Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

George W. Nukem 8 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • George W. Bush is welcomed to stop talking about throwing nukes around at any time.
    Um....Ronald "bombing begins in 15 minutes" Raygun seems to have written Dubya's playbook.

    Maybe if we could switch the crucially important Page 47 while he isn't looking, he'll start talking about more important things, like Bolivian Pop-up dolls. :-)

  • It's called "bluffing", and it's the sort of threat it takes to get Hussein's attention. Do you really think he's gonna drop a nuke on Iraq? Hell no.

    Perhaps you prefer the Bill Clinton approach of telling everyone what you're NOT willing to do, or that you're almost out of cruise missiles. Pure genius, that one.

    • what you're NOT willing to do
      Did you mean "what you're NOT willing to admit you did"? I really can't see the other. :)
      • I'm not sure what you mean. I was referring to the Bosnian campaign, where Clinton repeatedly told the public that we wouldn't commit ground troops. Even if you're not going to commit ground troops, you sure as hell don't *announce* it.

    • Get Saddham's attention? Are you serious? We've got troops engaged in a shooting war on his back porch. The US and UK have dropped not so subtle hints about bitch slapping Iraq again. It is unreasonable to think that Saddham has forgotten that world's largest nuclear stockpile belongs to the US. Saddham is playing a different political game than just grabbing land and I don't think the US public has the whole story on this.

      Nukes are stupid. The environmental damage even from small warheads will affect th

      • It is unreasonable to think that Saddham has forgotten that world's largest nuclear stockpile belongs to the US

        It's not a question of knowing or forgetting. He knew it in '90 and he knows it now. He just doesn't *care*.

        Nukes are stupid. The environmental damage even from small warheads will affect the US.

        The whole world *knows* that. In the case of Iraq, they're hardly necessary either. Hell, I was mad when I found out we were using uranium depleted shells against them, which ended up irradiating

      • 1. If anything, the UN owes the US money, because of all the unreimbursed billions the US has spent on behalf of the UN. I am not saying the US should demand such payment, but the money is not actually owed by the US government to the UN. In fact, the UN has no power to compel payment, so the money cannot be "owed" to the UN.

        2. The Kyoto Protocols are lame. Condoning them would be be bad. Condoning something bad is not being good to anyone, least of all your neighbors.

        3. You have a problem with CAMP X
  • 1. Bush talks about the possibility of nukes because he is asked by the press. He could lie and say that they are not a possibility, or he could refuse to answer the question. I thought you wanted honesty, though? Nukes have been a possibility for every President since the Cold War began, including Clinton. There is nothing new here with Bush.

    2. The US got thrown off the UN Human Rights Commission for purely political reasons. They put SUDAN [hrw.org] on the commission in place of the US, for crying out loud.
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.