WikiLeaks cables: US agrees to tell Russia Britain's nuclear secrets

BaghdadBob · Post by **BaghdadBob** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 8:24 am

Not what friends do to one another.

Now the question:

Which does obummer hate more, the USA or the UK?

Vote early. Vote often. (It's the donk way!)

Post by **spot** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 8:42 am

It's the cheap option, buying US missiles. The UK's always constructed its own warheads, I doubt whether the US has much of a clue how many of those we possess. Though the Russians might, they're rather better at finding out such trivia.

What matters is that we invariably hold at least 14 missiles in an offensive posture. That's sufficient to guarantee the integrity of our borders from invasion by foreign arms. Every country on earth should do the same, in my opinion.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 8:54 am

Most people in the UK think the so called special relationship is a fantasy anyway. Britain and France both have their own nuclear forces for the simple reason that they know america could not be depended on as an ally in the event of another war. Most people in the UK would now prefer to see the replacement of trident scrapped, we have ballistic missile submarines but no aircraft carriers and not a big enough navy to defend our shores because we can't afford them meanwhile we send aid to india and Pakistan who can afford nuclear weapons and large conventional forces but can't feed their own people. Stupidity somehow is an inadequate word.

Who cares what Obama thinks He will do what he thinks is in america's interests regardless of the consequences for any of their allies just as they always have done. As america goes in to economic they will eventually become less powerful anyway and alliances shift, once you lose control and access to the middle east oil the balance of power will really shift and since you seem to be able to face up to the reality that alternatives technologies need to be developed other countries will take a technological lead.

I thought you didn't approve of wikileaks, what are you doing readong treasonous material? Be careful it would be a shame if you got arrested as a suspected enemy of the state.

You do seem to have a point about the Obama administration though.

https://news.change.org/stories/fbi-rai ... organizing

It's a bit like Tony Blair, big hope for change, brave new world - but all we got were even bigger wankers than the ones we had before.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 9:01 am

Really though BBob. :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

YouTube - Commie Rant ~ short clip from Monty Python's Flying Circus

Be thankful Russia is doing what it is. Be very thankful. You're completely clueless.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 9:25 am

I can imagine Russian officials rolling their eyes and sharing a laugh over a bottle of Vodka when they first learned of this cable. Maybe Russia is Wikileaks' source.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:02 am

I just wonder why an apparently intelligent person needs to call their President a silly name ?

BaghdadBob · Post by **BaghdadBob** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:08 am

Hey, GMC, your always fine prose were a bit clumsy today so I took the liberty of editing them so they would better reflect reality. No need to thank me. Your welcome!

gmc;1353003 wrote: Most people in the UK think the so called special relationship is a fantasy anyway. Britain and France both have their own nuclear forces for the simple reason that they know OBUMMER could not be depended on as an ally in the event of another war. Most people in the UK would now prefer to see the replacement of trident scrapped, we have ballistic missile submarines but no aircraft carriers except HMS Illustrious as small as it is and not a big enough navy to defend our shores because we can't afford them because we're stifling the producers and giving our wealth away to the societal leeches thru a bloated bureaucracy meanwhile we send aid to india and Pakistan who can afford nuclear weapons and large conventional forces but can't feed their own people. Stupidity somehow is an inadequate word.

Who cares what Obama thinks He will do what he thinks is in Marxist interests regardless of the consequences for any of their allies just as they always have done. As america goes in to economic they will eventually become less powerful anyway and alliances shift, once you lose control and access to the middle east oil the balance of power will really shift and since you seem to be able to face up to the reality that alternatives technologies need to be developed other countries will take a technological lead and the donks won't let you develope your own resources or nuclear power.

I thought you didn't approve of wikileaks, what are you doing readong treasonous material? Be careful it would be a shame if you got arrested as a suspected enemy of the state.

You are absolutely right about the Obama administration though.

https://news.change.org/stories/fbi-rai ... organizing

It's a bit like Tony Blair, big hope for change, brave new world - but all we got were even bigger wankers than the ones we had before.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:10 am

I think it might take complete collapses of the political and economic systems before we pull back to a sane military policy.

BaghdadBob · Post by **BaghdadBob** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:10 am

Bruv;1353010 wrote: I just wonder why an apparently intelligent person needs to call their President a silly name ?

To know him is to loath him.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:15 am

BaghdadBob;1353013 wrote: To know him is to loath him.

So said by Baghdadbooby ?

Post by **spot** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:23 am

BaghdadBob;1353013 wrote: Hey, GMC, your always fine prose were a bit clumsy today so I took the liberty of editing them so they would better reflect reality.

You can't call HMS Illustrious an aircraft carrier, Bob, it's equipped only with helicopters. It has no aircraft. Once upon a time HMS Illustrious was an aircraft carrier but it's not now. The UK Armed Forces, as far as I'm aware, owns no aircraft capable of landing on and taking off from aircraft carriers. HMS Illustrious is now a floating helicopter platform. We have two of them, the other's HMS Ocean. Her Majesty's Government is currently being petitioned to propose to the United Nations that aircraft carriers be declared weapons of mass destruction and made illegal.

BaghdadBob · Post by **BaghdadBob** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:36 am

Accountable;1353012 wrote: I think it might take complete collapses of the political and economic systems before we pull back to a sane military policy.

Your a cloward-pivenite ?!?!?!?!

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:38 am

There are those people who present themselves so distastefully that, rather than convincing others that their thinking may be correct thinking, even those people who might already agree with his ideas start second-guessing their own convictions. Bob is such a person.

BaghdadBob · Post by **BaghdadBob** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:39 am

spot;1353015 wrote: You can't call HMS Illustrious an aircraft carrier, Bob, it's equipped only with helicopters. It has no aircraft. Once upon a time HMS Illustrious was an aircraft carrier but it's not now. The UK Armed Forces, as far as I'm aware, owns no aircraft capable of landing on and taking off from aircraft carriers. HMS Illustrious is now a floating helicopter platform. We have two of them, the other's HMS Ocean. Her Majesty's Government is currently being petitioned to propose to the United Nations that aircraft carriers be declared weapons of mass destruction and made illegal.

Point taken!

But thanks for finally coming to your senses and agreeing with the rest of it.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:41 am

BaghdadBob;1353018 wrote: Your a cloward-pivenite ?!?!?!?!

Dunno. Maybe, only with different ends in mind. Is it better to preserve a nation or an ideal? I'm sure the same question came up with all revolutionaries. I'm sure it also entered Abe Lincoln's mind.

BaghdadBob · Post by **BaghdadBob** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:43 am

Accountable;1353019 wrote: There are those people who present themselves so distastefully that, rather than convincing others that their thinking may be correct thinking, even those people who might already agree with his ideas start second-guessing their own convictions. Bob is such a person.

If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking.

~ Gen George Patton

Post by **spot** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:48 am

Accountable;1353022 wrote: I'm sure it also entered Abe Lincoln's mind.You're not one of those who feels the world would have been a better place without him, then?

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:49 am

BaghdadBob;1353023 wrote: If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking.

~ Gen George PattonYou missed the point, but I'll do something you seem never to. I'll clarify. It's not about people not thinking alike, it's about presenting yourself as such a douchebag that to agree with you makes one feel slimy.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:51 am

Bruv;1353010 wrote: I just wonder why an apparently intelligent person needs to call their President a silly name ?It appears to be an involuntary Tourette's type tic. I don't think he can see it coming.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:56 am

spot;1353024 wrote: You're not one of those who feels the world would have been a better place without him, then?
I'm guessing you've misinterpreted many negative opinions of Lincoln's actions.

Lincoln decided it was more important to keep a country together than to honor the ideals under which the nation was created. That has nothing to do with whether the world would have been better or worse.

BaghdadBob · Post by **BaghdadBob** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:57 am

Accountable;1353025 wrote: You missed the point, but I'll do something you seem never to. I'll clarify. It's not about people not thinking alike, it's about presenting yourself as such a douchebag that to agree with you makes one feel slimy.

One of these days political correctness is going to get somebody killed - again. It will not have been necessary.

One more thing, I'm glad I've got you questioning your beliefs. I hope you continue to do it every day.

Post by **spot** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:18 am

Accountable;1353028 wrote: I'm guessing you've misinterpreted many negative opinions of Lincoln's actions.Lincolns apparent opinions are what grate, as far as actions went he pretty much had to do what a man has to do. I'm not at all convinced he had to say some of the things he said though. And it would be very hard to misinterpret his meaning.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:51 am

BaghdadBob;1353029 wrote: One of these days political correctness is going to get somebody killed - again. It will not have been necessary.It's not political correctness. It's smarmy comments and being needlessly belligerent. There's a difference.

BaghdadBob wrote: One more thing, I'm glad I've got you questioning your beliefs. You haven't gotten me doing anything. My point was in no was praise for you. What you do risks knocking people off right thinking for fear they might be perceived to be like you. Sort of like when people voted for Affirmative Action to avoid being labeled racist.

In other words, you do your cause harm.

BaghdadBob · Post by **BaghdadBob** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 12:05 pm

Accountable;1353035 wrote: It's not political correctness.

That's x-zackly what it is.

You haven't gotten me doing anything.

Uh huh. Have somebody specific in mind?

even those people who might already agree with his ideas start second-guessing their own convictions.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 12:11 pm

BaghdadBob;1353029 wrote: One of these days political correctness is going to get somebody killed - again. It will not have been necessary.

One more thing, I'm glad I've got you questioning your beliefs. I hope you continue to do it every day.You classify respect as political correctness? Have you questioned that belief?

You have pretty good command of language and facts in some discussions, but you lack sophistication, and that compromises your personal integrity and how others take you.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 12:24 pm

You have pretty good command of language and facts in some discussions, but you lack sophistication, and that compromises your personal integrity and how others take you

In short he's saying you're ignern't.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 12:30 pm

Scrat;1353040 wrote: In short he's saying you're ignern't.I'm saying he's intelligent and witty and fun and I like him to death, and there is no reason or need for him or anyone to compromise his many pleasant attributes with conserv-a-speak dogma.

Accountable · Post by **Accountable** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:22 pm

BaghdadBob;1353036 wrote: Uh huh. Have somebody specific in mind?Those that read these posts with their opinions only partially formed, looking for confirmation or further information. I've been challenging my opinions for many years, honing, altering and improving them so that I can explain and defend them. I never understood why someone would use theirs as a bludgeon to chase people away - as if to say "They're my beliefs and you can't have them!"

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Sun Feb 06, 2011 4:26 pm

I'm saying he's intelligent and witty and fun and I like him to death, and there is no reason or need for him or anyone to compromise his many pleasant attributes with conserv-a-speak dogma.

The way I see it is his dogma is because of ignorance. He lives in a very small world. IMO.

He wouldn't even have started this thread if he knew what really goes on between east and west and just how wise our government has been in its dealings in this case with Russia. Make no mistake, Russia has America by the short hairs and some people understand that you have to cut deals to keep everyone happy and to progress. Especially in this case.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:07 am

His hero still hasn't been given a trial yet. Seems you're innocent until proven guilty unless you annoy the establishment.

WikiLeaks's alleged source Bradley Manning held in 'punitive' conditions | World news | The Guardian

Maybe they'll hoping he'll claim insanity as a defence.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Tue Feb 08, 2011 10:35 am

Scrat;1353074 wrote: The way I see it is his dogma is because of ignorance. He lives in a very small world. IMO.

He wouldn't even have started this thread if he knew what really goes on between east and west and just how wise our government has been in its dealings in this case with Russia. Make no mistake, Russia has America by the short hairs and some people understand that you have to cut deals to keep everyone happy and to progress. Especially in this case.So what, Scrat, that's how we learn, through dialogue. Don't ridicule others when they may not have all the facts, inform them respectfully. After all, I'd bet you don't know everything either. Bob is willing to put himself out there right or wrong and he deserves credit for that Besides, it increases activity in the forum.

Scrat · Post by **Scrat** » Tue Feb 08, 2011 12:21 pm

So what, Scrat, that's how we learn, through dialogue. Don't ridicule others when they may not have all the facts, inform them respectfully.

Or criticize in a constructive manner. Only one problem, he doesn't care. Not that it really matters, this is basically a game anyway.