Oligo

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Murda Inc @ Mar. 12 2002,10:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It's just that the majority of you have become, or atleast seem to be, pacsifists. You dont want to go to war because you fear a substantail loss of life, which I dont think we are going to see, sure a few hundred at most, but thats after a few years war with all these other countries.<span id='postcolor'> I think it is a good thing not to go to war because it WILL cause substantial loss of life. As for your estimate of few hundreds, U.S. has already killed that many civilians alone in Afganistan. As for soldiers, I don't even want to think about how many of those you have killed. Maybe we should all have a little exercise in empathy, it is very useful when discussing war. Imagine you're in a situation where all the people you know and care about have been blown to bits by bombs. Even if you didn't want war against those foreign people who bombed you. Even if you couldn't less care about those foreign people and their business. It's just that your asshole neighbour that you never liked suicide bombed those foreigners. Imagine how that feels. If you can put yourself into that position, can you really wish that for somebody else? It sure seems that the 3000 deaths in WTC were just the prelude to the actual loss of life to come.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wobble @ Mar. 12 2002,09:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the Nukes saved more lives than they ever could have taken considering without them the invasion of Japan would have probably have had to be done to get them to surrender.. and that would mean that by law of their god every single person in Japan would have to fight to the death or kill themselves..<span id='postcolor'> I'm not going to fight with you about this. Already done that. But I'm sure that somebody somewhere could explain the 9/11 thingy very nicely and also point out how many lives the attack actually helped to save. The thing is, the history is written by the winners and thus it is impossible to say just how many lives actually were saved, if any. But of the ABC-weapons, the nukes are far worst. They kill a lot of people, but they also destroy the only real inheritance we give to our children: The genetic code. As far as I'm concerned, their first use can NEVER be justified.

I'm 25 and currently working as a researcher in a university biotechnology laboratory here in Finland. -My current education is M.Sc. in Biotechnology but working on my Ph.D. -Did 8 months in a mortar company. Finished as a lance corporal. -Hobbies: Jogging, Downhill skiing, Trekking (man finnish lapland is SOMETHING), Cooking, Movies, Reading, Computer Gaming, General Mischief

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wobble @ Mar. 12 2002,01:13)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">and the Russians should be the last people to point a finger at anyone.. seeing as how for many years they were the Nuclear arms superstore for any 3rd world nuttjob with enough money to buy one.. Â <span id='postcolor'> Yet the only nuttjob ever to have used nukes in anger is... U.S.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wobble @ Mar. 12 2002,05:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dont really know much about how much yeild these "mini nukes: but the term mini is probably proportional .. they are probably smaller than a tactical (I.E. base killer) nuke..<span id='postcolor'> The thing with nukes: You cannot make them too small. If you use fission, which you have to use if you want to make small nukes, you need to initiate what is called a 'critical mass'. To do that, you need a certain minimum mass of fissible material combined with a shitload of conventional explosive as a booster charge. Basically the russian suitcase nukes (nuclear demolition charges) are as small as they can get. I think one of those can screw the Manhattan island. The conventional bomb 'Daisy Cutter' can probably accomplish half of this effort.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wobble @ Mar. 12 2002,00:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Iraq? fuck iraq, let in the inspectors like you agreed or get your ass kicked.. you break the deal you get screwed.. such is life..<span id='postcolor'> The problem with Iraq: Even if you totally economically isolate Iraq, Saddam or his army is not going to starve. The regular people will starve. Do you really think Saddam is asking the regular people whether he should let in the inspectors? Saddam doesn't give a fuck what happens to his people. Or, if you're talking about invading Iraq... Saddam will draft everybody and U.S. will kill them. Such a liberation it shall be. And you call it ass kicking. Right-o.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Akira @ Mar. 11 2002,16:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You're a fucking jack ass.<span id='postcolor'> Any sarcasm obviously escapes you. Whatever.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Akira @ Mar. 11 2002,16:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> "Oh spare me your self righteous indignation. Letting down partners in the ISS? I bet when Russia announced it couldn't deliver its part and the US had to financially help them produce it you didn't say jack shit about it did you." Nope. I was quite pissed at the fact that the russians couldn't deliver. Luckily they did in the end. And now U.S. isn't delivering the habitation module and as far as I know the lifeboat, so limiting the size of the crew on the station. In the same time, U.S. is pouring money into weapons. With only a miniscule fraction of this dough, you could easily double the funding of NASA. "I'm a strong a supporter of the ISS and space exploration as there ever was, but the X33 hate to tell you was soaking up money at an alarming rate, and wasn't even CLOSE to being complete or what was promised (much like the shuttle)." The shuttle is an obsolete piece of junk. X33 was a completely revolutionary single stage to orbit piece of finesse. When developing that kind of revolutionary technology, setbacks are to be expected. No point in cutting funding when you're already halfway there. But that's just my opinion. "But you wouldn't care about that because you ain't gotta pay for the damn thing." Way more of your taxes goes to your huge army. X33 was just a miniscule project compared to that black hole. "And I'm sick of listening to all this crap about pollution." I'm sure the whole issue will just disappear if you grow tired of it. I guess it is not 'chic' anymore.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Murda Inc @ Mar. 11 2002,13:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> "Oligo, you had better remove that evil piece of industrial space material from your avatar, being U.S. made an all, it's pure evil and is going to bring the earth to its knees, because it came from America of course." The piece of industrial space material pictured in my avatar is the X-33 prototype, a true masterpiece of technology, which got cancelled and physically cut up by the budget slashes imposed by your all-wise president Dubya. I use it as my avatar, because it reminds me of how U.S. is letting down it's international partners in the I.S.S. program by failing to deliver what it has agreed upon. "Why? thats my only question..why is it only our fault...why arent you doing your part to reduce world pollution!?!?!?" We ARE doing our part in reducing world pollution. It's YOU who are not doing yours. As long as WE are doing more than YOU, I reserve the right to bitch about it, however petty.

If you apply flamethrower to the air intakes of a tank or throw a Molotov onto the air intake grille, the tank will suck in flames. This can either ignite the tanks fuel supply or the crew or both. Of course, more advanced tanks are protected against such assaults.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Murda Inc @ Mar. 11 2002,13:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> "Does it really matter?? "Well sir I only shot him once, instead of 30 times" The guy should not be sent to jail cuz he only shot the guy once! Hooray for your great thought!" According to your reasoning, the crime of 3000 dead in WTC is equal to the crime of 110 dead in Afganistan. I couldn't agree with you more! "It doesnt matter you are still polluting the earth my firend, commencing your own demise, which you said would be our fault! this is that horse you ride so high on that I speak of, your country can do no wrong see. " There is an international community, which tries to initiate reduction of pollution. Reduction doesn't mean stop of pollution, but it is a start. Yet U.S., the super hero of freedomness and responsibility, chose to ignore these reduction initiatives, because of money, moolah, dinero. I'm sorry, but in this one thing we ARE better than you. "On top of that....Finland is such an economical powerhouse and all..." Finland is ranked #1 at the moment in the industry competitive prowess index list. We surpassed U.S. about half a year ago (or was it more?). This can be interpreted to mean that Finland IS an economic powerhouse, if you care about such things.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Murda Inc @ Mar. 11 2002,12:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> "Ahh yes, you are right, it's not Sadamm, or Israel and Palastine, or India that are in your backyard playing with nukes,...but us. You better worry more about them then us fucking up your great life pal." Nope. Industrialized nations fucking up the planet is a much more credible and imminent threat than some two nukes some moron might have. "And the U.S. is not the only country that fucks up the air you breathe, China is much more indutrialized then we, as well is Russia, again the ones in your own very backyard, not us. I think you as Europeans need to get your own backyard under control before you go telling us to get our shit together." When it comes to pollution, there is but one back yard, because we all live in the same house. And would you really expect some evil not-a-beacon-of-democracy-and-freedom China to agree on reducing emissions if beacon-of-democracy-and-freedom U.S. hasn't done so first? Doesn't sound likely.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Murda Inc @ Mar. 11 2002,12:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'> "And no I'm not going on about how great the U.S. is, but the U.S. does a hell of alot more good for this planet then the majoirty of the rest of the world." All EU countries give money to the poor countries, just like U.S. You hop around the world and bomb people to hell, then the europeans come and keep the peace. Which one is harder? "I only wish we knew what the world would be like with out the U.S. Because then you would surly be singing a differnt song." I would be discussing the next biggest problem. Be it what may. "But all you all want to look at is the bad policies which "plague your earth so badly"." I'm sorry man, but if you don't get your shit under control there won't be any earth habitable by humans left. Anything else is sort of secondary to that agenda, don't you think? "I wish that for once a president would stop sending the BILLIONS of dollars we feed into other countries to help their poor, sick, and hungry, which they turn around and stick in their own pockets, but thats a differnt story. I wish that for once a president would kepp all those BILLIONS of dollars for our country, our taxes would be reduced, we wouldnt have a national debt, we would have hardly any homeless, or hungry." I wish that your president would stop spending the KAZILLIONS of dollars to your army (more than the ten following countries spend combined) and instead spend it so that your taxes would be reduced, you wouldn't have a national debt, you would have hardly any homeless, or hungry. "But yet we would probably more than likly have your ass whinging about why the U.S. should be feeding this money to other countries" I don't give a shit about how much money you give to some countries. You sure as hell don't give any to Finland. I care about you fucking up the air I breath and heating up the Earth I thread on and so on...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Murda Inc @ Mar. 11 2002,12:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You really should take your comments and see that you are just as shallow as you say we are, I mean really think about it...you say we generalize...yet you are the one doing the generalizations, we are the cocky ones, yet it is your great country that apparently can do no wrong. Amercians simply defend themselves on this forum, we don't procalim how great and free we are...We aren't the ones who seem to think we can sit so high on our great horse, and watch over the wrongs everyone else does, it's you foreginers that like to do that for us. I'm waiting for the day the Europe has another Hitler on their hands, and can't handle it once again...but I'm sure the western countries will be their to bail your ass out as usual.<span id='postcolor'> It is funky how you totally fail to understand anything. I mean, I never have advertised how great my country is. In fact, I think the internal politics of Finland totally suck, you know, we are ruled by idiots. But that's the catch, my man, right there. The only thing our (finnish) politics affect are the internal workings of our country. So we'll just take care of those internally, ok? But the politics of United States of Freedom affect EVERYBODY on this planet, because you fuck up so many things and ocassionally hop around the globe bombing people. So if I want to discuss the problems plaquing our dear Earth, I start with the biggest problem, which is U.S.A. And I know how dear it is for you to think that your soldiers did jack shit in the WWII, but unfortunately the (to you) evil commie russians were the ones who mostly kicked Hitler's ass. Besides, who's going to bail out the world, which is plaqued with U.S. shit? The aliens?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Murda Inc @ Mar. 11 2002,11:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What a bastard..... I'm sure they were thinking what stars they would be while they jumped out you prick. But in a more sensible manner I think that they felt death would be much faster and easier jumping from 100 stories than to burn to death, or even worse be caught in a falling building and live to suffer to your own death, it's really sad how some people think these days.<span id='postcolor'> Why thank you. I always like it when somebody calls me a bastard and a prick. Anyway, I wonder what these people thought, when their wedding party was decimated by American Heroes? Let's see, the groom probably thought something like: "Oh, well. At least I don't have to listen to the nagging for the next twenty years." And the guests at the party thought: "It looks like we have to die for the United States of Freedom. Oh well, at least we are dying for the greatest country in the world. U.S.A! U.S.A! U.S.A!"

Here's a report from the MAINSTREAM media (in case you don't believe any other media) about one incident where over 100 civilians got killed in Afganistan. I don't think this is the only such incident that has gone down. Mayhem. Of course, the Pentagon is always denying all these reports.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Assault (CAN) @ Mar. 11 2002,10:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I also saw a picture of a man and a woman jumping out while holding hands, my heart sinks whenever I think about it. I ask myself: what were they thinking at that moment?...<span id='postcolor'> They were probably thinking: "The difference between suicide and martyrdom is press coverage. And we got aplenty of that."

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wobble @ Mar. 11 2002,10:45)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">define "mini" Â we already have low yield small tac nukes that are "clean" enough to render the area "safe" for non protected personell after 2 weeks in open air.. they are about 2x explosive power as the daisy cutter.. so they are quite small and it its small.. and clean.. well thats basically everything that ISNT nuclear.. so there shouldent be a big deal about it being used.. Â because the major piss and moan factor about nukes are their huge size and radiation.. of which these "mini" nukes have neither..<span id='postcolor'> Small nukes use a fission reaction to blow up. Fission creates only radioactive products. A small nuke has less fissible material, so the amount of radioactive waste generated is smaller. The area where a small nuke is detonated can be considered "safe" after two weeks, because the radiative environment has cooled down enough not to cause radiation sickness, which requires enough dosage to fuck up the cells lining your instetinal tract and/or thyroid gland. But make no mistake: For the next thousand years, your walking there will slowly screw up your DNA (cumulative effect of radiation) more than walking somewhere else. This damage will NEVER heal and you will be transmitting it to your offspring as well. Yeah, small nukes are totally harmless.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (R. Gerschwarzenge @ Mar. 11 2002,10:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I find this size comparison funny. Â <span id='postcolor'> Yep. Considering that nukes vary from a few kiloton pops to 100 megaton Cheyenne mountain levellers... All have one thing in common though: You're killing the present AND future generations in the same time.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (762WorldOrder @ Mar. 08 2002,21:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And if he kicked me in the chest, I would have broken at least one of his arms. Â Or at least choked him unconscious. Â Before I knew how to fight, there were few feelings worse to me than backing down from someone because I was scared of them. Â I hated that. Â And it looks like that's exactly what he did here - he just let the guy kick him in the chest and he didn't do anything because he was scared and hesitant. Â I know the feeling. Â The likelyhood of that happening to me now is much lower. Â <span id='postcolor'> This is a good point. Males are built to feel incredible shame, if they back out of a situation. It's in our flesh, if you know what I mean. So it's a real dilemma whether to fight or not. But if somebody kicked me in the chest, I'd probably fight. It's too much of a provocation to forget and not feel like a coward afterwards. If you get into a fight and lose, well, at least you weren't a coward.

Whoops. I have to apologize. I just checked the statistics myself and there is actually no bias towards blacks being executed more often. Check it out yourself. My earlier claim was based on a documentary I saw on TV in which they claimed that there is a bias. I don't know why the lied in that documentary. Anyway, I apologize. Shouldn't have believed that documentary.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ Mar. 08 2002,09:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm not from Texas but I am American and I resent the implications.<span id='postcolor'> I'm not implying anything. Just check out the list of people executed in Texas. There are significantly more blacks in there than whites. Just the way it is.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Mar. 08 2002,09:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">ppl have emotions regardless of how f-ed up u r. that's why ppl get angry at these kinda story.<span id='postcolor'> It's so easy to care about these sort of things, isn't it? There is a victim and a clearly evil criminal. It's so simple that everybody can understand it and have a conversation about how bad she is and what should be done to her. This is a nice conversation, because everybody has the same opinion. No hassle. Maybe you should waste your caring on issues which are a little more complicated than this case? Issues which have some meaning to you personally?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ Mar. 08 2002,09:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">this was in texas, so i won't be surprised if death sentence falls.<span id='postcolor'> Yeah, it was in Texas and judging from the photo she looks a little blackish. Also the victim was white. Definite capital punishment material.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ Mar. 08 2002,09:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No, it doesnt. This is the first time I ever hear of something like this. The reason _I_ get upset is because behavior like that CAN NOT be tolerated. At all.<span id='postcolor'> The funny thing is, even if you DO NOT tolerate this kind of behaviour, there isn't a thing you can do to prevent it. Ok, you can kill her or jail her whatever, but that won't stop the next person... You'll just have to accept that shit like this or very much like this happens all the time and it's one of the risks in life. Bummer.