([personal profile] catscradle Dec. 11th, 2002 10:39 am)
Correctly me if I'm wrong, but doesn't our first strike policy state that we cannot use nuclear weapons unless we have been attacked first with nuclear weapons? According to the Bush administration, we can use them if biological or chemical weapons are used against us. Any weapon of mass destruction can call down our nuclear arsenal. WTF???

U.S. warns potential enemies: Retaliation could include nukes

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Bush administration is issuing a reminder of its policy that warns any nation using weapons of mass destruction against the United States or its allies that it will face massive retaliation, perhaps with nuclear weapons.

Read more


A few days ago I read an article in the Denver Post where World War II was accidentally typo-ed as WWIII. I'm wondering if it wasn't just a Fruedian slip =P

From: [identity profile] butterfly-soul.livejournal.com


Yeah, I saw that, too. Honestly, talk about MAD.

...Now I have to think of something for which STARKRAVINGLUNATIC could be an an acronym.

From: [identity profile] stakebait.livejournal.com


EEEPPP!

This man is out of his tiny little mind, and he's going to kill hundreds of thousands of people, not to mention fucking up the environment for all the things that aren't people. And that's the *best* case scenario.

Does it have to be a crime, per se? Can you impeach a president for being Bug Fuck Nuts?

Mer, thinking my D&D group, which wants to move to New Zealand, had a point.
.

Profile

catscradle

Most Popular Tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags