We were just thinking the same thing at the same time. 
Sadly, evidently not.
I thought a Congressman was a Senator. How should I know. Anyways whatever he is, he is “The Man”. How can you say that a Congressman is not a reliable source of authority? What next? Obama is not an Authority to rely upon? I love Obama and anyone who puts him down I just don’t know about. As a Canadian I believe that Obama and his people are doing a fine job and if Jim says that there is something to fear about du bullets then I think he knows what he’s taking about. I have trust in our leaders and Jim is to me a very reliable source of insight. At least he took the opportunity to have the bill passed by Obama. So in fact even Obama believes in Jim, and subsequently, since the U.S voted for Obama, then the people should have trust in Obama and Jim and don’t push off the possibility that there is concern about du bullets. Where are my supporters? Somebody PLEASE, throw me a bone and support me on this. The Mod posse’s are hanging me high on this. Where are my peeps when I need them for support…
You thought a bit wrong Herman, Although they are called the two houses of Congress, the Congress, and Senate are distinct bodies. And you don’t know the difference between a Democrat, and a Republican? Really? Your response only serves to reinforce the fact that you do not bother checking facts, or details, and information when posting, and you just dig yourself in deeper. Too often your posts more resemble the Headlines of those Tabloids sold at the Shell Station next door. There is no Posse out to get you Herman, the situation you so often find yourself in is largely of your own making.
I personally have no interest in removing DU munitions from the NATO inventory, which act would serve only to diminish NATO’s conventional capability against a future enemy. If you haven’t been in the military, in a combat arm, you may not understand that point of view. When in my younger days, my only concern was to destroy the enemy we may face as quickly as possible, and take any advantage available in the process. When I laid the gunner on target, I wanted that target destroyed, in a single shot if possible. If DU makes that dream come true in the present time, great lets have more. I wish we had DU in our basic loads, it would have been very welcome. War is not a time to worry over if’s or maybe’s, the enemy will not care about the environmental impact of the weapons that they,or we use. No troops will live long enough to get sick if they are killed on the battle field for lack of proper equipment due to even more political meddling. The alternative is limited to Tactical, or Theater Nuclear munitions, my preference among those being the neutron warhead. Some small possibility of contamination by DU munitions is far better an option than the aftermath of Nuclear deployment. Operations on the Nuclear Battlefield are standard training in NATO.
There is far more to consider than just what the alarmist, or disinformation media outlets serve up in steaming piles on their websites.
Herman, you need to remember that most of the mods have spent time serving in the armed forces of their various countries, although I think only Nick was unfortunate enough to have people shooting at him at the time (I certainly never went on an Op Tour, although I have many friends who did including one who was killed in Afghanistan). That unavoidably colours our perception somewhat. Here, with DU munitions you have two options:
- Use a DU penetrator on that tank coming right at me. It’s got a 5" gun and god alone knows how many machine guns all pointing at me, but DU will kill it right away.
- I use something else which isn’t as effective on the tank. That means the tank will probably kill me right now, but hey, at least I’ve marginally reduced my risk of cancer in 30 years time!
Remember also that politicians are experts in one thing, and one thing alone: getting elected. That means when they say things like this, it isn’t coming out of some deep expertise in the subject but because they think it’ll assist with their next re-election campaign. DU is quite handy here - it’s got all the right buzzwords (“veterans”, “cancer”, “nuclear”, etc.) and the politician in question is seen to be doing something. Better yet, you need a reasonable level of education and reading to understand that it’s 99% bullshit, and just to make it perfect you can’t prove it isn’t true. The whole subject is a political wet dream.
Actually, I think the more modern smart weapons have pretty much made tactical nuclear weapons obsolete. Back in the bad old days, they were either used for very hard targets or for area targets such as attacking tank divisions. With weapons like Brimstone you can just give the smart weapon a kill box and they’ll destroy all armoured vehicles in the box, while the number of targets too hard for a modern penetrating smart bomb is tiny. These are all weapons you can use without political issues or risk of reprisal, while nuclear weapons bring all sorts of political interference and furthermore inhibit your own operations. So while they were great back in the day, I’d actually say they’re pretty much obsolete now.
Experience.
On the specific topic of politicians not being reliable on matters nuclear, there is no better example than Bush Jnr, Blair, the then Prime Minister of my country, and many other national leaders assuring their peoples that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and that we had to go to war because of it.
The environmentally responsible and Cancer Council approved choice is (2).
Personally, I’d pick (1), but that’s only because I’m a selfish ***** and I want to survive the immediate threat to my life and at that moment I couldn’t care less about what might, just possibly, happen to me or anyone else in an uncertain future.
Same way I’d sow landmines and anything else I could get my hands on that improved my defensive or offensive capacity in a given situation, despite the fact that I know now that landmines cause terrible injuries to civilians long after the conflict is over, although that wasn’t a consideration during the Vietnam War era which was my focus. But so does other unexploded ordnance, and there’s none I wouldn’t use if available at the time if it gave me an advantage or preserved me.
ok ok. I didn’t know Tank Guy and Nick went on combat in Nam. I guess they know more from real life experience. Unless I find something really incriminating on DU I won’t persist anymore, out of respect for Tank, Pdf , Nick , but no one else. P.S> I thought Democrats meant that Republicans are democratic. Like I said before Tank guy, I don’t hear those terms that often so how should I know. If I threw out words like PC,Liberal and NDP, I bet You wouldn’t know what they mean in Canadian politics…but anyways thank you for the correction nonetheless…
You are being purposely obtuse, or you are certifiably stupid.
Either way, you are not contributing anything worthwhile to this forum with your moronic posts.
Keep it up and your time here is limited.
Morning Herman, I do know the meanings of the Political terms you’ve used. The reason that I do is simple really, I took all of 3 minutes to look them up, and learn what they were. (Wherein lies the hint ) The U.S. Democrat Party is like your NDP,though perhaps more Liberal, and is reviled by many U.S. Citizens as the very Wellspring of Villainy. The U.S. Republican Party is like your PC Party though perhaps more conservative, and is reviled by many U.S. Citizens as the very Wellspring of Villainy. If I were to label myself Politically, I would be closer to a Libertarian. A little research goes a long way, something important for you to reflect upon.
herman, a good therapist might, with your diligent effort, help you to at least include yourself in the above list.
Please know we’ll all be pulling for you! Good luck and best wishes!
Ardee, I did not know that you represented all the hundreds and hundreds of members on the forum when you said:“We” Do you get self satisfaction from your boring life to criticize and complain about me just because I have the balls to not accept conformity in life? I only convey discussion. Forums are meant to discuss issues. I and many others learn from discussion. If no one ever ever ever objects then is that not what Hitler would have wanted? Ardee, Personal Insults are not conducive to our relationship. Can we please discuss our issues professionally and forgive us that may not be as war smart as our Mods…thx Ardee…
Now I accepted your apology once before but I won’t be so
Herman, you complain when Ardee says “we’ll all”, and then a couple sentences further on, you do much the same thing in using the words “I, and many others”. Sorry Herman, you can’t have it both ways. You didn’t seem to take in the warning given by RS* in post #130, so I will repeat it for your edification,do please be sure that you let your non conformist “balls” know as well." you are not contributing anything worthwhile to this forum with your moronic posts.
Keep it up, and your time here is limited. " This warning now comes from both of us. You have in the past received a great deal of leeway here, after your last couple vacations, that leeway has run out. Understand this Herman,and mark it well.
herman, I am shocked at your attitude. I merely noted that by your own words, you seemed to be lacking self-respect in your decision making. While I appreciate the possible reasons for your self-assessment, I would like to assure you that life is much richer if you can muster at least some self-respect, and I was trying to kindly encourage you to get the help you need.
So far as my choice of the word “we” goes, I confess you have me puzzled. So far as I know, “we” means more than one, and could be as small a number as, say, two. I was taking it for granted, that out of the “hundreds and hundreds of members” here, that at least one other person besides myself would wish you well. I can only assume it’s your lack of self-respect that might be leading you to have doubts about that. I realize you may also have been mislead by my use of the word “all,” but I can assure you (without getting into too deep a discussion of English language and word modifiers) that whatever the number of well-wishers “we” turns out to be, we will, in fact, all be wishing you well.
Your plea to discuss issues “professionally” is an expression on your part that perhaps captures exactly what the last two pages of so of this thread has been about – though I think “substantively” or other words might have been a better choice. You don’t really seem to understand the concept of credible, unbiased sources of information, for instance. We have been trying to help you achieve exactly the learning you claim to desire, and your response has been consistently combative, insistent on the correctness of your preconceptions and misinformation, and, in fact, a demonstrated total UNwillingness to learn. Right down to the last, you refuse to admit any error or lack of understanding on your part, stating only that you “won’t persist” in your insistence on being correct. And honestly, that’s pretty sad.
If you are feeling that others besides yourself are showing you a lack of respect, you might wish to scroll back through all the pages of this thread since you joined in, and try to identify where such practices began. I think you may then find your finger to be pointing at yourself. For example, my initial posts to you were quite polite and proper, while your relies were…less than that. As was advised above, you shouldn’t try to blame others for messes you put yourself into. If you behave in an abrasive manner, don’t be surprised when others reciprocate.
And you are welcome for my well-wishes and educational services, and I hope you do get yourself under control before the above warning by RS* comes to fruition. I would, however, advise you not to complain too much about his choice of words, which are certainly much more direct and to the point than mine.
Good luck herman, and I sincerely hope you get your troubles straightened out, with help, or by yourself. Tootles!
Tankgeezer, you posted while I was typing. Sorry if I wound up beating the point into the ground.
ok Ardee…point taken.and as for RS, if he bans me again for lively discussion, then I guess that will bring the membership from 5, down to 4…and we all know 5 is better than 4, so i apologize if it means preventing RS from being trigger happy as usual. p.s. Whats with the Tootles…its not exactly manly…maybe you mean Peace out or maybe catch you on the Flip Side…or Maybe Once In Awhile Crocodile (I think the later, RS would like)
OK OK Tank Guy!!!.In fact I will not contribute anymore EXCEPT for the Off topic threads…Is that ok with youÉ Am I allowed to post in there if It doesnt bother you..and subsequently will you visit me once in awhile over there....É..I think my offer is fair. But mark my words, dont feel lonely if you don`t see me around lately! I know I will be missed!
Sorry Herman, but playing at being the victim isn’t going to work for you. Your behavior determines your future here, continue as you have in this thread, and you won’t have one.
Well, herman, I freely acknowledge your greater knowledge and expertise about what constitutes being “unmanly.” Since the expression seems to have aroused your interest, I’ll explain I used the phrase the same way it often is: a humorous way of saying good-bye, laughing at you, and dissing you at the same time. Sorry if that disappoints you.
Your inability to take the point you claim to have taken is quite amusing. I do wonder, when you were growing up, how many times your momma had to tell you the stove was hot before you stopped touching it. I don’t think you’ll be with us very long: you just can’t seem to help yourself, can you?
Good luck with life, herman. I’ve enjoyed laughing, but I doubt I’ll bother with you any more. Tootles!