeny weeny bit restless about this entire thing.
but this is all off topic about the nukes.
LMFAO - sorry - that deserves nothing. I already explained why america had to get on the offencive after WWII..
Great job though - Its been a while since i have seen such a biased post.
thanks for that..
bipper
sorry i missed the post in which you explain why breaking international law was cool.
It was inbetween your posts on why look out for eachother is bad
there is no excuse for war crimes. end of. we ddin't like the nazis doing it. we didn't like sadamme doing it, we didn't like serbia doing it. i don't like america doing it.
but war crimes are just another treaty america has broken like the weapons agreements and human rights.