CatherineM Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 The big guys never do the suicide bombings. They always find someone young and naive. On the other hand, if I was one of the Swiss Guard that day, I'd be afraid to blink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Daddy Posted May 29, 2008 Author Share Posted May 29, 2008 [quote name='geauxsaints26' post='1547105' date='May 28 2008, 07:21 PM']I don't think he or anyone would be able to get close to the Pope with any sort of weapon or explosive device.[/quote] Ya, because no body has ever shot the Pope before... *in the most sarcastic voice that I can* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aalpha1989 Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 [quote name='prose' post='1547102' date='May 28 2008, 07:17 PM']I'll be the first to admit that I am not exactly the expert on politicians or politics, but I still stand by what I said. The guy would not be "off'ing" himself for nothing. He is an extreme man, and, from what I have seen, he would go to extremes to prove a point. Like I said, I am not an expert on politics, but people like him are unpredictable and, I believe, have evil intent in most of their actions. Maybe he wouldn't kill himself to kill the Pope, but you just don't know what crazy people would do. That is why they are crazy.[/quote] I just really think that he thinks he has too much more to do in this world. Killing the pope is not a "worthy" use of his time, skill, or political prestige. It'd be a small step towards a much bigger goal, a step which would eliminate his own usefullness. I bet he understands that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StColette Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 [quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1547923' date='May 29 2008, 01:09 AM']Ya, because no body has ever shot the Pope before... *in the most sarcastic voice that I can*[/quote] my point exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kujo Posted May 29, 2008 Share Posted May 29, 2008 [quote name='aalpha1989' post='1547965' date='May 29 2008, 03:25 AM']I just really think that he thinks he has too much more to do in this world. Killing the pope is not a "worthy" use of his time, skill, or political prestige. It'd be a small step towards a much bigger goal, a step which would eliminate his own usefullness. I bet he understands that.[/quote] This is [i]exactly[/i] what I'm trying to say. This guy has a messianic streak a mile long. He's not going kill himself...yet. I think he feels there is too much work still to do. He wants to get Israel. That's his purpose. And he's not going to do anything (yet) that will jeopardize his mission. I'm not saying that I am against higher security during the visit. All steps should be taken for the Pope's safety no matter who is in town. I just don't think he will do anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Daddy Posted May 30, 2008 Author Share Posted May 30, 2008 [quote name='kujo' post='1548150' date='May 29 2008, 10:26 AM']This is [i]exactly[/i] what I'm trying to say. This guy has a messianic streak a mile long. He's not going kill himself...yet. I think he feels there is too much work still to do. He wants to get Israel. That's his purpose. And he's not going to do anything (yet) that will jeopardize his mission.[/quote] I agree with you--to a point. Keep in mind that Ahmadinejad set a three year timetable on his plan to bring back The Mahdi by triggering blood and chaos. That clock began ticking in 2005. With that in mind, stories [url="http://www.iranfocus.com/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14010"]like one in the New York Times[/url] in the beginning of this year take on a whole new air of urgency. It stated that "President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran said ... that his country would produce nuclear energy by next year and condemned Israel as a 'filthy entity' that would soon collapse." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geauxsaints26 Posted May 30, 2008 Share Posted May 30, 2008 [url="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/"][img]http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/3a0eba22f6.jpg[/img][/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kujo Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 [quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1548728' date='May 29 2008, 11:31 PM']I agree with you--to a point. Keep in mind that Ahmadinejad set a three year timetable on his plan to bring back The Mahdi by triggering blood and chaos. That clock began ticking in 2005. With that in mind, stories [url="http://www.iranfocus.com/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14010"]like one in the New York Times[/url] in the beginning of this year take on a whole new air of urgency. It stated that "President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran said ... that his country would produce nuclear energy by next year and condemned Israel as a 'filthy entity' that would soon collapse."[/quote] He is dangerous. Not to the Pope...yet. We will have to deal with this guy...and I've laid out my opinion on how to do it. What do you think about my proposal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 (edited) i'm not sure if bombing them for the nuke facilitie sshould be done. i don't know. some points contra bombing them though. you can try to warn people to leave. that doesn't mean they will know to or hear it. if this is negligable to you, given the big picture, we should at least consider whether forcing tight oversight by the UN or US would be an alterantive. they have blown off those measure, i think, but i'm not sure. eg, i think we offeere them nuke power as long as they didn't devleop it, but they insited for autonomy and pride that they do it themself with no ovesight... which if true, then bombs might be warranted and a few innocent deaths justified. just incidental... their nuke facilities are underground awith anti aircraft guns on the surface. i'd think a bomb could be made that makes craters etc, but. anyway this is just practical stuff... i'm sure it's possible to obliterate the place soemhow. we don't want to go bombing cities or anything for fear of the populace becoming terrorists and chaos. that might happen if we bomb their nuke facilities i don't know. if we thought we were innocent, which many probably would over there, and someone bombed us,,, i'm sure we wouldn't like it. plus, the israel istuation only would further justify themself to htem... cause they want to oblitarate israel only cause the jews through teh US etc took over the area, when before it had belonged to the muslims predominately until recently for many hundred years as the jews were discplaced without a coutnry. I imagine if someone came to the US and gave it to england, we'd be up and arms. and pissed if someone bombed a nuke facility that may or may not be for energy only. even if for weopons and just trying to avoid others knowing that, we'd still be pissed. it's a delicate situation is all im saying. we probably should bomb them though or something, given what heir own leader has been saying. Edited May 31, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kujo Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 (edited) [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1550834' date='May 31 2008, 03:09 PM']i'm not sure if bombing them for the nuke facilitie sshould be done. i don't know. some points contra bombing them though. you can try to warn people to leave. that doesn't mean they will know to or hear it. if this is negligable to you, given the big picture, we should at least consider whether forcing tight oversight by the UN or US would be an alterantive. they have blown off those measure, i think, but i'm not sure. eg, i think we offeere them nuke power as long as they didn't devleop it, but they insited for autonomy and pride that they do it themself with no ovesight... which if true, then bombs might be warranted and a few innocent deaths justified. just incidental... their nuke facilities are underground awith anti aircraft guns on the surface. i'd think a bomb could be made that makes craters etc, but. anyway this is just practical stuff... i'm sure it's possible to obliterate the place soemhow. we don't want to go bombing cities or anything for fear of the populace becoming terrorists and chaos. that might happen if we bomb their nuke facilities i don't know. if we thought we were innocent, which many probably would over there, and someone bombed us,,, i'm sure we wouldn't like it. plus, the israel istuation only would further justify themself to htem... cause they want to oblitarate israel only cause the jews through teh US etc took over the area, when before it had belonged to the muslims predominately until recently for many hundred years as the jews were discplaced without a coutnry. I imagine if someone came to the US and gave it to england, we'd be up and arms. and pissed if someone bombed a nuke facility that may or may not be for energy only. even if for weopons and just trying to avoid others knowing that, we'd still be pissed. it's a delicate situation is all im saying. we probably should bomb them though or something, given what heir own leader has been saying.[/quote] First of all, your knowledge of the history of Israel is pathetic. No one "came into" the area now known as Israel and just [i]gave it to the Jews[/i]. The Jews purchased the land that from a group of wealthy Muslims who [b]OWNED THE LAND[/b]. These men were not elected officials or any representatives of the people who lived in the land; rathere they were just businessman looking to make a buck. The land was untennable, and the Jews carved it literally out of the rocks and sand to what it is today. They paid for it (mostly with money given them by the U.N.). They did not "steal it." Suggesting so is little more than partisan, revisionist history nonsense. Secondly, we have bombs that can take out targets located underground. Earth-penetrating weapons (also known as "bunker-busters") are missiles and bombs used to destroy hardened, underground military bunkers buried deep in the ground. Within the EPW classification, there are nuclear EPWs (also known as "robust nuclear earth penetrators") which, in theory, would have a decreased amount of radioactive nuclear fallout (compared to that of a standard, air-burst nuclear detonation) because they would have relatively low explosive yield. Ideally, the shockwave generated by a RNEP would be similar in strength to that of an earthquake. There are some very valid criticisms of using RNEPs to deal with this issue, mainly focusing on the potential for radiation to spread and kill hundreds of thousands ([url="http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/nuclear_weapons/nuclear-bunker-buster-rnep-animation.html"]click here for an animation done by the Union of Concerned Scientists[/url] dealing with this issue), instead suggesting that conventional weapons be used to achieve this goal. Bottom line is that it is more than possible to get at these sites. It's just a matter of how and which weapons to use. Finally, you are crazy if you think that Ahmadinejad is going to be okay with more U.N. oversight. There's no reason for him to do so. He's stated that he is going to develop these weapons whether or not the world community want him to or not. We can sweeten the pot a little bit (i.e.- repealing the sanctions, offering economic incentives) once the comply; however, the problem with the U.N. has and always will be its lack of force to back up their "values." Sanctions haven't done anything to halt him in the past. We need to be open to exercising more aggressive options in the future. Edited May 31, 2008 by kujo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 well i concede i am not an expert on this stuff. if i am wrong, so be it. why haven't i heard more about this?: [quote]He's stated that he is going to develop these weapons whether or not the world community want him to or not.[/quote] he's made threats to israel, but i don't remember him saying he indeed plans to make weopons. the news always says iran insists it's for energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kujo Posted May 31, 2008 Share Posted May 31, 2008 [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1550926' date='May 31 2008, 04:11 PM']well i concede i am not an expert on this stuff. if i am wrong, so be it. why haven't i heard more about this?: he's made threats to israel, but i don't remember him saying he indeed plans to make weopons. the news always says iran insists it's for energy.[/quote] No worries. I apologize if I am coming off as angry or anything. I am [b]really[/b] passionate on this subject and have spent hours debating it in classes. Ahmadinejad claims it is for energy. Doesn't mean he isn't lying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrishSalesian Posted June 2, 2008 Share Posted June 2, 2008 TO the case that the Pope meeting with Ahmadinejad, I'm sure that the Swiss Guard will be in the room at all times. I would be surprised if they do not carry some type of firearm with them. I mean, look at those baggy pants, there's plenty of room to hide a gun in there. And the Swiss Guard are highly trained Special Forces type guys. Their hands are deadly weapons. So I'm not worried about the Pope being taken out by this Ahmadinejad guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Daddy Posted June 2, 2008 Author Share Posted June 2, 2008 [quote name='kujo' post='1550572' date='May 31 2008, 11:50 AM']He is dangerous. Not to the Pope...yet. We will have to deal with this guy...and I've laid out my opinion on how to do it. What do you think about my proposal?[/quote] I think it sounds logical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Daddy Posted June 2, 2008 Author Share Posted June 2, 2008 [quote name='kujo' post='1550938' date='May 31 2008, 03:22 PM']Ahmadinejad claims it is for energy.[/quote] Ya, that kinda cracks me up. The entire area is swimming in oil, but he claims that they need fuel. Nuclear fuel. ...right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now