Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.

Our Great and Glorious Leader has Spoken!

"The leaders of states who would use terrorist means against us, as well as those who would consider using in one way or another weapons of mass destruction, must understand that they would lay themselves open to a firm and adapted response on our part,"

You heard it here first!  Yep, Nuclear weapons may be used against any states sponsoring terrorist strikes against the Sovereign nation!  Damn, you just knew that Bush wanted to press that Button!  That war monger, and evil blood thirsty tyrant!  He cares nothing for collateral damage or the fallout from using such weapons!  He truly must be just like Hitler, and the world's worst Terrorist!

{Ms. Latella?  Ms. Latella! That was Jacques Chirac that said that, not Bush.}

So how many bought the first paragraph and decided "Yup!  That is What Bush would say!".  The only problem is Bush did not say that, but Jacques Chirac, the leader of that dovish nation over in Europe, the nation that America should take its queue from according to John Kerry and Ted {hic} Kennedy, France.  Yup!  That Jacques Chirac!  Who has yet to feel the sting of a true terrorist attack, but is ready to nuke half the word in retaliation.  Yup, that France!

So let me get this straight.  If John Kerry would have won in 2004, and followed his avowed policy of following Europe, and when Osama Bin Laden hits us again, then the supporters of Kerry are saying that a nuclear response would be right and proper.  And that we should do it?

Right?  And they call Bush the terrorist!  Seems we were saved from a terrorist president by the American Electorate.

The statement from Chirac does not surprise me.  Since that would be the only way they could retaliate anyway.  Terrorist are not afraid of the backs of soldiers running away.


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jan 23, 2006

Doesn't bother me whether it was Prs. Bush, Chirac, Kerry, Clinton or Gandhi. The fact is, as soon as a country buys or develops a weapon, they are putting it on the table. That doesn't mean it WILL be used, but if the threat is there, so is the reality of its use.

Getting back to the serious, you are correct.  If tehre is no intent to use them, then the stockpiles are virtually useless, much like the Maginot line was.

2 Pages1 2