West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: Real American on March 28, 2007, 12:32:29 PM
-
All this is about is propaganda.
(http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20070328/capt.sge.jwh72.280307174312.photo01.photo.default-512x361.jpg?x=380&y=267&sig=sm1A33dawow2riaOk18qyg--)
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8O5BET80&show_article=1
Iran Shows Video of British Crew
Mar 28 02:43 PM US/Eastern
By NASSER KARIMI
Associated Press Writer
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - Iranian state TV showed video Wednesday of 15 British sailors and marines who were seized last week, including a female captive in a white tunic and a black head scarf who said the British boats had "trespassed" in Iranian waters.
Britain called the broadcast "completely unacceptable" and said it was concerned that the statements from sailor Faye Turney were coerced. The British government earlier released what it called proof the boat crews were seized in Iraqi waters, and said it was freezing all contacts with Iran except negotiations to release them.
Iran's foreign minister said Turney—the only female captive—would be freed on Wednesday or Thursday, but British Prime Minister Tony Blair's office said it had received no confirmation of that.
The British military said its vessels were 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters when they were taken Friday, and it released what it said were the GPS coordinates that proved that.
Several hours later, Tehran broadcast the video on an Arabic-language satellite channel, along with a letter from Turney saying the sailors and marines were inside Iranian waters when they were captured.
"Obviously we trespassed into their waters," Turney said, sitting by herself against a floral curtain and smoking a cigarette.
"They were very friendly and very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people. They explained to us why we've been arrested, there was no harm, no aggression," she said.
Turney, 26, was also shown eating with several fellow sailors and marines.
What appeared to be a handwritten note from Turney to her family said, in part, "I have written a letter to the Iranian people to apologize for us entering their waters."
The video also showed a brief scene of what appeared to be the British crew sitting in an Iranian boat in open water immediately after their capture.
Before the video was broadcast, a Blair spokesman said any showing of British personnel on TV would be a breach of the Geneva Conventions.
"It's completely unacceptable for these pictures to be shown on television," the Foreign Office said after the broadcast. "There is no doubt our personnel were seized in Iraqi territorial waters."
The statement also demanded that British diplomats be given immediate access to them as a "prelude" to their release.
The Foreign Office said it had "grave concerns" about Turney's state of mind when she spoke on video.
"I am very concerned about these pictures and any indication of pressure on or coercion of our personnel," said Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett. She added that Britain had "comprehensively demonstrated today that our personnel were operating inside Iraqi territorial waters."
British officials declined to comment after the broadcast on whether it violated the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war. The chief spokesman for the International Committee of the Red Cross also declined to comment, saying the ICRC was not involved.
President Bush spoke to Blair over a secured video conference call about the standoff Wednesday, White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino said. "The president fully backs Tony Blair and our allies in Britain," she said.
Vice Adm. Charles Style told reporters that the Iranians had provided a position on Sunday—a location that he said was in Iraqi waters. By Tuesday, Iranian officials had given a revised position two miles east, placing the British inside Iranian waters—a claim he said was not verified by global positioning system coordinates.
"It is hard to understand a legitimate reason for this change of coordinates," Style said.
Style gave the satellite coordinates of the British crew as 29 degrees 50.36 minutes north latitude and 048 degrees 43.08 minutes east longitude, and said it had been confirmed by an Indian-flagged merchant ship boarded by the sailors and marines.
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki denied this, saying, "That's not true. It happened in Iranian territorial waters."
Iraq and Iran have never agreed on the ownership of waters near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab waterway, where Britain said the sailors and marines were seized. Fixing the dividing line is difficult because of conflicting claims to rock formations, sandbars and barrier islands in the shallow waters of the northern Gulf.
Mottaki told The Associated Press in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, that Turney would be released Wednesday or Thursday, and he suggested that the British vessels' alleged entry into Iranian waters may have been a mistake.
"This is a violation that just happened. It could be natural. They did not resist," he told the AP.
"Today or tomorrow, the lady will be released," Mottaki said Wednesday on the sidelines of an Arab summit in the Saudi capital.
The Iranian Embassy in London also said: "We are confident that Iranian and British governments are capable of resolving this security case through their close contacts and cooperation."
In a first act of retribution against Iran, Beckett suspended bilateral talks with Tehran on all other issues. Visits by officials were stopped, issuing visas to Iranian officials suspended and British support for events such as trade missions put on hold, her office said.
Oil prices rose by more than $1 a barrel Wednesday as the standoff continued and on rumors that Iran had fired a missile at a U.S. ship in the Persian Gulf, where the U.S. is carrying out its largest sequence of military maneuvers since the launch of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
In 2004, eight British sailors were captured as they were delivering a patrol boat to the Iraqi Riverine Patrol Service. Britain described the mission as "routine" but Tehran accused them entering Iranian waters illegally.
A day later, Iran said the sailors would be put on trial, and Iranian TV broadcast video of them blindfolded and sitting on the ground. Two of them later read a statement of apology for entering Iran's territorial waters, saying it was a mistake.
The sailors later told reporters they had been mistreated and subjected to mock executions.
The eight were eventually returned to British diplomats in Tehran and flown back to Iraq. Iran initially promised to return the seized boats, but later decided to keep them for display at Tehran's War Museum. The Iranians also kept the crew's GPS equipment, and their coordinates have never been released.
___
-
Here is the video...
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0a3_1175102305&p=1
-
Of course it is and when the detainees at guantanamo bay are paraded that is also about propoganda but you don't have a problem with that and it is that which makes you a controlled sick hypocrite.
-
Of course it is and when the detainees at guantanamo bay are paraded that is also about propoganda but you don't have a problem with that and it is that which makes you a controlled sick hypocrite.
When have the detainees in Guatanamo been paraded on TV?
-
Video footage of the detainees at guantanamo bay in hoods, or looking disorientated in those vile animal like cages, oh but that's different isn't it because those are evil people. So evil in fact that they will not allow ordinary trials to take place of these people, they are going ahead instead with military court tribunals and even they are running into problems, this is why despite your delusions most have never even even charged with any crime. Yet despite this Bush parades on tv talking about how these are bad people and so must be held there indefinitely. The filming of these detainees is not allowed without permissionm and if you don't think the filming of the detainees is done for propoganda purposes then you are even more stupid than the average fox viewer.
-
i think its a disgrace they made the women wear a veil, its a breach of her human rights
-
"Obviously we trespassed into their waters," Turney said, sitting by herself against a floral curtain and smoking a cigarette.
"They were very friendly and very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people. They explained to us why we've been arrested, there was no harm, no aggression," she said.
Turney, 26, was also shown eating with several fellow sailors and marines.
CWalker, don't you just admire the Iranians' kindness and hospitality?
-
i think its a disgrace they made the women wear a veil, its a breach of her human rights
Iranian law dectates that ,its like me marrying a 12 yr old in some backward ass country and coming to the uk , it ain't a breach of my human rights ,if they take her away.
-
(http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20070328/capt.sge.jwh72.280307174312.photo01.photo.default-512x361.jpg?x=380&y=267&sig=sm1A33dawow2riaOk18qyg--)
LOL i like how threw that habibibib on top of the white ladies head
-
i think its a disgrace they made the women wear a veil, its a breach of her human rights
Iranian law dectates that ,its like me marrying a 12 yr old in some backward ass country and coming to the uk , it ain't a breach of my human rights ,if they take her away.
fair enough if she chose to goto iran, but she didn't.
-
"Obviously we trespassed into their waters," Turney said
-
They are admitting they were trespassing with INTERNATIONAL coverage here.. They are not forced to do this, they are even admitting the Iranians are treating them well.. So what now? Let's start nitpicking I guess right? like "ewww the veil is disgusting".. shut the fuck up faggot, you're in their turf, you gotta respect their rules and regulations just like anywhere else, you can see most of her hair anyway. It's a respect issue, that's all. The Brits lost.
-
They are admitting they were trespassing with INTERNATIONAL coverage here.. They are not forced to do this, they are even admitting the Iranians are treating them well.. So what now? Let's start nitpicking I guess right? like "ewww the veil is disgusting".. shut the fuck up faggot, you're in their turf, you gotta respect their rules and regulations just like anywhere else, you can see most of her hair anyway. It's a respect issue, that's all. The Brits lost.
They are still in Iranian custody, they are going to say whatever the Iranians want them to say about their location. Don't be so fucking stupid.
As for showing respect in another person's country, I wish Muslims would do the same in the West.
-
Video footage of the detainees at guantanamo bay in hoods, or looking disorientated in those vile animal like cages, oh but that's different isn't it because those are evil people. So evil in fact that they will not allow ordinary trials to take place of these people, they are going ahead instead with military court tribunals and even they are running into problems, this is why despite your delusions most have never even even charged with any crime. Yet despite this Bush parades on tv talking about how these are bad people and so must be held there indefinitely. The filming of these detainees is not allowed without permissionm and if you don't think the filming of the detainees is done for propoganda purposes then you are even more stupid than the average fox viewer.
You are a freaking moon. Watch this video. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0a3_1175102305&p=1
That video is nothing but blatant propaganda. When you put prisoners on telvision and grill them and interrogate them for everyone to say that is the textbook definition of propganda. Same thing with having the female prisoner write a letter and show the contents to the world. The US never did anything like that with Guatanamo Bay prisoners.
Why are you such a brainwashed sheep, man? Somehow you can turn any story into an American bashing post. America and Guatanamo Bay have nothing to do with the plight of these British prisoners. Their treatment is wrong but for some reaosn you can't admit it.
-
They are still in Iranian custody, they are going to say whatever the Iranians want them to say about their location. Don't be so fucking stupid.
As for showing respect in another person's country, I wish Muslims would do the same in the West.
^ They do, there are millions of Muslims in the West who live along side every other immigrant. Some of their criminals came and killed a few people. And what? There's hundreds of Blacks and Latinos killing people right and left in every little neighbourhood of the West, what's ure answer to them? Every group has their trouble makers. America has been dis-respecting the Middle-East for over 100 years, what about that? C'mon now, get off British dick, they were in their waters without permission and should be locked the fuck up right now gettin they ass beat, instead they're fed right and treated well and "might" go on trial. It can't get any more fair than that.
-
You are the sheep and so truly stupid and brainwashed that you equate my hatred for some in the government with american bashing. I pointed out to you the hypocrisy of all of this I point out to you that torture goes hand in hand with the plight of those detainees and yet that is somehow ok and yet this is disgusting. You have been conditioned into accepting on the one hand and condemning on the other and for your information I don't condone what the iranians are doing. Of course you can not take the words of these captured soldiers seriously because you don't know how much duress they have been under. You know this to and yet you were probably up in arms about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed with all his series of confessions, totally disregarding what he has no doubt been put through also.
-
GPS and satellite tracking show that the Brits were in Iraqi waters. The Iranians obviously tried to pull some type of stunt that backfired.
-
They are still in Iranian custody, they are going to say whatever the Iranians want them to say about their location. Don't be so fucking stupid.
As for showing respect in another person's country, I wish Muslims would do the same in the West.
^ They do, there are millions of Muslims in the West who live along side every other immigrant. Some of their criminals came and killed a few people. And what? There's hundreds of Blacks and Latinos killing people right and left in every little neighbourhood of the West, what's ure answer to them? Every group has their trouble makers. America has been dis-respecting the Middle-East for over 100 years, what about that? C'mon now, get off British dick, they were in their waters without permission and should be locked the fuck up right now gettin they ass beat, instead they're fed right and treated well and "might" go on trial. It can't get any more fair than that.
international law doesn't allow arrest even IF trespassing in their waters, your supposed to escort them out!
-
Its official ya'll are bunch of punk pussy ass mothafuckaz with double standards. They are treated nicely, given food, they confess without force and they are not even complaining. So WHAT THE FUCK are you liittle bitches moaning about ???
-
international law doesn't allow arrest even IF trespassing in their waters, your supposed to escort them out!
is that right? so if some Iranian ship that just happened to carry some of their military was just cruising around the waters of Washington, they'd just be escorted out nicely huh?
-
Its official ya'll are bunch of punk pussy ass mothafuckaz with double standards. They are treated nicely, given food, they confess without force and they are not even complaining. So WHAT THE FUCK are you liittle bitches moaning about ???
they were abducted from Iraqi waters, it shouldnt of happened, just makes themselves look bad.
I don't mind Iran, obviously they want respect and they got the balls to demand it. But they gotta understand they can not hold out against the West forever...they should use their current position to cut a deal, instead of isolating themselves.
-
They are still in Iranian custody, they are going to say whatever the Iranians want them to say about their location. Don't be so fucking stupid.
As for showing respect in another person's country, I wish Muslims would do the same in the West.
^ They do, there are millions of Muslims in the West who live along side every other immigrant. Some of their criminals came and killed a few people. And what? There's hundreds of Blacks and Latinos killing people right and left in every little neighbourhood of the West, what's ure answer to them? Every group has their trouble makers. America has been dis-respecting the Middle-East for over 100 years, what about that? C'mon now, get off British dick, they were in their waters without permission and should be locked the fuck up right now gettin they ass beat, instead they're fed right and treated well and "might" go on trial. It can't get any more fair than that.
go to holland and see for yourself, they exclude and isolate themselves from the society. they are NOT trying to integrate in any society at all, and fuck you for thinking youre smart and got it right, you dont know shit fool.
these british troops only say what they say to stay alive, what if they refuse to say that, you think they still would be alive? plus youre a fool again, for saying they have it comfortable, these eating pictures are just propaganda to show how "nice" iran is to them, truth is they arent treated like that, for real.
unless iran is stopping with this nonsense and quits using/making nucleair weapons its a fuck you to iran as well, and i personally would say its best to throw a few nukes on their country and kill all these muthafuckas over there. fight fire with fire.
-
I'd save that turban and wipe my ass with it as soon as I got released.
Also, for her to admit that she was in iranian waters is just bullshit. How the fuck does she know? Either she did it intentionally, or she's actually believing these dumbasses. The truth is, she's probably scared shitless and said whatever the fuck they told her to.
Years ago there were others captured in a similar story by Iran, and they put blindfolds on them, put them in a ditch, and held a mock execution. These fuckers should be bombed severely.
BTW, if I were her, and they do offer to let her go early like they're saying, I'd say "no thank you, I'll stay here with my friends".
-
^ trauma do you take all your opinions from the fox news network?
-
They are still in Iranian custody, they are going to say whatever the Iranians want them to say about their location. Don't be so fucking stupid.
As for showing respect in another person's country, I wish Muslims would do the same in the West.
^ They do, there are millions of Muslims in the West who live along side every other immigrant. Some of their criminals came and killed a few people. And what? There's hundreds of Blacks and Latinos killing people right and left in every little neighbourhood of the West, what's ure answer to them? Every group has their trouble makers. America has been dis-respecting the Middle-East for over 100 years, what about that? C'mon now, get off British dick, they were in their waters without permission and should be locked the fuck up right now gettin they ass beat, instead they're fed right and treated well and "might" go on trial. It can't get any more fair than that.
go to holland and see for yourself, they exclude and isolate themselves from the society. they are NOT trying to integrate in any society at all, and fuck you for thinking youre smart and got it right, you dont know shit fool.
Go ahead and vote for right wing extremists like Geert Wilders if you really feel the urge. Go ahead, make them mosques disappear to make sure there's no possibility left for muslims to integrate at all.
How closely have you seen this? Because damn well, the people running mosques are trying their hardest to help these people integrate, and most muslims around there are well willing and kind people. Have you ever bothered talking to them?
Damn well there's scum in all ethnic groups in society, but you should realise these immigrants make up a huge part of the lower class. It's only logic from that perspective that they play a role in crime numbers. But what does that tell you? They need help to get up out of that lower class - they need not to be fought.
these british troops only say what they say to stay alive, what if they refuse to say that, you think they still would be alive? plus youre a fool again, for saying they have it comfortable, these eating pictures are just propaganda to show how "nice" iran is to them, truth is they arent treated like that, for real.
I definately agree with that. They're not posting these videos for nothing; it's obvious they do have a propagandistic purpose. We don't know how they're treated, but it's wrong to automatically assume they're being mistreated.
They may even have put that turban on her head in this video for a good purpose: to turn it into a scapegoat. "Hey, look, they're forcing their religious symbols on her while she's in their control!" ...They know it'll be easy for anyone to respond, saying "is that all?" and the well-willingness of the Iranians is saved.
unless iran is stopping with this nonsense and quits using/making nucleair weapons its a fuck you to iran as well, and i personally would say its best to throw a few nukes on their country and kill all these muthafuckas over there. fight fire with fire.
That's part of the game... You need to be prepared for anything any possible opponent might do to you, or they'll overrun you with their slickness.
If you're so much against nuclear weaponry, then why would you allow the USA to arm themselves with it? Because that means the weapons are in good hands? Come on now. As long as both parties are posing threats at each other, no one will get hurt. "Barking dogs don't bite", you know that. Let them both get their arms up and hold each other at gun point, that way we'll be sure nothing happens. Self interest overrules anything: if you don't want to be nuked, you don't want to challenge those who could nuke you.
-
Go ahead and vote for right wing extremists like Geert Wilders if you really feel the urge. Go ahead, make them mosques disappear to make sure there's no possibility left for muslims to integrate at all.
How closely have you seen this? Because damn well, the people running mosques are trying their hardest to help these people integrate, and most muslims around there are well willing and kind people. Have you ever bothered talking to them?
Damn well there's scum in all ethnic groups in society, but you should realise these immigrants make up a huge part of the lower class. It's only logic from that perspective that they play a role in crime numbers. But what does that tell you? They need help to get up out of that lower class - they need not to be fought.
these british troops only say what they say to stay alive, what if they refuse to say that, you think they still would be alive? plus youre a fool again, for saying they have it comfortable, these eating pictures are just propaganda to show how "nice" iran is to them, truth is they arent treated like that, for real.
I definately agree with that. They're not posting these videos for nothing; it's obvious they do have a propagandistic purpose. We don't know how they're treated, but it's wrong to automatically assume they're being mistreated.
They may even have put that turban on her head in this video for a good purpose: to turn it into a scapegoat. "Hey, look, they're forcing their religious symbols on her while she's in their control!" ...They know it'll be easy for anyone to respond, saying "is that all?" and the well-willingness of the Iranians is saved.
unless iran is stopping with this nonsense and quits using/making nucleair weapons its a fuck you to iran as well, and i personally would say its best to throw a few nukes on their country and kill all these muthafuckas over there. fight fire with fire.
That's part of the game... You need to be prepared for anything any possible opponent might do to you, or they'll overrun you with their slickness.
If you're so much against nuclear weaponry, then why would you allow the USA to arm themselves with it? Because that means the weapons are in good hands? Come on now. As long as both parties are posing threats at each other, no one will get hurt. "Barking dogs don't bite", you know that. Let them both get their arms up and hold each other at gun point, that way we'll be sure nothing happens. Self interest overrules anything: if you don't want to be nuked, you don't want to challenge those who could nuke you.
nice preach, but nah, i work at a supermarket and theres mostly turkish/marocan people coming there, now i have nothing against nobody but they cant even talk my language. theyre guests over here, but they dont want to adapt to our society.
im not right winged, and i dont vote at all, since politics aint my thing, i dont care bout it, let others do that. never have used ANY vote at all, it doesnt matter me. i know whats going on, and since most people in holland who dont inegrate in society are muslims, of course its gonna be criticized.
like i said i have nothing against nobody, i got some muslim friends even, but most of them here are NOT even trying to integrate, and that is a fatc, people who live here for more then 10 years and not even be able to speak dutch, is that integrate?
i dont care bout crime rates either, crimes are committed by all races/nationalities/religions so why bother? was just stating some facts.
the usa have had nukes for a long time, never shave used them, so what the fuck you talking about, there is NO garantuee iran wont use them once they have developed some crazy nukes over there.
but w/e i wont argue about this, its my opinion, and my truth, so yeah...
-
I guess that means we've come to a point where there's no point in arguing any further: there's two outs. I believe that if immigrants are supported, they'll make their way through proper integration. Your opinion on immigration seems perfectly validated to me, so I guess that leaves us with not much to discuss. Props for that :)
the usa have had nukes for a long time, never shave used them, so what the fuck you talking about
So we've forgotten about Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Over 200,000 people died, from some strategically chosen targets: they had to kill as many as possible.
The Target Committee at Los Alamos on May 10–11, 1945, recommended Kyoto, Hiroshima, Yokohama, and the arsenal at Kokura as possible targets. The committee rejected the use of the weapon against a strictly military objective because of the chance of missing a small target not surrounded by a larger urban area. The psychological effects on Japan were of great importance to the committee members. They also agreed that the initial use of the weapon should be sufficiently spectacular for its importance to be internationally recognized. The committee felt Kyoto, as an intellectual center of Japan, had a population "better able to appreciate the significance of the weapon." Hiroshima was chosen because of its large size, its being "an important army depot" and the potential that the bomb would cause greater destruction because the city was surrounded by hills which would have a "focusing effect".
(see: http://www.dannen.com/decision/targets.html)
In fact, look up "Nuclear Weapon" in Wikipedia, you'll be looking at a big mushroom-shaped cloud of American poison reigning over Japan. No other country in the world has ever used nuclear weapons. Only America.
there is NO garantuee iran wont use them once they have developed some crazy nukes over there.
but w/e i wont argue about this, its my opinion, and my truth, so yeah...
You're right, there is no guaranteeing that. But... Why would Iran use nukes, risking being bombed themselves?
-
That's part of the game... You need to be prepared for anything any possible opponent might do to you, or they'll overrun you with their slickness.
If you're so much against nuclear weaponry, then why would you allow the USA to arm themselves with it? Because that means the weapons are in good hands? Come on now. As long as both parties are posing threats at each other, no one will get hurt. "Barking dogs don't bite", you know that. Let them both get their arms up and hold each other at gun point, that way we'll be sure nothing happens. Self interest overrules anything: if you don't want to be nuked, you don't want to challenge those who could nuke you.
-
we've(the usa) never used a nuclear bomb, nagasaki and hiroshima were hit by atom bombs not only for the japanese to fall further into submission but also to scare the russians. We developed all that shit first(with the help of foreign scientists who also thought we should have it) so yeah we should get the benefits of it.
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/Nagasakibomb.jpg)
^^ There used to be Nagasaki ^^
we've(the usa) never used a nuclear bomb, nagasaki and hiroshima were hit by atom bombs
What the hell is this? This reminds me of the Turkish denial of the Armenian genocide... Now I hope you realise one thing: atomic bombs ARE nuclear bombs. They are so called weapons of mass destruction, the very thing "you" and "your army" and "your politicians" are combating.
nagasaki and hiroshima were hit by atom bombs not only for the japanese to fall further into submission but also to scare the russians.
Ah. Posing threats with weapons of mass destruction (not to mention using them) is alright now all of a sudden?
We developed all that shit first(with the help of foreign scientists who also thought we should have it) so yeah we should get the benefits of it.
Patents are only valid for 20 years. Does that mean you're now saying it's been okay since around 1965 for the entire world to arm themselves with totally destructive weaponry?
-
lmao that was a dumb post smoke break, follow your screen name's advice and take one
-
It is splitting hairs i'll give you that, but, Atom bomb- An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei. while a thermo-nuclear bomb works on fusion. the latter is bigger(1000x more powerful) while the first was a smaller one. Theres a difference.
lmao that was a dumb post smoke break, follow your screen name's advice and take one
:tosser: 7eeeeeeevvvveeeeeennnnnn
-
Ah. Posing threats with weapons of mass destruction (not to mention using them) is alright now all of a sudden?
I don't know what fucking post you were reading, but i sure never said that.
Patents are only valid for 20 years. Does that mean you're now saying it's been okay since around 1965 for the entire world to arm themselves with totally destructive weaponry?
well the cat's outta the bag at this point, but I really doubt patent rules apply to classified military documents.
Does this mean you support every nation having a nuclear aresenal?(see I can be a retard too!)
-
It is splitting hairs i'll give you that, but, Atom bomb- An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei. while a thermo-nuclear bomb works on fusion. the latter is bigger(1000x more powerful) while the first was a smaller one. Theres a difference.
Perhaps I don't fully understand. Explain to me the difference between a nuclear bomb and an atomic bomb? I thought they were one and the same, and therefore an atomic bomb is a nuclear weapon? It may not be the most reliable source ever, but on physics Wikipedia is usually right (as there's no opinions involved). So tell me, are they lying here, or am I making misconceptions?
A nuclear weapon is a weapon which derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions of fission or fusion.
A nuclear reaction is a process in which two nuclei or nuclear particles collide, to produce products different from the initial particles.
Nuclear fission—also known as atomic fission—is a process in nuclear physics and nuclear chemistry in which the nucleus of an atom splits into two or more smaller nuclei as fission products, and usually some by-product particles, hence, fission is a form of elemental transmutation.
Ah. Posing threats with weapons of mass destruction (not to mention using them) is alright now all of a sudden?
I don't know what fucking post you were reading, but i sure never said that.
It's a conclusion I'm drawing after you said this:nagasaki and hiroshima were hit by atom bombs not only for the japanese to fall further into submission but also to scare the russians.
Patents are only valid for 20 years. Does that mean you're now saying it's been okay since around 1965 for the entire world to arm themselves with totally destructive weaponry?
well the cat's outta the bag at this point, but I really doubt patent rules apply to classified military documents.
Of course I realise there is no such thing as patent for military documents. Thing is, you're saying the USA has the sole right to have nuclear weapons, and I wonder why you think that's justified.
We developed all that shit first(with the help of foreign scientists who also thought we should have it) so yeah we should get the benefits of it.
You developed it? It's a chemical process. That's physics: a science. It's part of the world we live in. How are you going to claim the sole right to enjoy the benefits of it? What, America owns the universe now?
-
Explain to me the difference between a nuclear bomb and an atomic bomb?
Atom bomb- An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei.
while a thermo-nuclear bomb works on fusion which creates an explosion nearly 1000x larger.
I get what you're saying which is why "It is splitting hairs i'll give you that" but, when talking in context of that war there is a major difference as the thermonuclear "super" bomb wasn't developed until almost 10 years later.
It's kind of like comparing a pistol and rifle, one allows for a much larger bullet, destruction, but both work on the same properties.
Of course I realise there is no such thing as patent for military documents. Thing is, you're saying the USA has the sole right to have nuclear weapons, and I wonder why you think that's justified.
I don't think we have the sole right to it, it's not justified, but it is rational. There were very valid reasons once it was created to stop it from spreading which obviously didn't work out too well. I would have liked to have seen what oppenheimer suggested enacted, which was to end the war by showing what we had in a civilized demonstration to the japanese and russians and share what we discovered with them in the hopes we could have it used for power purposes as well as a deterrent for conflict. Instead what we got was paranoia and the "scorpions in a bottle" stalemate with the soviets and what we have now is the worry that with countrys like iran getting peaceful power facilities may(scratch that, do) find it necessary and easy to turn around and make a bomb for the reason of self-defense in a hostile environment because everyone else does.
We developed all that shit first(with the help of foreign scientists who also thought we should have it) so yeah we should get the benefits of it.
You developed it? It's a chemical process. That's physics: a science. It's part of the world we live in. How are you going to claim the sole right to enjoy the benefits of it? What, America owns the universe now?
The best minds of the world worked on learning and fleshing out that science, but they developed the transportation device and methods to actually detonate it with maximum effect.
-
Why are Iran suddenly the big looming enemy and why this continual use of "we"? I don't understand how you can adopt this stance and yet when I pointed out to you that when Donald Rumsfeld who was on the board of AB at the time sold North Korea 3 water reactors, your reply was "he is a g". What did that mean exactly ....it's gangsta for him to do that but Iran wanting nuclear technology is not acceptable?. I really am bemused how you can compartmentalise the various statements you make.
-
i just used iran as an example, and what you're talking about I was halfway kidding, lots of actual gangsters will sell you a big shipment of drugs then murder your ass and take it back, just like rumsfeld did. You read way too much into how people say things, like where i said we, rather than what they say, which is good in terms of politics but not internet message boards, these aren't heavily calculated thoughts. I never said Iran shouldn't have that technology either re-read what I said.
-
Forget that last reply I have deleted it in order to post a more constructive one, so for the record where do you stand on Iran? especially when considering the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty isn't worth the toilet paper it was written on.
-
Explain to me the difference between a nuclear bomb and an atomic bomb?
Atom bomb- An explosive weapon of great destructive power derived from the rapid release of energy in the fission of heavy atomic nuclei.
while a thermo-nuclear bomb works on fusion which creates an explosion nearly 1000x larger.
I get what you're saying which is why "It is splitting hairs i'll give you that" but, when talking in context of that war there is a major difference as the thermonuclear "super" bomb wasn't developed until almost 10 years later.
It's kind of like comparing a pistol and rifle, one allows for a much larger bullet, destruction, but both work on the same properties.
There are two basic types of nuclear weapons. The first are weapons which produce their explosive energy through nuclear fission reactions alone. These are known colloquially as atomic bombs, A-bombs, or fission bombs.
The second basic type of nuclear weapon produces a large amount of its energy through nuclear fusion reactions, and can be over a thousand times more powerful than fission bombs. These are known as hydrogen bombs, H-bombs, thermonuclear bombs, or fusion bombs. Only six countries—United States, Russia, United Kingdom, People's Republic of China, France, and India—have detonated, or have attempted to detonate, hydrogen bombs.
^^ Wikipedia, once again... A source of information for the ignorant :)
So. These termo-nuclear bombs are just one type of nuclear bombs, as are the atomic bombs. Yes, these H-bombs are big fuckers, and no, the USA didn't use them back then in Japan. But they might have, had they had one - we don't know. Fact is, they are the ones who did use weapons of mass destruction. The biggest piece of weaponry available at the time.
Of course I realise there is no such thing as patent for military documents. Thing is, you're saying the USA has the sole right to have nuclear weapons, and I wonder why you think that's justified.
I don't think we have the sole right to it, it's not justified, but it is rational. There were very valid reasons once it was created to stop it from spreading which obviously didn't work out too well. I would have liked to have seen what oppenheimer suggested enacted, which was to end the war by showing what we had in a civilized demonstration to the japanese and russians and share what we discovered with them in the hopes we could have it used for power purposes as well as a deterrent for conflict. Instead what we got was paranoia and the "scorpions in a bottle" stalemate with the soviets and what we have now is the worry that with countrys like iran getting peaceful power facilities may(scratch that, do) find it necessary and easy to turn around and make a bomb for the reason of self-defense in a hostile environment because everyone else does.
I see what's wrong with Iran arming themselves like that, but isn't the problem that the environment is hostile with nuclear weaponry? Of course, you can put them under control all you like, but there would be no need for that hadn't they been challenged, right?
We developed all that shit first(with the help of foreign scientists who also thought we should have it) so yeah we should get the benefits of it.
You developed it? It's a chemical process. That's physics: a science. It's part of the world we live in. How are you going to claim the sole right to enjoy the benefits of it? What, America owns the universe now?
The best minds of the world worked on learning and fleshing out that science, but they developed the transportation device and methods to actually detonate it with maximum effect.
Haha, so do you still stand by your claim that these scientists really wanted you to enjoy the benefits of having these weapons? :D
-
. The US never did anything like that with Guatanamo Bay prisoners.
no, but they pissed on em and ripped their qurans
why dont u be a man, and stop being a pussy? what is it with you americans, that make u so puss like in nature? is it the ohio well water?
-
Its official ya'll are bunch of punk pussy ass mothafuckaz with double standards. They are treated nicely, given food, they confess without force and they are not even complaining. So WHAT THE FUCK are you liittle bitches moaning about ???
they were abducted from Iraqi waters, it shouldnt of happened, just makes themselves look bad.
I don't mind Iran, obviously they want respect and they got the balls to demand it. But they gotta understand they can not hold out against the West forever...they should use their current position to cut a deal, instead of isolating themselves.
Riiiiiiiiiiite...you see that gov't is all part of the british plan
they've been raising mullahs over a 100 years in iran
-
Tech they did a lot more than that....for your own health do not read the armies own report on guantanamo bay and abu ghraib :'(. I felt sick to the pit of my stomach when I had read over just a section of it and really wished I had not done so.
-
These termo-nuclear bombs are just one type of nuclear bombs, as are the atomic bombs.
Sure, it's another type of bomb.
I see what's wrong with Iran arming themselves like that, but isn't the problem that the environment is hostile with nuclear weaponry? Of course, you can put them under control all you like, but there would be no need for that hadn't they been challenged, right?
1)Yes.
2)We've only had the capability for these for like 60 years, thats not a long time at all, and already half the world has an arsenal, we have to get a hold of it soon. As history has shown us there is always eventual conflict so all we can do is hope nobody uses one, and the less people with the capability the better. If they hadn't been sought after by so many nations for the purpose of the bomb rather than the power plant it wouldn't be such a big deal.
Haha, so do you still stand by your claim that these scientists really wanted you to enjoy the benefits of having these weapons? :D
I never said that either, the weaponry made the scientists on the project sick, as many didn't actually know what they were building; as well as the mathematicians and theorists who saw what their dedicated work had accomplished. There are benefits as well, even if it's just the scientific knowledge that came out of it, which could have been applied much better, under different circumstances.
-
Forget that last reply I have deleted it in order to post a more constructive one, so for the record where do you stand on Iran? especially when considering the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty isn't worth the toilet paper it was written on.
I've never read that, but i'll take your word for it. Iran is tricky, the people deserve to have the power as it could help them and their neighbors, but I don't trust their current government with a bomb.
-
if only churchill was still prime minister