Can U justify use of Uranium against Iraqi civilians ?
- Thread starter Anomalous
- Start date
"Originally Posted by Anomalous
I use U humans as specimen,"
No no dont worry too much, unlike humans I dont use them for medical testing or weapons effects testings, I just use them to understand what they think. This is beneficial to them because I give them many ideas out of that for free, i.e. only the constructive ideas.
- Humanologist.
I use U humans as specimen,"
No no dont worry too much, unlike humans I dont use them for medical testing or weapons effects testings, I just use them to understand what they think. This is beneficial to them because I give them many ideas out of that for free, i.e. only the constructive ideas.
- Humanologist.
Well i voted for the last one.
@Anomalous
But i do agree that the poll is misleading, in war many horrendous acts occur, and are overlooked, its all very well gobbing off about types of munition used, but that wont really ake a difference.
Tell me, were you voting against the war, were you doing everything you could do to show that you were against the war even being an option in the first place? Because if the answer is no to any of these questions, then you have no real 'right' (used in a lose sense) in protesting about the outcome of the war, which many people failed to stop.
though it sounds like im entirely against your argument and your point of view, im not.To an extent i do agree.
:m:
@Anomalous
But i do agree that the poll is misleading, in war many horrendous acts occur, and are overlooked, its all very well gobbing off about types of munition used, but that wont really ake a difference.
Tell me, were you voting against the war, were you doing everything you could do to show that you were against the war even being an option in the first place? Because if the answer is no to any of these questions, then you have no real 'right' (used in a lose sense) in protesting about the outcome of the war, which many people failed to stop.
though it sounds like im entirely against your argument and your point of view, im not.To an extent i do agree.
:m:
Anomalous said:
you know i had the same trouble!:m:
If this were true, wouldn't there be an unusually large amount of radiation sickness among US soldiers? Handling bullets with radioactive material in them sounds like something that would leave an obvious trail of evidence sooner or later.
Just my guess, though.
Anomalous said:
Really? You feel pity for the people that you said should be bombed while eating their BigMacs because their tax dollars are paying for a war that they didn't start, and can't stop?
Really, Anomalous, you're too much!
Even terrorism?Hapsburg said:
When I see this statement in the context of positive masculinity --- in the past all masculine traditions --- whether in the west (Greeks) or in the East (Samurais or others!) were a great sticklers for fair play. Fair play and sticking to the rules is an important part of positive masculinity.
Real men were supposed to lay down their lives, but not go against the rules of figthing.
It was only after the Christian/ Islamic religions came who forced out positive masculinity from our civilisation and taught that any hook or crook method to get what you seek is justified, that the west developed an idiom like "everything is fair in love and war". But I don't think it is so!
Last edited:
Giambattista said:
THEY ARE, as so are their CHILdren, who suffer genetic damge due to the radiation poisoning of the male sperm
i haveother sources, but check this for now:
Deception Over Health Risks of Deleted Uranium http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0201-01.htm
They could have stopped and They didnt stop, its called Democracy, they should have stormed in the whitehouse and pentagon by millions; But no instead they chose to reVote for Bush.Giambattista said:Really? You feel pity for the people that you said should be bombed while eating their BigMacs because their tax dollars are paying for a war that they didn't start, and can't stop?
Really, Anomalous, you're too much!
I said Enough !
Caught ya! I said nothing about sexuality here......so you are in fact obsessed with bringing up sexuality when dealing with my posts!Light said:Ahh, yes. Here comes Buddha again - sticking his thoughts of positive/negative masculinity into yet another unrelated topic.
See? He finds his sexual-identity crisis everywhere he looks.
I don't know who is in crisis, going by the way the so-called heterosexuals are organising themselves into a movement (
) it seems some other group is going through a severe identity crisis! Oh, I see. You don't consider "masculinity" a facet of sexual differentiation?Buddha1 said:Caught ya! I said nothing about sexuality here......so you are in fact obsessed with bringing up sexuality when dealing with my posts!
I don't know who is in crisis, going by the way the so-called heterosexuals are organising themselves into a movement (
I wonder why I'm not surprised...