Terrorist gas attack.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by El_Guero, Feb 20, 2007.

  1. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
  2. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    'WMD' is an accromym for 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'.

    Somebody is still making WMDs in or for Iraq terrrorists.
     
  3. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Someone exploded a chlorine tanker, no more of a WMD than the 9-11 airplanes were.
     
  4. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Both methods were intended to kill a large group of people using weapons for massive destruction.

    I do not think that the dead people are concerned if the weapons were WMD or WSD. . .
     
  5. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Huh? The airplanes on 9/11 did not cause mass destruction? That's a weird view.:eek:
     
  6. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you're saying any country that make airplanes are making WMDs?
     
  7. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
     
  8. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Naw, just saying that you have a weird view. However, I guess if I followed a politically correct view of WMD's I'd have to agree with you.

    Personally, I never did get the definition. I think it's silly. It's like saying that the A-bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima were more deadly than the fire-bombings of Tokyo. Both were horrible. In WW1 the machine gun was a WMD--but who would call it one today? Silliness in my mind. A weapon is a weapon.

    God bless.
     
  9. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    What, that trucks and airplanes are not WMDs?

    That's a technically correct, not politically correct. In fact, the airplanes of 9-11 didn't belong to the terrorists - they had box cutters. Box cutters are not WMDs by anyone's definiton.

    Individually, they were, compared bomb to bomb.

    In WWI, mustard gas was a WMD and still is today. Point is, airplanes and trucks are not usually weapons at all - and it isn't clear who the tankers belonged to, so to say that the terrorists were supplied with a WMD is incorrect.
     
  10. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Yep. I'm considered an expert in self defense by some. In my seminars and classes I teach that everything can be a weapon. This is a teaching of the Chinese martial arts--ever see what Jackie Chan uses for weapons in his movies? An airplane is a weapon if you force it to be flown into a building. In my mind it is then a so-called "WMD" if it causes mass destruction.

    The whole WMD definition is a political construct, not a linguistic one. Not being a political animal, but being a linguist, I look at the definition as being ridiculous in real life, where common sense is actually used.
    So what's wrong with this picture? In 1995 the AUM terrorists used sarin gas, labeled a WMD by the politicians, to kill just 12 people. (I was almost caught up in a second attack the next day, not commonly reported in the American media because no one was killed.) However, terrorists force airplanes to be flown into buildings and kill multitudes and cause massive destruction--but that is not called an attack by a WMD. (And it is patently obvious that they were in control of the airplanes themselves, since they trained to fly.)
     
  11. Daisy

    Daisy
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, but this is the Politics Forum where common sense is not always welcome. I agree with you about its being a political construct, totally.
     
  12. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chlorine gas, BTW, is absurdly easy to generate and store in compressed form. It isn't very effective at causing huge casualties, compared to more specific gases, but it still works.
     
  13. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Huh?? I wandered into the Politics Forum? I'm lost!! [​IMG]
     
  14. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why is the trashing of two buildings considered mass destruction?
     
  15. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey bro!

    God is great!

    That is when I landed in Japan . . . you should have seen the eyes of the soldiers on my flight when I explained the reality of chemical warfare . . . in enclosed spaces . . . and us being 'favored targets' by most of the 'peace loving' terrorists in the world.

    Like all of my trips to Japan - it was WAY too short.

    God bless

    Wayne

     
  16. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Galatian

    . . . If you really knew what you just wrote . . .I would applaud your words.

    :godisgood:


     
  17. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    <quote of personal attack deleted - LE>

    My skills and knowledge in self defense will not be needed in Heaven, obviously. They are needed down here, though. I don't know what you are imagining; some brawler, or violent person looking for a fight? I teach "threat avoidance," not searching for threats and picking fights.

    "Blessed be the Lord my Strength, which teacheth my hands to war and my fingers to fight." (Ps. 144:1)
     
    #17 John of Japan, Feb 22, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2007
  18. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    How many lives and skyscrapers and businesses lost would it take to convince you it was mass destruction?
     
  19. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,212
    Likes Received:
    192
    Well, brother, you'll just have to make your next trip a long one! :thumbs:

    Fortunately, we don't seem to have any Islamics in our town. Their camels don't seem to like the cold and snow.
     
  20. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Anything owned by anyone, including the United States, designed pr capable of killing many, is a Weapon of Mass Destruction.
     
    #20 pinoybaptist, Feb 22, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2007

Share This Page

Loading...