Posted August 30, 2007 i guess posting a picture of bush with a nimbus wasn't obvious enough. now i come to think of it though, chavez is doing almost exactly the same thing, changing the constitution so he can stay in office for an unlimited amount of terms. so maybe, just maybe, it ain't so funny at all. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/help/3681938.stm here's a vid. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 30, 2007 i guess posting a picture of bush with a nimbus wasn't obvious enough. now i come to think of it though, chavez is doing almost exactly the same thing, changing the constitution so he can stay in office for an unlimited amount of terms. so maybe, just maybe, it ain't so funny at all. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/help/3681938.stm here's a vid. lol ok sorry then with chavez it really is bad news. In america however it would be impossible to do that unless it was a very unique situation with most of the countrys consent I think Roosevelt pulled it off? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 30, 2007 it won't be too long before george suspends the comming elections on bases of national emergency. "fighting each other is what the enemy wants" he'll say. george is the best. Literally made me lol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 30, 2007 i guess posting a picture of bush with a nimbus wasn't obvious enough. now i come to think of it though, chavez is doing almost exactly the same thing, changing the constitution so he can stay in office for an unlimited amount of terms Can't British Prime Ministers also stay in office for an unlimited number of terms? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 30, 2007 Can't British Prime Ministers also stay in office for an unlimited number of terms? Yes but they arent the executive so its a bit different. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 30, 2007 i actually disagree with "they lack techonolgy" with regards to Iran. wernt they supplying huzbullah (according to americans intel) which halted isreals advancement last year? Arnt they also blamed by the US that they are training iraqis to make Explosive formed projectiles which have a 80% chance of killing troops in armoured veihcals? did they also not carry out test runs on what was apparently the fastest water/land missile in the world? In additiuon, i actually technology is no longer as big advantage as it was before. eg. would be iraq, afghanistan, lebanon, syria can all hold grounds and cause large damage to well organised and equiped armies with modified weapons from the 1970s Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 30, 2007 The US want regime change so that gives them a reason to invade. dont think it will happen though. The US and its allies cannot stop the resistance in iraq and Iran would be much tougher. As for Saudi Arabia, them dictators would support the US against Iran. The Saud family has always been a bunch of traitors. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 31, 2007 Not reading anything but 1st and 2nd post. Iran have anti-britain protests every day - especially with those kidnappings. They have nuclear enrichment programs, terrorist organisations and hate the Uk to boot. Adding messing up Iraq and Afganistan they are next to get there arses kicked and they are asking for it. PS the Prime Minister is a tit Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 31, 2007 Iran have anti-britain protests every day Really? Do you have a cite for these daily anti-britain protests? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 31, 2007 I think that if America's involved, then we shouldn't.....We'd lose more men that way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 31, 2007 NK have nukes, no chance we'll go to war with them. I dunno, I thought they made one nuke the size of a bus and have already detonated it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted August 31, 2007 Really? Do you have a cite for these daily anti-britain protests? Ok I might have exaggerated the daily. but it happens Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 1, 2007 Not reading anything but 1st and 2nd post. Iran have anti-britain protests every day - especially with those kidnappings. They have nuclear enrichment programs, terrorist organisations and hate the Uk to boot. Adding messing up Iraq and Afganistan they are next to get there arses kicked and they are asking for it. PS the Prime Minister is a tit One cruise missile to the nuclear station out to do it, didnt we destroy their nuclear programme last time? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 2, 2007 One cruise missile to the nuclear station out to do it, didnt we destroy their nuclear programme last time? nope it was israel that bombed iraqs nuke stations in the 1980s during the iraq/iran war. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 2, 2007 nope it was israel that bombed iraqs nuke stations in the 1980s during the iraq/iran war. Gotta love those jews Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 2, 2007 Really? Do you have a cite for these daily anti-britain protests? How dare people exercise their right to protest, we ought to bomb some freedom into those ungrateful persians! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 2, 2007 What exactly makes Hilary Clinton so great by the way. Genuine question, I honestly dont see all the fuss over her. Other then ZOMG WOMAN!!1!! Nothing makes her good. If she gets elected, it'll only be because she is a woman. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 3, 2007 Nothing makes her good. If she gets elected, it'll only be because she is a woman. i second that, id assume most of woman voters will go with her and the casual people will probably go for a name they recognise. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 3, 2007 i second that, id assume most of woman voters will go with her and the casual people will probably go for a name they recognise. Plus she's a milf. I mean come on, who wouldn't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 3, 2007 i second that, id assume most of woman voters will go with her and the casual people will probably go for a name they recognise. the fact of the matter is that women hardly ever vote for other women. ofcourse there are exceptions, motivated votes and such, but basically a woman doesn't vote for another woman if she is just picking one out. it's quite disturbing, but women are competitive to the bone. people who don't recognize clinton's obvious assets might do good reading half a word about her. she's actually quite formidable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 3, 2007 Not reading anything but 1st and 2nd post. Iran have anti-britain protests every day - especially with those kidnappings. They have nuclear enrichment programs, terrorist organisations and hate the Uk to boot. Adding messing up Iraq and Afganistan they are next to get there arses kicked and they are asking for it. PS the Prime Minister is a tit er which terrorist organisation do Iran have? please name them! Also it is not Iran who have messed up Iran and Afghanistan, instead it is the US and British invaders. How the hell can you blame Iran for the mess and misery that occupation has brought the the population in them countries. Oh and the US, UK, India, Israel have all got nuclear enrichment programs but I guess thats okay for you to accept. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 3, 2007 er which terrorist organisation do Iran have? please name them! Also it is not Iran who have messed up Iran and Afghanistan, instead it is the US and British invaders. How the hell can you blame Iran for the mess and misery that occupation has brought the the population in them countries. Oh and the US, UK, India, Israel have all got nuclear enrichment programs but I guess thats okay for you to accept. no hard feelings but only perminant members of UN council plus (first come first served baisis) are allowed weapons and neuclear energy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 3, 2007 no hard feelings but only perminant members of UN council plus (first come first served baisis) are allowed weapons and neuclear energy. What so because that is the UN policy, you think it is a fair policy?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted September 3, 2007 er which terrorist organisation do Iran have? please name them! Also it is not Iran who have messed up Iran and Afghanistan, instead it is the US and British invaders. How the hell can you blame Iran for the mess and misery that occupation has brought the the population in them countries. Oh and the US, UK, India, Israel have all got nuclear enrichment programs but I guess thats okay for you to accept. Iran sponser terrorist organisations im pretty sure thats established. They have caused trouble in Iraq for sure for their own gain they want to be the dominant regional power. The british army have found Iranian equipment used by Iraqi militants. An Iraq civil war is very benificial for them. The less countries that have it the better and a country whose President says he wants to wipe Israel off the map and holds state sponsered holocaust denial conferences shouldnt be allowed a nuke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
