It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Russia preparing for nuclear war?

page: 9
0
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by iskander
Same guys also think that romancing a woman is saying something like "I'm gonna slip my beaf in your taco."


You mean that doesn't work? Man, I'm gonna have to rethink my whole strategy....

Maybe I can tell her that I have a bigger bunker buster?





posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 07:11 PM
link   
LOL 27jd,

I'm afraid she'll just say she has "deeper bunker"!



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
Guys, it's really not hard to understand that Rogue1 is confused; look past the sources (which I've proved his strongest sources to be completely wrong and misleading in another thread).


LOL, you haven't proved anything at all - what are you talking about
I haven't even used the Bulletin to prove you wrong here LMAO.
You can't even provide one source to anything you claim, I mean come on, I feel like I'm talking to a retard.



For instance; Rogue1 stated that the US deployed a 24ish MT bomb...one of his sources detailed the history of this development.

It ended in a disaster as the plane fell apart and both test Nukes were lost.


Gawd, you are stupid, the plane had an accident - it wasn't like it fell apart due to the bombs - are you a moron LMAO.



The US never successfully deployed a bomb higher than 1MT yield; first of all there's no point...second of all the US has just not pursued it.


Another completely wrong statement, I'm starting to wonder if you're doing this on purpose, no one could be as stupid as you make yourself out to be

The US had more than a few bombs of multi-megaton yield. Maybe pictures are easier for you to understand. In this graph high yield weapons are thos over 4.5MT.



U.S. nuclear warheads with yield over 4.5 megatons (table)

Actually read the whol site, you will learn a hell of alot nd stop wasting my time with BS.



There's a big difference between Deployment and Development; Rogue1 is a child with a box of matches...he doesn't know what he's talking about and it's observable through-out his posts by the words he chooses to describe an event.


You really are stupid, you either can't read or can't assimilate information
You obviously don't understand what deployed means


Why don't you look up what deployed means


[edit on 16-3-2006 by rogue1]


You know what's incomprehensible about you? You will post information that has no citations: well your MK-41 has a citation it's a "the Secret History of Nuclear Weapons" Book...I'm sure it just has pilfered all the Top Secret Information unreleased by the US or Russia and has all the answers


Your site doesn't cite the "high yield graph" you presented so who knows where that came from.

How about you try providing real evidence that isn't from some website that is reliable (i.e. the authors can actually speak Russian when concerning Russian Nuclear Posture).

Because you're making everyone here sick by pretnding to know anything just because you read a lot of websites....you probably believe in Aliens visiting the Earth too...



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
You know what's incomprehensible about you? You will post information that has no citations: well your MK-41 has a citation it's a "the Secret History of Nuclear Weapons" Book...I'm sure it just has pilfered all the Top Secret Information unreleased by the US or Russia and has all the answers


You are very tired, if you read the links provided, there are many sources. Once again you provide no information yourself just a rant , which is wrong as usual



Your site doesn't cite the "high yield graph" you presented so who knows where that came from.


Erm, it is in the link I provided below, are you blind ? or are you just trolling and making yourself look even more stupid. If you really wanted to know where the picture came from, you could just click on its properties, obviously too stupid to do that or click the link


Once again for the dopey : www.johnstonsarchive.net...


How about you try providing real evidence that isn't from some website that is reliable (i.e. the authors can actually speak Russian when concerning Russian Nuclear Posture).


How about you provide some evidence. Nowhere have you provided any, even after repeated requests. You're hardly credible are you

Got know idea what you're talking about speaking Russian for.


Because you're making everyone here sick by pretnding to know anything just because you read a lot of websites....you probably believe in Aliens visiting the Earth too...


What is obvious is that I know far more than you. It seems most people would know more than you - I hvae proven you wrong time and time again. All you can do is post an uninformative rant, nothing more. You are as good as useless.
You are extraordinarily childish.



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   
BOTTOM LINE. Grow up children. Can we not converse anymore. If you have to look up converse. This is NOT ATS material.

Closed.




top topics
 
0
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join