Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Helgoland]

Why'd he get banned, again?

[penguinofhonor]

.

[IcyTea31]

tahujdt      October 14, 2014       Ban       Bigoted/inflammatory remarks

[Yoink]

I am so tired right now and I gotta stay awake on the train ride home. I seem to b drift4ng in and out of dreams as I sit here.

[KingofstarrySkies]

Can't tell if joke or he's actually just really sleepy.

[Yoink]

If by "joke" you mean the amusing typos in that post, then nope.
I was nodding off as I typed that on my phone, haha. I was trying to keep myself awake by doing something.
For those concerned, I did manage to stay awake and make it to the right stop after all that. Hooray.

[i2amroy]

Good for you! I know that I nodded off in the back of a bus and ended up going past my stop, though luckily buses travel in loops, so I caught it on the rebound (and my town is fairly small, and bus people are usually nice, so I didn't get anything stolen while I was out ). Scared the crap out of me when I work up though.

[hops]

Today on "Summoning Satan through electronic appliances"

[Iceblaster]

Today on "Summoning Satan through electronic appliances"

Spoiler: You called? (click to show/hide)

[alway]

So there was a new thing on wikileaks today about the safety (or rather, lack thereof) onboard the UK's nuclear-armed Trident subs.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11611270/Navy-whistleblower-claims-Trident-is-disaster-waiting-to-happen.html
In short, it sounds like through a combination of lack of proper maintenance and carelessness, they're likely to cause a nuclear disaster at a moment's notice.
Original here: https://wikileaks.org/trident-safety/

[Graknorke]

And nobody was surprised. Or at least, nobody should be.

[i2amroy]

Of course, the easiest way to solve this would be to scrap the subs completely and not have nukes, but wait! We NEED  nukes for the non-existent country that will invade us if we don't!

Really you only need two countries on opposite sides to have nukes (though they have to have enough to wipe out each other) to totally keep each other in check. Beyond that having more just makes it more likely that at any given point you will have at least one nuclear country on the opposite side of any given conflict than another.

[Loud Whispers]

Of course, the easiest way to solve this would be to scrap the subs completely and not have nukes, but wait! We NEED  nukes for the non-existent country that will invade us if we don't!

Island country m8y, Britain was the only country in WWI that could've lost in a day and lost without having a single enemy soldier set foot on Britain. To ruin a nation such as Britain, all you'd need to do is close a few important sea lanes. One is all you really need, to be honest.

[Graknorke]

Of course, the easiest way to solve this would be to scrap the subs completely and not have nukes, but wait! We NEED  nukes for the non-existent country that will invade the USA if we don't!

Fixed.
Trident is basically owned by the US.

[Loud Whispers]

I'e left my ramblings on this in yurpol thred to avert the derails