News: Col Muammar Gaddafi fires nukes towards USA

[DVTimes]

It could happen.

What has he to loose?

[B.Barnato]

having nukes would help...

[Sly]

What's he going to hit? Bermuda? Maybe?

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by Sly

What's he going to hit? Bermuda? Maybe?

More like Algeria.


.

[DVTimes]

What is his religion. He says he is against islam, so i presume he is not muslim.

[DWB]

Does Libya even have nukes?

[CaptainHowdy]

[moeloubani]

Unlike Americans, Libyans won't stoop to the level of being mass murderers just because they can.

Sorry Americans, still alone in your 'used a nuke to mass murder' club.

[dyna mo]

in the mean time, libyan Moammar Gaddafi mass murders libyans in massacres


Libya protests: 140 ‘massacred’ as Gaddafi sends in snipers to crush dissent
Women and children leapt from bridges to their deaths as they tried to escape a ruthless crackdown by Libyan forces loyal to Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.


Colonel Muammar Gaddafi has apparently decided he’s not going down without murdering a lot of people.

[dyna mo]

Al Jazeera:

Ali al-Essawi, who resigned as Libyan ambassador to India on Tuesday, told Al Jazeera that fighter jets were used by the government to bomb civilians.

He said live fire was being used against protesters, and that foreigners had been hired to fight on behalf of the government.

Al-Essawi labelled the violence "a massacre", and called on the UN to block Libyan airspace in order to "protect the people".

Al Jazeera's Prerna Suri interviewed him about the crackdown.

http://english.aljazeera.net/video/a...119717549.html

[dyna mo]

i think it's safe to say that if gaddafi is murdering libyan women and children via fighter jets, he'd have no problem lobbing a nuke over.

[EonBlue]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Unlike Americans, Libyans won't stoop to the level of being mass murderers just because they can.

Sorry Americans, still alone in your 'used a nuke to mass murder' club.

The sad thing is that the US actually saved lives by using those bombs.

[junction]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Unlike Americans, Libyans won't stoop to the level of being mass murderers just because they can.

Sorry Americans, still alone in your 'used a nuke to mass murder' club.

[MaDalton]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

i think it's safe to say that if gaddafi is murdering libyan women and children via fighter jets, he'd have no problem lobbing a nuke over.

if he only had a nuke

[moeloubani]

Even a lunatic like Ghadafi had the sense to reject nuclear weapons. In an interview with Larry King he says when he first came into power he wanted nuclear weapons but as he grew up he realized that they were no good.

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

What I don't understand is, if Gaddafi has been dictator of Libya for 40+ years, why hasn't he promoted himself? I know that I would be 7-star muthafukin' Generalisimo if I was in charge!!!



He has pretty hot bodyguards though - I guess it's good to be dictator:



ADG

[bronco67]

Misleading thread title....

[Sly]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Even a lunatic like Ghadafi had the sense to reject nuclear weapons. In an interview with Larry King he says when he first came into power he wanted nuclear weapons but as he grew up he realized that they were no good.

So the United States clearly lies about everything but Ghadafi would never do such a thing?

[$5 submissions]

Originally Posted by B.Barnato

having nukes would help...

Exactly. He gave up the WMD quest when he saw how Saddam got OWN3D

[moeloubani]

Originally Posted by Sly

So the United States clearly lies about everything but Ghadafi would never do such a thing?

I'm just saying that's what he said in an interview and Libya isn't known to have any nuclear weapons. I don't know what Ghadafi would do guy is a fucking nut case that will be powerless in a matter of days/hours.

[TripleXPrint]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Unlike Americans, Libyans won't stoop to the level of being mass murderers just because they can.

Sorry Americans, still alone in your 'used a nuke to mass murder' club.

Typical pacifist response. I'd rather have killed 200,000 Japanese by dropping two nukes on their asses than losing 200,000+ American soldiers by trying to invade mainland Japan.

The Allied Forces lost over 100,000 men and women in the Pacific theater, and over 200,000 missing or wounded. That is the damage from OUTSIDE of Japan. Could you imagine if the Allied forces were forced to take the fight to the Japanese? We're talking massive casualties on both sides, upwards and probably over 1 million lives. Both military and civilian. It sounds horrible when you think about how many people died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but think for a second how many lives it saved.

On top of that, the U.S. went in and rebuilt Japan from the ground up and now they're an economic and manufacturing world power. The same with Germany. You know, the best thing that could ever happen to a country is to lose a war against the U.S.

[Yanks_Todd]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Unlike Americans, Libyans won't stoop to the level of being mass murderers just because they can.

Sorry Americans, still alone in your 'used a nuke to mass murder' club.

yeah, no reason we did that huh?

[Yanks_Todd]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Even a lunatic like Ghadafi had the sense to reject nuclear weapons. In an interview with Larry King he says when he first came into power he wanted nuclear weapons but as he grew up he realized that they were no good.

you need to stop posting and read up on what you are talking about my friend.

[dodger21]

[dodger21]

Says a lot about this apologetic cocksucker you emotionally weak retards voted into office.

[scuba steve]

Originally Posted by MaDalton

if he only had a nuke

if he only had a brain

this guy is out for blood, he's going to have court in the streets. i don't see this going down quietly

[moeloubani]

Originally Posted by TripleXPrint

Typical pacifist response. I'd rather have killed 200,000 Japanese by dropping two nukes on their asses than losing 200,000+ American soldiers by trying to invade mainland Japan.

The Allied Forces lost over 100,000 men and women in the Pacific theater, and over 200,000 missing or wounded. That is the damage from OUTSIDE of Japan. Could you imagine if the Allied forces were forced to take the fight to the Japanese? We're talking massive casualties on both sides, upwards and probably over 1 million lives. Both military and civilian. It sounds horrible when you think about how many people died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but think for a second how many lives it saved.

On top of that, the U.S. went in and rebuilt Japan from the ground up and now they're an economic and manufacturing world power. The same with Germany. You know, the best thing that could ever happen to a country is to lose a war against the U.S.

And 9/11 saved 2 billion + lives so you guys should praise them. Right? Because we can just say 'oh, well that saved x amount of lives' and make ANYTHING okay.

[TripleXPrint]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

And 9/11 saved 2 billion + lives so you guys should praise them. Right? Because we can just say 'oh, well that saved x amount of lives' and make ANYTHING okay.

What in the fuck are you talking about?!?! Do you even know or are you just on a coke binge? How is 9/11 in any way related to or even remotely in the same league as WWII? Not to downplay 9/11...but that's like comparing a wedgie at a Boyscout jamboree to Columbine.

Post proof that 9/11 saved 2 billion lives or retract. I posted proof how dropping Fat Man and Little Boy on Japan saved lives.

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

And 9/11 saved 2 billion + lives so you guys should praise them. Right? Because we can just say 'oh, well that saved x amount of lives' and make ANYTHING okay.

You are one seriously mind-skewed nutjob my friend.

I pray you seek help.

[moeloubani]

Originally Posted by TripleXPrint

What in the fuck are you talking about?!?! Do you even know or are you just on a coke binge? How is 9/11 in any way related to or even remotely in the same league as WWII? Not to downplay 9/11...but that's like comparing a wedgie at a Boyscout jamboree to Columbine.

Post proof that 9/11 saved 2 billion lives or retract. I posted proof how dropping Fat Man and Little Boy on Japan saved lives.

Well the Taliban were going to stage a massive attack at the heart of America, attempting an invasion that would have cost billions of lives as the entire world would have gotten involved.

See how I can just fabricate things like you? How do you know that the Japanese wouldn't have surrendered anyways? How do you know how many casualties there would have been in a war that never happened? You don't. So please, stop acting like you somehow know when all you're doing is what I just did, making shit up.

CDSmith glad to see you support mass murder including the murder of children. Who is the one that needs help? Right.

[beerptrol]

Originally Posted by dodger21

Says a lot about this apologetic cocksucker you emotionally weak retards voted into office.

yeah, cause Obama is the only president to make nicey with a dictator of an oil rich country who oppresses and murders their people

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

How do you know that the Japanese wouldn't have surrendered anyways?

They were asked several times to surrender during the latter parts of the war, they refused all of them.

It's quite well documented.

Read, and learn, before posting.

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

CDSmith glad to see you support mass murder including the murder of children. Who is the one that needs help? Right.

Just the mere fact that that's what you derived from my post underlines the fact that I'm right about you.

Seriously, seek help.

[moeloubani]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

They were asked several times to surrender during the latter parts of the war, they refused all of them.

It's quite well documented.

Read, and learn, before posting.

So what are you saying, that the Japanese surrendering was impossible?

Originally Posted by CDSmith

Just the mere fact that that's what you derived from my post underlines the fact that I'm right about you.

Seriously, seek help.

I don't think you understand causality - you supporting the bomb being dropped means you are supporting the murder of those people. Just like if someone supported the guys flying the plane into the Twin Towers they are supporting murder, not just airplanes.

[Alky]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

So what are you saying, that the Japanese surrendering was impossible?



I don't think you understand causality - you supporting the bomb being dropped means you are supporting the murder of those people. Just like if someone supported the guys flying the plane into the Twin Towers they are supporting murder, not just airplanes.

There is a cause and effect for everything. I guess because I support airports I supported 9/11 too.

You're such a nutjob.

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

So what are you saying, that the Japanese surrendering was impossible?

I'm saying they were asked numerous times and refused each time. It was only AFTER they were nuked (not once but twice, they still refused to surrender after the first one) that they finally figured out that maybe they better stop their war effort.

I don't think I can dumb it down any further for you. Sorry.

Originally Posted by moeloubani

I don't think you understand causality - you supporting the bomb being dropped means you are supporting the murder of those people. Just like if someone supported the guys flying the plane into the Twin Towers they are supporting murder, not just airplanes.

I understand causality perfectly. Do you understand the difference between a real war and an unexpected terrorist attack?

I support the ending of the war (WWII) as quickly as possible. Period. If anyone in the world doesn't like how that goal was attained then I invite you to consider the notion that maybe, just maybe, Japan shouldn't have started the war to begin with.

No war = no need for bomb usage, yes?

They knew the risk, and took it anyway.


Your comparing 9/11 to WWII is awefully weak, and in fact quite lame. But I've come to expect no less than that kind of thinking from you.

[moeloubani]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

I'm saying they were asked numerous times and refused each time. It was only AFTER they were nuked (not once but twice, they still refused to surrender after the first one) that they finally figured out that maybe they better stop their war effort.

I don't think I can dumb it down any further for you. Sorry.





I understand causality perfectly. Do you understand the difference between a real war and an unexpected terrorist attack?

I support the ending of the war (WWII) as quickly as possible. Period. If anyone in the world doesn't like how that goal was attained then I invite you to consider the notion that maybe, just maybe, Japan shouldn't have started the war to begin with.

No war = no need for bomb usage, yes?

They knew the risk, and took it anyway.


Your comparing 9/11 to WWII is awefully weak, and in fact quite lame. But I've come to expect no less than that kind of thinking from you.

Sorry that you can't equate one act of murder with another. Both were acts of murder, both served no purpose but to murder. If you think yours is justified for some reason, someone else thinks their attack was justified for another. The point is that murder is wrong no matter what justification you may think you have for it. Especially the kind that kills innocent people that have nothing to do with the war.

Japan surrendered in the end, and they could have surrenedered earlier. You can't say they wouldn't have. And you can't say that there would have been more or less casualties if the bomb wasn't dropped. Point is that you guys murdered tens of thousands of innocent people that had nothing to do with the war so that you could inflict terror into the hearts of your enemy. Sound familiar?

[Blingbaby]

Originally Posted by junction

This is such a crock of shit, as if unconditional surrender (ie. our soldiers will rape your women for the next 50 years) is the only possible outcome to war.. sure murderers find any ways possible to justify their crimes.

[papill0n]

man the fucking japs attacked america

they got what was coming to em

had the japs got to american women and children their fate would have been farworse than being nuked

[DVTimes]

i am worried for those sext hot bodyguards of his.

i hope they send them to the uk for protection.

i will look after them.

[SZNY]

Originally Posted by TripleXPrint

On top of that, the U.S. went in and rebuilt Japan from the ground up and now they're an economic and manufacturing world power. The same with Germany. You know, the best thing that could ever happen to a country is to lose a war against the U.S.

I don't think this will have the same effect on Iraq and Afghanistan becoming a world power.

By nuking Japan the US ended WW2 in a very dirty way mass murdering civilians, but war is dirty. The Japs where cold hearted bastards and maybe this was the only way to stop them.

My grandfather fought against the Japs in WW2 while my father and the rest of the family was locked up in Japanese war camps. My family never talked that much about that time but from the things they told me that period was quite horror.

[kbauerctu]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Well the Taliban were going to stage a massive attack at the heart of America, attempting an invasion that would have cost billions of lives as the entire world would have gotten involved.

See how I can just fabricate things like you? How do you know that the Japanese wouldn't have surrendered anyways? How do you know how many casualties there would have been in a war that never happened? You don't. So please, stop acting like you somehow know when all you're doing is what I just did, making shit up.

CDSmith glad to see you support mass murder including the murder of children. Who is the one that needs help? Right.

Do you know anything about Japanese culture at all? Death is something they embrace with pride. To die defending their country is an HONOR. Ever heard of Seppuku? Bonzaiiiii? They have a much higher cost tolerance (in terms of death) than any western country.

Now we can't say for sure, because it didn't happen, but there's evidence that supports our military's decision to drop the bomb's instead of invade was the right decision.

I don't believe they would have surrendered like they did with just an invasion. That's just my 2 cents.

[Scott McD]

Originally Posted by bronco67

Misleading thread title....

Yeah, slightly...

[roly]

Originally Posted by kbauerctu

Ever heard of Bonzaiiiii?

They're little trees aren't they? Do you mean Banzai?

[pornguy]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Unlike Americans, Libyans won't stoop to the level of being mass murderers just because they can.

Sorry Americans, still alone in your 'used a nuke to mass murder' club.

How many people died in the crusades?

[MaDalton]

Originally Posted by scuba steve

if he only had a brain

this guy is out for blood, he's going to have court in the streets. i don't see this going down quietly

after seeing his speech i have to say that if he wasnt the guy who used to be their leader he would have been locked away in some mental facility long ago

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by pornguy

How many people died in the crusades?

he's on his *americans are the only ones who have dropped the bomb* bandwagon. what's lacking is his ability to look at and understand events as they developed AT THAT TIME. not in hindsight.

[Cyandin]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Unlike Americans, Libyans won't stoop to the level of being mass murderers just because they can.

Sorry Americans, still alone in your 'used a nuke to mass murder' club.

Are you serious?

1. Japan struck first at Pearl Harbor.
2. The US usage of the bomb avoided the need for an invasion of the Japanese mainland, and saved tens, if not hundreds of thousands of lives of the very same people which the Japanese preemptively attacked in the beginning.
3. Then Japan surrendered, which saved the rest of the Japanese population from being even worse off (read: annihilated).

War is cruel, ugly, and never something to be proud of, on any side, ever. But you have to remember, the Japanese brought it upon themselves, and as Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto said after the attack on Pearl Harbor which he led (before the US shot his ass down out of the sky in 1943) "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve". Yamamoto, you were right.


Sorry moeloubani, but the thesis of your statement holds no water.

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Sorry that you can't equate one act of murder with another. Both were acts of murder, both served no purpose but to murder. If you think yours is justified for some reason, someone else thinks their attack was justified for another. The point is that murder is wrong no matter what justification you may think you have for it. Especially the kind that kills innocent people that have nothing to do with the war.

Japan surrendered in the end, and they could have surrenedered earlier. You can't say they wouldn't have. And you can't say that there would have been more or less casualties if the bomb wasn't dropped. Point is that you guys murdered tens of thousands of innocent people that had nothing to do with the war so that you could inflict terror into the hearts of your enemy. Sound familiar?

You are truly deluded, and for want of a better term, downright unfucking-believable.

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Sorry that you can't equate one act of murder with another. Both were acts of murder,

No, one was an act of war, done for the purposes of putting an early end to it. Period. The other was as you say, a blatant act of murder. Too bad you can't draw the distinction.

Originally Posted by moeloubani

both served no purpose but to murder. If you think yours is justified for some reason, someone else thinks their attack was justified for another. The point is that murder is wrong no matter what justification you may think you have for it. Especially the kind that kills innocent people that have nothing to do with the war.

Sorry to once again burst your bubble but many of those innocent people as you refer to them were working in factories and in other industries that supported their country's war effort. Guns, munitions, uniforms, food production, whatever, you can bet a good portion was supporting their military in some way. Does it suck those people died? Of course it does. Again, the Japanese knew the risks when they started the war. They paid a heavy penalty, but you sitting there 60-odd years later laying blame on the US is, well, boneheaded.

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Japan surrendered in the end, and they could have surrenedered earlier.

Could have, but they didn't.

Originally Posted by moeloubani

You can't say they wouldn't have.

Yes I can, since as I said they were asked several times before the first nuke was dropped to surrender, they refused every time. They were asked after the 1st bomb was dropped, they refused. There is no reason to assume that had the US not dropped the bomb and instead launched a massive attack on Japan itself that the Japs would have surrendered until the last of them fell (along with no doubt several hundred thousand Americans)

Originally Posted by moeloubani

And you can't say that there would have been more or less casualties if the bomb wasn't dropped.

Neither can you.

Originally Posted by moeloubani

Point is that you guys murdered tens of thousands of innocent people that had nothing to do with the war so that you could inflict terror into the hearts of your enemy. Sound familiar?

See above.



Your demented slant on WWII has now been fully dealt with. I hope you learned something here today moolaboobie.

Cheers.

[dyna mo]

i've argued with moe ad infinitum about dropping those bombs to end world war 2 and he refuses to budge from his view.

just a heads up, carry on.