Re: Poland
Posted: 22 Aug 2008, 00:35
Poland? Yeah, a nice country, we'll take it 

No he is not. He is dangerous because he is a crafty, cunning, ruthless control freak.Hoi wrote:Putin is like a russian Bush, that's very dangerous.
They are also sitting on top of the worlds largest reserves of oil and gas, mostly untapped. They have pipeline spread over europe like veins of influence. This is putins legacy.PicassoCT wrote:Russia is finnished... accept it. There Birthrate is low, there Economy is Petro, there Army is way to big for there small budget - and they try to clean there eurasian borders, because they know that the next trouble they will have- will be for shure with China..
You know the basic Rules of Free Market? What get´s to expensive, gets replaced by better Things.. as Ironically as it sounds, by flooding the worldmarket with oil, they had the Power, to keep the Carcivilisations addicted to there cheap drug, without giving most Alternatives a Try-> http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200809/termitesElkvis wrote:
They are also sitting on top of the worlds largest reserves of oil and gas, mostly untapped. They have pipeline spread over europe like veins of influence. This is putins legacy.
What? See that makes no sense. Like conservatives give a crap about the ceo of GM...tombom wrote: A true conservative would never admit that global warming existed(That is unless the CEO of General Motors said he would like to hear it)
See? Hilarious!
I meant for the average consumer, obviously not for military, mass transit, trains, planes, etc.PicassoCT wrote:Next to forgotten ? No, Sir.
I vote for opening Oil-Museums, drill Equipment to your left, Geologic Section to your Right, Corruption &Despotism Section (Including a Try-a-Torture-Chamber) right down the Hall- oh, and of course there is the Souvenirshop...
So Oil has a future, it is just not the one most GovOffs expected
Yes, practically all politicians do change their views based on public opinion.Forboding Angel wrote: TL;DR, your "joke" fails for the above reasons, mine is funny because of the fact that liberals (and hell, most repubicans in office now as well) will "Refactor" their opinions based upon what the latest NYTimes poll says.
They ARE powerful enough, but the cost for infrastructure is completely prohibitive.tombom wrote:Yes, practically all politicians do change their views based on public opinion.Forboding Angel wrote: TL;DR, your "joke" fails for the above reasons, mine is funny because of the fact that liberals (and hell, most repubicans in office now as well) will "Refactor" their opinions based upon what the latest NYTimes poll says.
and your global warming shit is so cute :3 as well as your bizarre belief that electric trains JUST AREN'T POWERFUL ENOUGH
MIRVs and fractional orbits completely negate the anti-ICBMs. (Don't worry about the mutual destruction factor.)general short-range tactical ABMs cannot intercept ICBMs, even if within range. The tactical ABM radar and performance characteristics do not allow it, as an incoming ICBM warhead moves much faster than a tactical missile warhead. However it is possible the higher performance THAAD missile could be upgraded to intercept ICBMs.
Oh goddammit,it took them a whole winter before they got over those rivers. d-day was 6th June 1944, they finally freed the Netherlands May 5, 1945. That would make the km/month liberated very low because of those rivers.The V2s were eventually dealt with by the launch sites being over-run by the rapid advance of the Allied armies through Belgium and the Netherlands.