Nuts!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by GoneBezerk, Feb 14, 2012.

  1. GoneBezerk
    Offline

    GoneBezerk BANNED

    Joined:
    May 14, 2011
    Messages:
    7,603
    Thanks Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +495
    Obamination floated the idea of cutting our nuclear arsenal by 80% to the Pentagon.

    The response back to the White House from the Pentagon...."Nuts!"
     
  2. occupied
    Offline

    occupied Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    Messages:
    16,407
    Thanks Received:
    2,247
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,731
    Was it really? I doubt it.
     
  3. Sunshine
    Offline

    Sunshine Trust the pie. Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    19,377
    Thanks Received:
    3,036
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Ratings:
    +3,045
    You got a link?

    Another question: What does one do with a used 'nuclear arsenal?'
     
  4. GoneBezerk
    Offline

    GoneBezerk BANNED

    Joined:
    May 14, 2011
    Messages:
    7,603
    Thanks Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +495
    Uh, the word is leaking out that Obamination floated the idea which would be a surrender order if followed by the Pentagon.

    I'm sure Gen Kehler kindly said...."This would endanger our nation if executed." Under his breath he said "Nuts."
     
  5. occupied
    Offline

    occupied Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2011
    Messages:
    16,407
    Thanks Received:
    2,247
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +5,731
    If we knew the price tag on this hideously expensive weapons system we will never use I think most of us wouldn't mind cutting them down in number.
     
  6. GoneBezerk
    Offline

    GoneBezerk BANNED

    Joined:
    May 14, 2011
    Messages:
    7,603
    Thanks Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +495
    "Used nuclear arsenal?"

    We want to have reserves if a war breaks out or enough to make other side think twice about pulling a fast one on us.

    If they have 10 bombs and you lower your numbers to 2 bombs, they might get the crazy idea of taking out your 2 bombs with say 5-6 of their bombs...then they own you. :eusa_whistle:

     
  7. GuyPinestra
    Offline

    GuyPinestra Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2012
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    667
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +669
    Yeah, that'd give us more money to dump into our 'friends' solar companies...
     
  8. Peach
    Offline

    Peach Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    17,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,709
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,966
    Some are outdated, some redundant. I doubt those opposed to cuts understand how many we have.
     
  9. California Girl
    Offline

    California Girl BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,337
    Thanks Received:
    8,960
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +8,965
    Us? Who is us?
     
  10. GoneBezerk
    Offline

    GoneBezerk BANNED

    Joined:
    May 14, 2011
    Messages:
    7,603
    Thanks Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +495
    Dumbass....the ICBM force is pretty cost efficient. The weapons last for decades and require minimum maintenance compared to tanks, ships and airplanes.

    They are the biggest bang for the buck and have kept your sorry ass protected ever since you started sucking O2.

     

Share This Page