US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-08-2013, 06:01 AM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
On the whole I think its a good thing nobody died during the fires. Its also a good thing for the planet and every living thing on it that a weapon of mass destruction has been taken out of commission.

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bemore's post
10-08-2013, 02:13 PM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
(10-08-2013 06:01 AM)bemore Wrote:  On the whole I think its a good thing nobody died during the fires. Its also a good thing for the planet and every living thing on it that a weapon of mass destruction has been taken out of commission.

An attack sub is not a WMD. It is a tactical weapon used to interdict ships and subs.
It has limited ground attack capability - non-nuclear cruise missiles.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2013, 02:20 PM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
(10-08-2013 02:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  An attack sub is not a WMD. It is a tactical weapon used to interdict ships and subs.
It has limited ground attack capability - non-nuclear cruise missiles.

[Image: and0424.web_.jpg]

You can forgive the users classification when the bar is set SO LOW and so arbitrarily. Dodgy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes PoolBoyG's post
10-08-2013, 02:24 PM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
(10-08-2013 02:20 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  
(10-08-2013 02:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  An attack sub is not a WMD. It is a tactical weapon used to interdict ships and subs.
It has limited ground attack capability - non-nuclear cruise missiles.

[Image: and0424.web_.jpg]

You can forgive the users classification when the bar is set SO LOW and so arbitrarily. Dodgy

No, I don't forgive muddying the waters with the misuse of terms.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2013, 03:32 PM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
(10-08-2013 02:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(10-08-2013 02:20 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  [Image: and0424.web_.jpg]

You can forgive the users classification when the bar is set SO LOW and so arbitrarily. Dodgy

No, I don't forgive muddying the waters with the misuse of terms.

No. You are right. The official definition of a weapon of mass destruction is chemical, biological, radiological or Nuclear.

Im still happy though that the sub which approximately (from googling various sources) costs around $2 billion, that carries multiple cruise missiles that cost around $1,000,000 each is now out of commission.

For no matter how much I use these symbols, to describe symptoms of my existence.
You are your own emphasis.
So I say nothing.

-Bemore.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes bemore's post
10-08-2013, 06:50 PM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
(10-08-2013 03:32 PM)bemore Wrote:  
(10-08-2013 02:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, I don't forgive muddying the waters with the misuse of terms.

No. You are right. The official definition of a weapon of mass destruction is chemical, biological, radiological or Nuclear.

Im still happy though that the sub which approximately (from googling various sources) costs around $2 billion, that carries multiple cruise missiles that cost around $1,000,000 each is now out of commission.

I'm not.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2013, 08:42 PM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
I can sympathize with the seamen. Setting fire to my ship crossed my mind several times. I'm just smart enough not to fucking do it. Whatever...he is SCREEEWED! And rightfully so. Fucking bubbleheads!

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2013, 09:58 PM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
(10-08-2013 08:42 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I can sympathize with the seamen. Setting fire to my ship crossed my mind several times. I'm just smart enough not to fucking do it. Whatever...he is SCREEEWED! And rightfully so. Fucking bubbleheads!

He's sunk.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-08-2013, 10:09 PM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
(10-08-2013 09:58 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(10-08-2013 08:42 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I can sympathize with the seamen. Setting fire to my ship crossed my mind several times. I'm just smart enough not to fucking do it. Whatever...he is SCREEEWED! And rightfully so. Fucking bubbleheads!

He's sunk.

[Image: bhKp2.gif]

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Light's post
10-08-2013, 11:52 PM
RE: US Navy Seaman sets fire to a submarine!
(08-08-2013 01:10 AM)Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver Wrote:  
(07-08-2013 11:42 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  Al Qaeda has a navy?

No, but the US Navy has a selfish douchebag....

Agreed but that still does not answer the question of exactly what or who requires this strong as ever "demand" for attack submarines? Or is it simply the military industrial complex seeking to maintain its profit margin?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: