General Chat / WWIII

I agree Israel should defend itself but this is sheer overkill. They blatently took this as an oppatunity to settle old scores with Lebannon and demolish the place.

Absolutely right. That's exactly what's happening.

This isnt an attack on a terrorist organisation, it has become an attack on another sovreign state.

Almost. This IS an attack on a terrorist organization that happens to be hiding in another sovereign state, excep that right now, Israel doesn't care if it invades another country, just so long as they get their guys.

I'm pretty sure Israel is not unfriendly with Lebanon (wouldn't make sense, since Lebanon's got a relatively new democratic government). But Israel knows they can go after Hezbollah in Lebanon and not really face any repercussions, so they're stomping through in what I like to call "The American Way" (plow through and worry about the details later).

I find it understandable, but not condonable. There's a difference between the two.

HEZBOLLAH DO NOT CARE ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE.

Or Lebenon for that matter. Lebenon doesn't have the resources to do anything about Hezbollah because their entire millitary consists of a seven year old kid who grew up watching Commando and a modified Dodge with a REALLY loud speaker system.

ISRAEL ALSO, DOES NOT CARE ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE.
And also, about how many Lebonese people they kill in an attempt to get at Hezbollah.
HEZBOLLAH AND ISRAEL CARE ONLY ABOUT CARS AND MONEY.

At the same time that the Lebanese aren't the same as Hezbolla, haven't the Lebanese people put their differences aside and sided with the terrorist organization to take down Israel? I'm sure it's a byproduct of the war, but if the people nationalistically side with Hezbolla, I really don't know what to think.

No, they have like one Hezbollah dude in their government. They also have a disproportionately high number of Christians.
So, you know.
Lebenon is totally a front for the Vatican.
I'm getting all this from AtEase, so you know it's reliable shit, all.

Everyone stop talking about Al-Qaeda like it's some sort of terrorist organisation or something. I hate when people do that.

Edited by catachresistant, 23 July 2006 - 10:50 PM.

Holy shit. Can we give git some kind of posts of the year award.

This topic could go up for Thread Of The Year.

But I do like the Post Of The Year award idea. I'd like to go dig up some good ones.

Also, Ace, when you have fire burning for a couple of hours, the structural members will burn. That weakened the columns enough to cause buckling and structural failure, which produced an initial collapse that sent a shock through the building that initiated the "second" collapse (all of this happening continuously enough to look like one basic collapse).

The WTCs were built with the shit to withstand a fire. The steel they used can't melt until its at a temp of around 2000+ I think. And with the carbon, shown by the black clouds after the crash, cannot possibly reach that temp to melt it. Imma look more into it and figure out what the actual numbers are but keep it in mind.

The whole thing is crazy.

And ACE, you can't call it crap. Just because the gov. didnt say it dont mean it didnt happen. Its not crap. Maybe the gov. is saying "crap" and the Loose Change shit it real. Its crazy though.

_________________

And Micool, is that supposed to represent percent? I think thats a bunch of bullshit too. No way over 50% of the US approves of Bush. Them are prolly gov poles. Most not government funded poles say his approval rating is around 30 sumthin %. Which is more believable.

Edited by RMM, 24 July 2006 - 01:03 AM.

http://www.pollingre...com/BushJob.htm

Yea, none of the numerous polls have him above a 41% job approval rating for the most recent polls. Quite sad really. I guess he's just trying to follow his father's footsteps.

And Miccols chart only goes to the beginning of 2004, that's why it's way higher.

Edited by eman, 24 July 2006 - 01:27 AM.

Sniff: Topic of the year...Brings a tear to mine eye.

The WTCs were built with the shit to withstand a fire. The steel they used can't melt until its at a temp of around 2000+ I think.

I can't claim absolute sureness about this, but I'm pretty sure when you have a nice big airplane crash into a building full of electrical/mechanical systems that can burn (like all skyscrapers have), a fire *can* get up to that hot. Steel will melt after constant exposure to heat. It will take a while, but in all buildings, fire ratings are designed to ideally get people out of the building before the structural members fail.

It's not like it gets hot and then the steel instantly collapses; it's prolonged exposure (in case no one was clear on what I mean).

I've had a lecture on this by a very knowledgeable structural engineer who is highly respected in his field. I'm pretty sure I'm right (or rather this information and explanation I'm relaying to you is right).

Just to support Cork's theory on the WTC...

The report concludes that the fireproofing on the Twin Towers' steel infrastructures was blown off by the initial impact of the planes and that, if this had not occurred, the towers would likely have remained standing. The fires weakened the trusses supporting the floors, making the floors sag. The sagging floors pulled on the exterior steel columns to the point where exterior columns bowed inward. With the damage to the core columns, the buckling exterior columns could no longer support the buildings, causing them to collapse. In addition, the report asserts that the towers' stairwells were not adequately reinforced to provide emergency escape for people above the impact zones. NIST stated that the final report on the collapse of WTC 7 will appear in a separate report.[53]

[53]"Final Reports of the Federal Building and Fire Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster"

Now, back on topic....

Yeah they went with drywall as the fireproofing material because it was cheaper, instead of the more expensive but more reliable stuff (fire-resistant foam? I dunno) and the drywall got completely obliterated by the impact of the planes. There was a story about a few people that were trapped in an elevator somewhere below the impact in one of the towers, and they were able to budge the doors open and then break through the layer of drywall in front of them with a window-cleaning squegee and by kicking it, and then get out. Stuff wasn't that strong.

Let me tell you something. Fire can get that hot, believe me, especilly with an abudance of combustible materials.
Further, those planes were carrying lots of jet fuel, which also is explosive, and will burn like a mother fucker. It is extremely plausible that the temperatures in that building were high enough to melt steel.

Steel will melt after constant exposure to heat. It will take a while

I dont think a lil over an hour counts as constant exposure...
One was less than an hour too.

In any case, no, I don't believe our government is behind the 9/11 attacks. There's no logic behind that - no reasoning for the US to attack itself

There was also reasoning for Churchill to tell the US Pearl Habour was going to be bombed.

But he didn't.

I dont think a lil over an hour counts as constant exposure...
One was less than an hour too.

You stand in fire for an hour then tell me that again.

Actually, stand about fifty feet away from a fire like that for an hour.

Trust me, an hour's enough if the heat is hot enough, and in the WTC case, it was.




Anyway, back to the topic. Sorta. The U.S. was feeling arrogant at the time. I'm not sure Churchill telling us Pearl Harbor would be bombed would haven changed anything, to be honest. But was the leader of another country. It's a tad different.



Anyway, more bombings and rocket firing today. Two Israelies killed this morning by a rocket, four Lebanese civilians killed in a bombing raid.

It sucks.

There was also reasoning for Churchill to tell the US Pearl Habour was going to be bombed.

But he didn't.

ACTUALLY...

Why do you think the main Carriers were out on manoeuvres?

The Churchill told the US Government who then moved their crucial ships out of Pearl Harbour so that they could respond to the attack.

Up until then, the public were't too keen on just jumping in. The perfect excuse for the US to enter the war.

An un-proven conspiracy on my part, yes based entirely on speculation.

I just heard on the news on the way home that a hezbollah leader is quoted as saying that they[hezbollah] never expected this type of response from Israel. I sort of edited that down to get the gist of it. The whole quote is a little longer, but I mean holy shit.

Lovely.

Wow, not even America would have made a blunder like that.

There goes that. Israel just embarrassed themselves and ensured they won't be getting much support now, outside of the United States.

It's pathetic at this point. Israel's kinda like the kid who's got a backyard full of firecrackers and is tossing them randomly into the next yard at the neighbor who keeps on firing spitballs at him. If this whole thing was like a joke, it would have been killed, buried, exhumed, mutilated, and reburied about seven times by now.

It's a good thing our President hasn't expressed support for the Israeli's actions. Oh, wait....