George "W"

[heidi!]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="times new roman">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#00003C"><font size=2 face="times new roman">Originally posted by rotten:

and i think im so immune to those types of insults.. so dont really notice them.. I guess i expect them anyway when redhead responds to a post where you dare to "insult" her country by questioning issues.

Its actually kinda weird how narrow minded some people are..

<font color="#0000FF" size="1">[ February 22, 2003 03:25 AM: Message edited by: rotten ]</font></font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>


*LOL@ that...Talk about narrow minded people...You have respect for one opinion Rotten and thats Your own..
and as for Redhead defending her country ..why the hell wouldnt she....I defend the Country im from when its under attack..I love Canada ..I take the good with the bad when it comes to this Country ..Its not "perfect"...and for the record anyone that claims everything is "perfect" has to be livin behind rose colored glasses.
Mannn....some people's kids..

[Australis]

The thing that disappoints me the most about this "war with iraq" is that the so-called democratic countries leaders are totally disregarding the opinions and wishes of the people that elected them... that's not democratic... calling a peaceful protest a "mob" as our prime minister did and pointing out that saddam kills protesters in iraq, as blair did (i might add to me the way he said it, it sounded like blair was disappointed he couldn't deal with the protesters in the same manner) isn't really promoting the peoples democratic right to free speech... and ignoring the people who elected them doesn't do much for democratic process in my opinion. However, come election time the people will take advantage of their democratic right to vote out a politician that doesn't really represent them i'm sure... i certainly will anyway...

i read this the other day and i wonder if it is in fact true... maybe one of you will know more.

US plan for new nuclear arsenal

Secret talks may lead to breaking treaties

Julian Borger in Washington
Wednesday February 19, 2003
The Guardian

The Bush administration is planning a secret meeting in August to discuss the construction of a new generation of nuclear weapons, including "mini-nukes", "bunker-busters" and neutron bombs designed to destroy chemical or biological agents, according to a leaked Pentagon document.
The meeting of senior military officials and US nuclear scientists at the Omaha headquarters of the US Strategic Command would also decide whether to restart nuclear testing and how to convince the American public that the new weapons are necessary.

The leaked preparations for the meeting are the clearest sign yet that the administration is determined to overhaul its nuclear arsenal so that it could be used as part of the new "Bush doctrine" of pre-emption, to strike the stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons of rogue states.

Greg Mello, the head of the Los Alamos Study Group, a nuclear watchdog organisation that obtained the Pentagon documents, said the meeting would also prepare the ground for a US breakaway from global arms control treaties, and the moratorium on conducting nuclear tests.

"It is impossible to overstate the challenge these plans pose to the comprehensive test ban treaty, the existing nuclear test moratorium, and US compliance with article six of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty," Mr Mello said.

The documents leaked to Mr Mello are the minutes of a meeting in the Pentagon on January 10 this year called by Dale Klein, the assistant to the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to prepare the secret conference, planned for "the week of August 4 2003".

The National Nuclear Security Administration, which is responsible for designing, building and maintaining nuclear weapons, yesterday confirmed the authenticity of the document. But Anson Franklin, the NNSA head of governmental affairs, said: "We have no request from the defence department for any new nuclear weapon, and we have no plans for nuclear testing.

"The fact is that this paper is talking about what-if scenarios and very long range planning," Mr Franklin told the Guardian.

However, non-proliferation groups say the Omaha meeting will bring a new US nuclear arsenal out of the realm of the theoretical and far closer to reality, in the shape of new bombs and a new readiness to use them.

"To me it indicates there are plans proceeding and well under way ... to resume the development, testing and production of new nuclear weapons. It's very serious," said Stephen Schwartz, the publisher of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, who added that it opened the US to charges of hypocrisy when it is demanding the disarmament of Iraq and North Korea.

"How can we possibly go to the international community or to these countries and say 'How dare you develop these weapons', when it's exactly what we're doing?" Mr Schwartz said.

The starting point for the January discussion was Mr Rumsfeld's nuclear posture review (NPR), a policy paper published last year that identified Russia, China, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya as potential targets for US nuclear weapons.

According to the Pentagon minutes, the August meeting in Strategic Command's bunker headquarters would discuss how to make weapons to match the new policy. A "future arsenal panel" would consider: "What are the warhead characteristics and advanced concepts we will need in the post-NPR environment?"

The panel would also contemplate the "requirements for low-yield weapons, EPWs [earth-penetrating weapons], enhanced radiation weapons, agent defeat weapons".

This is the menu of weapons being actively considered by the Pentagon. Low-yield means tactical warheads of less than a kiloton, "mini-nukes", which advocates of the new arsenal say represent a far more effective deterrent than the existing huge weapons, because they are more "usable".

Earth-penetrating weapons are "bunker-busters", which would break through the surface of the earth before detonating. US weapons scientists believe they could be used as "agent defeat weapons" used to destroy chemical or biological weapons stored underground. The designers are also looking at low-yield neutron bombs or "enhanced radiation weapons", which could destroy chemical or biological weapons in surface warehouses.

According to the leaked document, the "future arsenal panel" in Omaha would also ask the pivotal question: "What forms of testing will these new designs require?"

The Bush administration has been working to reduce the amount of warning the test sites in the western US desert would need to be reactivated after 10 years lying dormant.

And one more thing...

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="times new roman">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#00003C"><font size=2 face="times new roman"> and for the record anyone that claims everything is "perfect" has to be livin behind rose colored glasses.
</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

just for the record... *S* to ME.. for the last 2 years my life has been "perfect" that is to say that i wouldn't change anything about my life in that time... well maybe at this point i'd like my baby girl's first tooth to come through a little faster for her... *L* but i can honestly say that i wouldn't change anything else... i like things just the way they are... and to me it's perfect... the world may not be (no rose coloured glasses there *L*) but the areas of my life that i have control over and even a few that i don't but that impact my life in some way are just "perfect" for me.

[rotten]

heidi you're so simple i cant help but like you..
*L*

very true.. I can see why redhead doesn't like anyone criticizing war.. she loves america. and you love canada... you should write childrens books.

stick to talk about cybersex.. *L* jk.. only kinda though..

<font color="#0000FF" size="1">[ February 22, 2003 06:06 PM: Message edited by: rotten ]</font>

[heidi!]

" Perfect To You"..That I understand...I have relationships in my life I think are perfect as well.....Overall the big picture isnt perfect...if that makes sense... [img]smile.gif[/img]

and Rotten You should stick with what you know...*SPANK*...*S*

[rotten]

Im way ahead of you heidi.. cept you have that a little mixed up [img]wink.gif[/img]

[heidi!]

Naw I dont have anything mixed up....I can read a personality from a mile away...and You'll never be ahead of me.. [img]wink.gif[/img]

[Blazey]

Holy cow...I just read all this..well..most of it..*L..i have a short attention span when it comes to politics..but i have to say i just learned more on here than i have reading or listening to the news..it was much more entertaining.. [img]eek.gif[/img] ..glad to see mobes and isis are happy.. [img]graemlins/thumbs_up.gif[/img] ..and minnow..i think your post pretty much summed up my feelings as well...i cant add a thing...*waits for part 2*

[Australis]

*winks@blaze*...

gotta keep you well informed... *L* hope ya keepin' happy too firey one... *S*

[Blazey]

happy as i can be...im sure hoping we dont go to war..but looks like i have no say in anything..what a sad time for the entire world..if we could all stand togather ..things would be better for us all..but it will never happen..peace is almost a fantasy we all have isnt it..what a world to watch children grow up in.. [img]frown.gif[/img] ...maybe thats why i still havnt had a baby yet..i worry for the future... [img]redface.gif[/img] ..*sends baby chloe a cuddle*

[Më£ïñÐa]

WoW! i read it all too!!
and alot sunk in....
now i'm really scared half to death......fuck!!!