Romney takes hit over Palestine gaffe

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by sir_slide
reply to post by daaskapital
 


Political suicide...I couldnt believe what he said, even regarding the other comments this guy really doesn't get it, if anything at all.


Except he is completely right. There will be no peace in the region until someone tells the Palestinians to stop being terrorists.


...or tells the Israeli's to stop being terrorists.




posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by snarky412

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by daaskapital
 


This is the part that bothers me; Source article; www.theaustralian.com.au...


"I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say there's just no way," Mr Romney said.

"You move things along the best way you can. You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognise that this is going to remain an unsolved problem -- and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it."


Talk about being a man with a plan???? No wonder you can't get him to give any specifics, he doesn't have any! Just punt the ball down-field and hope that someone on your team picks it up and runs with it, now that's what I call a plan.


Romney doesn't know what to do until someone else tells him what to do, period. Bush puppet on steroids!!!


Just food for thought for those against Romney's views to help Israel:

[Former Pres. Bill Clinton's words]

The former U.S. leader, whose energetic efforts to broker an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal collapsed, also urged both sides to end their decades-old conflict, saying they cannot escape their common future.

"We are either going to hurt each other or we are going to help each other," he said of the two foes. "Divorce is not an option."

While president, Clinton had a close personal involvement in Middle East peacemaking. He presided over the signing of the historic first agreement between Israel and the Palestinians in 1993, and seven years later, he brought the two sides closer than ever before to a final deal.

But talks broke down in late 2000, and soon after, tensions ignited into years of deadly fighting.

The former U.S. president remains extremely popular in Israel, however, because he is perceived as being a genuine friend.


www.haaretz.com...

I realize a lot of democrats are waiting to pounce on any thing Romney says but when you have a former Dem. Pres. with very high favorable ratings siding with Israel, I can't help but wonder why no one is bashing Clinton for his support.

Is he, Clinton, a moron too as another poster stated of Romney for supporting Israel???

As I'm one who voted for Obummer in 2008, his Foreign Policies are terrible and needs some serious help.
So how can Romney be any worse when our current president isn't doing to hot himself???

I'm an Independent and do not like our choices for President.
I can not re-elect Obummer .....he has been nothing but a huge disappointment as a leader for our country. IMO.

So, I guess that leaves the "Other Guy"....


Oh...I'll bash Clinton for supporting Israel. Just like I'll bash both Bush's, the Reagan Admin, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, Richard Nixon, LBJ, JFK, Eisenhower, and Harry S. Truman. I'll give Obama a little bit of credit for telling our warships to shoot to kill any threatening Israeli aircraft and calling for a return to the 1967 borders...but the fact that we still give that country money SICKENS me.

We ought to throw up a blockade around the country and tell them nothing goes in or out until the Israeli's stop acting like animals. It's the only form of intervention in the Middle East that I'll support is action and/or sanctions against Israel.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by wascurious

Originally posted by Mr Tranny
There is people on here that talk about a conspiracy against freedom of speech. I think the people that conspirers against that freedom are already right on this board.
Could you perhaps try writing your post again but in English this time? After trying to make sense of your made up words and terrible noun/verb agreement I see you are right about one thing. The stupid really does burn. Sorry I have no idea what you are attempting to say to me. I just want to hand you back your post with red ink all over it instead of try and interpret it.


LOL. Yes...the "stupid does burn"...whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Sweet, now show me where these garage amateurs created WEAPONS GRADE plutonium. Thanks.


Ummm...that's the point. An H-bomb/missile can yield an explosion 100-200X MORE POWERFUL than anything that can possibly be done with uranium or plutonium.

The most powerful nuclear reaction that humanity has thus far mastered is fusing deuterium or tritium. The big trick w/ an H-Bomb is to generate the plasma field to set off the chain reaction. In the early days of fusion in the 1950's we still used a fission reaction to generate that plasma. However, even right now the military is field testing a handheld unit about the size of an LED flashlight that generates a plasma beam to cauterize wounds in the fields. It's being billed as a "medical lightsaber". In fact, you can build your own plasma cutter powerful enough to slice through a quarter inch of steel like it was butter from an old microwave and a few and a few other odds and ends from Radio Shack. In fact...here are the plans.

Link: www.instructables.com...

Now take into account that earlier this month a british researcher published a paper which details his advancement in masers (a "microwave laser") in which his home grown pentacene organic crystalline allowed him to increase the efficiency and output of a coherent beam of microwave energy which was approximately 100 MILLION times more powerful than anything ever previously demonstrated. In short...this means that generating the massive amounts of plasma needed to create an uncontrolled nuclear fusion reaction will now be possible with an old microwave, an organic crystal, and a car battery.

Now...I'm the FIRST one to say that Iran's scientists are barely competent and pose no significant security threat...so let's just say it takes them 5 years to figure out how to do this. Now what? We started WWIII to (perhaps) successfully stop their big scary weapons-grade plutonium progam...but now all they need are spare parts from household appliances hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen to make a unit that would 100-200X more powerful and small enough to fit inside of a panel van.

So...what would we have achieved except for pissing off the people who now have the capability of taking out every major metropolitan area in America for a grand total of $10,000 worth of broken appliances.

See? No amount of bombing raids will ever be able to eliminate that threat...it's futile. The only REAL solution is diplomacy.



posted on Sep, 20 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Personally, I wish they would bring all our troops home and protect our own borders, especially the southern border.

But that's wishful thinking.

It doesn't matter who is president, dem or repub., no one will do any thing about the illegals coming across the border.

And not all are Mexicans. Which I guess I don't have a big problem with, yeah they take odd jobs that most others won't do but they don't blow stuff up and terrorize people.
[excluding the M13 gangs, of course]

But when Hezbollah and groups like that are stationed on the Mexico side close to our border, well that I have a problem with. Easier to get smuggled across. Hence why we need our troops along all our borders. Not just abroad.

And when ever a border patrol agent shoots some one, they catch hell for it.

But that's a topic for another time.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


And how do you start the chain reaction of the hydrogen bomb without enriched Uranium/Plutonium? It still requires weapons grade material to start the chain reaction needed for the bomb.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder
LOL. Yes...the "stupid does burn"...whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.


Did you just agree with something you did not understand? I cannot tell if you are agreeing with me or questioning my verbage.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by snarky412
As I'm one who voted for Obummer in 2008, his Foreign Policies are terrible and needs some serious help.
So how can Romney be any worse when our current president isn't doing to hot himself???


Easily. How do you not realize that things can always be worse. Do you think Bush's foreign policy was better than Obama's? Just because something is not as good as you think it should be does not mean that it cannot be worse.

I kind of get this feeling that anyone who is still fighting the cold war with the USSR and wants to make it a hot war in the year 2012, yeah things can get worse.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by wascurious

Originally posted by milominderbinder
LOL. Yes...the "stupid does burn"...whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.


Did you just agree with something you did not understand? I cannot tell if you are agreeing with me or questioning my verbage.


I'm agreeing with you and mocking the tranny.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


And how do you start the chain reaction of the hydrogen bomb without enriched Uranium/Plutonium? It still requires weapons grade material to start the chain reaction needed for the bomb.


Read the post. I just outlined it. It DOESN'T require enriched uranium or plutonium. It requires PLASMA. In the '50's the only way we had to generate that much plasma was by splitting atoms. Today, we can do it with parts from radio shack and a broken microwave.

This is junior high physics. I don't want to confuse you, so I'll keep it simple and won't get into any higher level mathematics, physics, or scientific papers which require a strong grasp of calculus to understand. Here is the first paragraph to the "plasma" entry in wikipedia.

"In physics and chemistry, plasma is a state of matter similar to gas in which a certain portion of the particles is ionized. Heating a gas may ionize its molecules or atoms (reduce or increase the number of electrons in them), thus turning it into a plasma, which contains charged particles: positive ions and negative electrons or ions.[1] Ionization can be induced by other means, such as strong electromagnetic field applied with a laser or microwave generator, and is accompanied by the dissociation of molecular bonds, if present."

Does this make sense to you now? You don't need uranium, plutonium, or ANY nuclear fissible materials to create an uncontrolled fusion reaction of hydrogen isotopes. In fact...it's probably the LEAST efficient way to do it. Modern fusion experiments generally rely on a combination of pressure, magnetic field compression, and plasmoids to initiate the reaction.

It isn't really hard at all. The big catch with fusion power plants is trying to build a CONTROLLED fusion reaction that doesn't release so much energy that it vaporizes the reactor and everything else for about 80 square miles whilst still producing more energy than was used to initiate the reaction. If we just want to create a big boom w/ hydrogen atoms it's really not all that difficult.

Does this make sense to you now? I'm trying to provide enough details, but still explain it in layman's terms. Let me know if I can flesh anything out for you.



posted on Sep, 21 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by wascurious

Originally posted by milominderbinder
LOL. Yes...the "stupid does burn"...whatever the hell that's supposed to mean.


Did you just agree with something you did not understand? I cannot tell if you are agreeing with me or questioning my verbage.


I'm agreeing with you and mocking the tranny.


OK. Sorry. It was the "whatever the hell that is supposed to mean" that confused me. You know how people try to be sarcastic online when it doesn't work. I thought it was possible that was the case.

So you never heard or read something so stupid it felt like your brain was being burned?



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


You are clueless if you think you can create a H-bomb with a microwave. Enough said. I'm done with your ignorance.



posted on Sep, 22 2012 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


You are clueless if you think you can create a H-bomb with a microwave. Enough said. I'm done with your ignorance.


Once again...read the posts.

I never said you could create an H-bomb with a microwave. I said you could create an H-bomb w/ a broken microwave (all you need is the magnets if you know what you are doing), some radio shack parts, and most importantly a pentecene crystal which will allow you to amplify a coherent beam of microwave energy by a factor of 100 million times greater than what was known to be possible even just two or three months ago.

I then provided you links to the relevant research including one to plans on how to construct your own plasma cutter which is capable of cutting through 1/4 inch steel with little to no difficulty.

Given that the two key components of hydrogen isotopes and the pentacene crystal there is NO POSSIBLE WAY in which we could stop Iran or anyone else on this planet from obtaining those materials. It's hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, and silicon. Again...the "magic" is in the pentacene.

I know your awful excited to go kill a bunch more brown-colored civilians, but there really is no justification for it anymore. Whether you like it or not and whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. This is simply the state of technology today. Look it up yourself. Read the scholarly papers if you have a strong enough grasp of calculus, physics, and materials science to understand them. Or don't...I don't really care. I'm not trying to change your opinion...I'm informing you that opinions don't matter on this one.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Sweet, now show me where these garage amateurs created WEAPONS GRADE plutonium. Thanks.


Ummm...that's the point. An H-bomb/missile can yield an explosion 100-200X MORE POWERFUL than anything that can possibly be done with uranium or plutonium.

The most powerful nuclear reaction that humanity has thus far mastered is fusing deuterium or tritium. The big trick w/ an H-Bomb is to generate the plasma field to set off the chain reaction. In the early days of fusion in the 1950's we still used a fission reaction to generate that plasma. However, even right now the military is field testing a handheld unit about the size of an LED flashlight that generates a plasma beam to cauterize wounds in the fields. It's being billed as a "medical lightsaber". In fact, you can build your own plasma cutter powerful enough to slice through a quarter inch of steel like it was butter from an old microwave and a few and a few other odds and ends from Radio Shack. In fact...here are the plans.

Link: www.instructables.com...

Now take into account that earlier this month a british researcher published a paper which details his advancement in masers (a "microwave laser") in which his home grown pentacene organic crystalline allowed him to increase the efficiency and output of a coherent beam of microwave energy which was approximately 100 MILLION times more powerful than anything ever previously demonstrated. In short...this means that generating the massive amounts of plasma needed to create an uncontrolled nuclear fusion reaction will now be possible with an old microwave, an organic crystal, and a car battery.


No that's not going to happen. You need very large and fast implosion pressures which are achieved only by burning the outer uranium shell of the fusion fuel with an extremely powerful burst of x-rays. The energy density and quantity required is very high.

Los Alamos and the professional nuclear labs had been looking for ways to get fusion weapons without a fission primary for decades, and found nothing practical.



Now...I'm the FIRST one to say that Iran's scientists are barely competent and pose no significant security threat


That isn't true. Their scientists and engineers are not at all incompetent, but their government is. They have indigenous medium-range rockets---and the technology for making rockets, and rocket guidance, is higher than that for making nuclear weapons, at least fission weapons. Nuclear weapons though take time, money and expensive infrastructure.


So...what would we have achieved except for pissing off the people who now have the capability of taking out every major metropolitan area in America for a grand total of $10,000 worth of broken appliances.


no, the physics is wrong---or if you get something the fusion yield is negligible. Fortunately, nuclear weaponry is still very difficult.


See? No amount of bombing raids will ever be able to eliminate that threat...it's futile. The only REAL solution is diplomacy.


No, diplomacy helps parties who want to negotiate, negotiate. If one side doesn't want to make a deal acceptable to the other side, it doesn't happen. For example, what are you supposed to say to North Korea? People have been flapping their lips for 60 years, and DPRK is still exactly what it is.



posted on Sep, 23 2012 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by daaskapital

"I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say there's just no way," Mr Romney said.



He spoke the truth. Hamas doesn't want peace. If peace comes, then Hamas will be out of a job. They will have their power taken away. They won't get tons of 'aid' money flowing in any more. So how, exactly, is telling the truth about a situation a 'gaffe'??

If you all want to nail Romney for his love affair with Israel .. that's fine.

But you really can't nail him on his statement about some not wanting peace in the Middle East.
It's accurate.



posted on Sep, 24 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Los Alamos and the professional nuclear labs had been looking for ways to get fusion weapons without a fission primary for decades, and found nothing practical.


With all due respect...you haven't read a scientific journal on the subject within the last 25-30 years. The last time that rocket guidance was a bigger technological challenge than creating nuclear weapons was the mid-80's. An android cell phone has all of the parts, software, and processing power to accurately guide a drone or a rocket, That's the crazy thing about the exponential advancement of Moore's law...the "tricky stuff" isn't so tricky anymore. Any child in America can buy a Parrot AR drone for a whopping $300 and use their ARM-based cell phone to accurately control their very own drone with a learning curve of about 10 minutes. Pick up a copy of MAKE magazine and your local bookstore and look at the incredibly accurate guidance and control systems which unschooled hobbyists make in their basements using their cell phones, $20 Arduino boards, and $35 Raspberry Pi computing devices.


no, the physics is wrong---or if you get something the fusion yield is negligible. Fortunately, nuclear weaponry is still very difficult.


The last time the "physics was wrong" about this either Reagan or Carter were still in office. All modern experiments with fusion reactions have run up into a brick wall ONLY in trying to actually CONTROL the reaction. Specifically, the blanket term used for this normally referred to as "plasma containment". The energy expended in creating the incredibly powerful magnetic fields to keep the plasma from melting the torus reactor is more or less why historically fusion produced a net-loss in power production. However...not anymore.

But don't take it from me...take it from the guys who have already broken ground on nuclear fusion plants which will be online by the end of the decade. Here are the links and scholarly citations in scientific journals which will show you that I know EXACTLY what I'm talking about.
Links:
www.iter.org...
www.iter.org...
www.iter.org...
www.iter.org...
www.iter.org...
www.technologyreview.com...
www.generalfusion.com...
www.generalfusion.com...
www.generalfusion.com...
www.generalfusion.com...

Scholarly References
General Fusion
Laberge, M. "An Acoustically Driven Magnetized Target Fusion Reactor" Published in Journal of Fusion Energy, Vol 27, 2007
Laberge, M. "Experimental Results for an Acoustic Driver for MTF" Published in Journal of Fusion Energy, Vol 28, 2008
Howard, S. et al "Development of Merged Compact Toroids for Use as a Magnetized Target Fusion Plasma" Published in Journal of Fusion Energy, Vol 28, 2008

Magnetized Target Fusion
Miller, R.L. and Krakowski, R. A. "Assessment of the Slowly-Imploding Liner (LINUS) Fusion Reactor Concept" 4th ANS Topical Meeting on the Technology of Nuclear Fusion, 1980
Siemon, R., Lindemuth, I., and Schoenberg, K. "Why Magnetized Target Fusion Offers A Low-Cost Development Path for Fusion Energy" Comments on Plasma Physics and Controlled Fusion, 1997
Wurden, G. et al "Magnetized Target Fusion: A Burning FRC Plasma in an Imploded Metal Can" Journal of Plasma Fusion Research, Volume 2, 1999
Siemon, R. et al "The relevance of Magnetized Target Fusion (MTF) to practical energy production" A white paper for consideration by the fusion community and the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee, 1999
Intrator, T. et al "A high density field reversed configuration (FRC) target for magnetized target fusion: First internal profile measurements of a high density FRC" Physics of Plasmas, Volume II, Number 5, 2004
Canadian Plasma Injector Research
Raman, R. et al "Design of the compact toroid fueler for center fueling Tokamak de Varennes", Fusion Technology, 1993
Raman, R. et al "Expiremental Demonstration of Nondisruptive, Central Fueling of a Tokamak by Compact Toroid Injection", Phys. Rev. Lett., 1994
Raman, R. et al "Experimental demonstration of tokamak fuelling by compact toroid injection", Nuclear Fusion, Vol 37, 1997
Xiao, C., Hirose, A., and Sen, S. "Improved confinement induced by tangential injection of compact torus into the Saskatchewan Torus-Modified (STOR-M) tokamak", Physics of Plasmas, Vol 11, 2004
Olynyk, G. and Morelli, J. "Development of a compact toroid fuelling system for ITER", Nuclear Fusion, 2008

Trust me when I say that I have nothing to gain by bullsh^tting you on this one. Simply fusing atoms in an uncontrolled reaction has been child's play for the last decade or so. The tricky part is in harnessing that power to do something besides vaporize metropolitan areas in a manner that is a net gain of power.
edit on 24-9-2012 by milominderbinder because: italics formatting





new topics
top topics
 
13
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join