The Black Vault Message Forums

Discover the Truth!        

The War on Terrorism & Homeland Security

WorleyParsons to build two new nuclear plants.

Discuss the War on Terrorism, Homeland Security, Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea and other global terrorist concerns.

Postby screamzero » Sat Jun 20, 2009 7:51 am

1)"You suffer an excessive ("sophistic") preference of argument over the love of true wisdom."
2)"...a game plan real easily mimicked and mocked."

The first is what I'm talkin'about; the second is what I'm having fun with.

Arguing about the peaceful use of nuclear energy is stupid. Slammin' Wong Fung U and Achtunemenninidas with bunker busters to rack their nuke plants out is not stupidness.
You and your ilk can't tell the difference: real crippling and sick stupidness.
Last edited by screamzero on Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
screamzero
 
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Texas, U.S.A.

Postby Aquatank » Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:03 am

Screamzero
Uhm.. Are you for The Nuke plants or against? Its rather hard to tell when you rallying against liberals & socialists and maybe nuke plants at the same time. It was too much rallying cry that post and not enough substance. Please bring more substance to a debate Screamzero, I know you can do it I've seen it before.

Addendum: After sorting it through:OKAY you're against spreading nuclear reactors but you blame liberals for their spread even though most liberals protest nuke plants.
Last edited by Aquatank on Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:09 am, edited 2 times in total.
Aquatank
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Midwest USA

Postby screamzero » Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:05 am

Read the statement above you that I edited too slowly.
User avatar
screamzero
 
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Texas, U.S.A.

Postby screamzero » Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:06 am

Arguing about the peaceful use of nuclear energy is stupid. Slammin' Wong Fung U and Achtunemenninidas with bunker busters to rack their nuke plants out is not stupidness.
You and your ilk can't tell the difference: real crippling and sick stupidness.
User avatar
screamzero
 
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Texas, U.S.A.

Postby screamzero » Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:07 am

My apologies for-r-r me rash tones...I'm rather passionate and sensitive ya know.
User avatar
screamzero
 
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Texas, U.S.A.

Postby Aquatank » Sat Jun 20, 2009 8:14 am

I'm just trying to sort through your arguments, Screamzero.

Its my opinion (unaligned socialist that I am :) )

1) That spreading nuclear reactors around is not only a waste of money but a global security risk.

2) Bombing said reactors causes a radiological health risk to local populations.

can we agree those two points?
Aquatank
 
Posts: 1016
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am
Location: Midwest USA

Postby Tairaa » Sat Jun 20, 2009 12:27 pm

screamzero wrote:You suffer an excessive ("sophistic") preference of argument over the love of true wisdom.

Are you so sure then?

Or perhaps my goal is to show people the things they ought to consider? I rarely offer my opinion, merely what, in my eyes, should be considered by people. Therefore, I never give you something to consider that you've already considered, instead I bring another possible side to things.

My percieved preference for argument over wisdom is actually a preference to stir thought in others. My own wisdom is something I don't share nearly as often as you figure I do. Hahaha..

It's funny really. You've got no idea what I think of the situation in the ME, beyond a very vague set of facts, like I don't think the Iraq war was necessary. You where lied into it, just like 'Nam. But you're too into it to see or understand that. I can't think of anything else regarding that situation that you would know my thoughts on. This was proved very recently by your assuming my opinion about the Marine firing at and killing the Iraqi insurgent who was pretending to be dead.

Contrary to what you're so sure you know about me, I think that situation was handled quite well.


You don't know me nearly as well as you think. However, I will say you seem to be rather observant. You just simply don't have enough information on me to go off of. Keep it up though, you might get incremental bits more. :)
"George Bush says he speaks to god every day, and christians love him for it. If George Bush said he spoke to god through his hair dryer, they would think he was mad. I fail to see how the addition of a hair dryer makes it any more absurd."
Tairaa
 
Posts: 2940
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby Tairaa » Sat Jun 20, 2009 12:30 pm

Aquatank wrote:I'm just trying to sort through your arguments, Screamzero.

Its my opinion (unaligned socialist that I am :) )

1) That spreading nuclear reactors around is not only a waste of money but a global security risk.

2) Bombing said reactors causes a radiological health risk to local populations.

can we agree those two points?



The latter of the two is an easily proven fact, whereas the first point is a fact that is more complex and difficult to prove. There are two points within fact 1, that it's a waste, and a global security risk. Again, the latter of the two is fact. The first, being that they are a waste of money, I'd say I have to agree with you personally, but some would disagree..

After comparing initial costs, upkeep costs, service life, and energy output I think Geothermal is the best form of power we have available. Works worldwide, costs little to build and maintain, requires no fuel, no dangerous security risks, and superb power output.
"George Bush says he speaks to god every day, and christians love him for it. If George Bush said he spoke to god through his hair dryer, they would think he was mad. I fail to see how the addition of a hair dryer makes it any more absurd."
Tairaa
 
Posts: 2940
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby rath » Sat Jun 20, 2009 2:57 pm

Australia owns/controls 60% of the world supply of uranium ....... & who gets it.
Image
rath
 
Posts: 4344
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

Postby Tairaa » Sat Jun 20, 2009 3:04 pm

Uhm... You? It stand to reason that Australia would get the 60% in it's possession, if said number is accurate anyway.
"George Bush says he speaks to god every day, and christians love him for it. If George Bush said he spoke to god through his hair dryer, they would think he was mad. I fail to see how the addition of a hair dryer makes it any more absurd."
Tairaa
 
Posts: 2940
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:54 am

PreviousNext

Return to The War on Terrorism & Homeland Security

cron
  • View new posts
  • View unanswered posts
  • Who is online
  • In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 10 minutes)
  • Most users ever online was 292 on Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:19 pm
  • Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest