US bomb somalia
- Started
- Last post
- 80 Responses
- johndiggity0
bush is not talking about his legacy, rather, the presidential legacy in general. he is trying to restore the presidency to the strength and authority it posessed prior to watergate.
- mrdobolina0
//?
- Nairn0
mpfree - that article is fucking ridiculous - such an unlikely and inefficient technology, given the defined method of employment - any situation that requires that level of technology is distinctly a one-way trip. A costly one at that.
That's the first ever PopSci i've ever bought (it's not usually found on UK news-shelves) and I had to laugh a little at that article.
- mg330
Thanks mpfree. I love stuff like that. My stepdad always has Pop Mechanics when I visit and I always mean to get a subscription.
I'm a sucker for everything they do articles about.
- mrbee28280
I don't remember bombing anyone.. I don't even have a plane :)
- Cactus0
convenient.
poomoo
(Jan 9 07, 01:09)I'm guessing it was pretty fucking unconvenient for all those slaughtered Africans.
- mrdobolina0
lace up your boots, cactus.
- Cactus0
I would love to get a crack at those cowards.
Do you have my back, mr dobs?
- mrdobolina0
nah, maybe in sudan.
- Cactus0
We should better hurry then.
From what I hear they have just about finished them all off there.
- mrdobolina0
between this, the bullshit blown up bomb (sprinkler parts) in miami and the gas smell in nyc yesterday, they ratcheted up the terra' pretty sweet right before bush increases troop levels in iraq.
I don't believe a damn thing this country does anymore is in the best interest to the citizens.
- Cactus0
You forgot to bracket that post with...
RANT:
END OF RANT:
- mrdobolina0
yep, you are right.
- Point50
this whole thing
is
out of
your control...
- Cactus0
Well if it is any consolation for you Tony Blair will be going on trail soon for crimes against humanity in May.
http://enjoyment.independent.co.…
- ConceptHue0
when will everyone learn that it has nothing to do with the people. its all about money. on both ends of the war. now, who has money? for the us (and other countires, yes the us is not the only one despite popular belief) it' corporations. heh why do you think companies send people to broken countries that are dangerous? cuz they are profiting off the crap the army leaves behind! ... then everyone is like, 'why the hell did u take a job in afghanistan? just quit your company. no matter what they are paying you' and u hear about who got captured on tv yada yada. now on the other side of the fence it's the warlords and dictators who have money. not their people. their people also get caught up and killed for no reason too. --- or what? everyone thinks that the whole world just wants to kill each other? you think the average person doesn't want peace? course they do . maybe on their terms. but no one wants war. minus the greedy people who stand to make money off it.
- TheBlueOne0
Third front in a war. Stretched thin military force. Refusal to raise taxes to support it. No need to gain support of general populace except to tell them to "Keep shopping! Be happy!" Refusal to draft to get new blood into the operation. No solid victory conditions.
Historical this is just ass stupid. It's like Vietnam being fought by the war end drugged out megalomaniac Hitler. Just great.
- M0NEYCIDE0
yeah that's wrong...it's making up for the issues in iraq, start something else. what a bullshit excuse too.
- poomoo0
convenient.
poomoo
(Jan 9 07, 01:09)I'm guessing it was pretty fucking unconvenient for all those slaughtered Africans.
Cactus
(Jan 9 07, 13:39)i think you missed my point.