|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:02 PM Original message |
US's smallest nuke would be perfect to shut the well down... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HiFructosePronSyrup (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:03 PM Response to Original message |
1. So you want to fire an nuclear artillery shell into the Gulf... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:06 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. as opposed to letting it keep spewing oil till everything is dead... sure. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HiFructosePronSyrup (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:07 PM Response to Reply #2 |
4. Because nuclear fallout is full of delicious nutrients that fish crave. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:22 PM Response to Reply #4 |
15. Exactly what makes you think much radioactive material could... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Number23 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat May-29-10 09:43 PM Response to Reply #4 |
44. You absolutely crack me up. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheManInTheMac (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 10:17 AM Response to Reply #4 |
56. It's got electrolytes. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
awoke_in_2003 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 05:26 PM Response to Reply #56 |
90. I've never seen |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
awoke_in_2003 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 05:18 PM Response to Reply #4 |
89. That was DUzy worthy. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:06 PM Response to Original message |
3. Deleted message |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:08 PM Response to Original message |
5. Deleted message |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:10 PM Response to Reply #5 |
6. Deleted message |
Chulanowa (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:10 PM Response to Original message |
7. Just curious about how you think physics work... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:12 PM Response to Reply #7 |
9. You really didn't read what I said did ya. Who suggested a surface blast? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Chulanowa (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:16 PM Response to Reply #9 |
10. All the time? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:19 PM Response to Reply #10 |
13. Id says its FAR harder to shove 10 pallets of conventional explosives down the pipe.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Chulanowa (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:27 PM Response to Reply #13 |
17. Now you're just defending your idea becuase it's your idea, not on its own merits |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:39 PM Response to Reply #17 |
21. No, your asking unrelated questions... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
charlie (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:25 PM Response to Reply #9 |
16. Explosives are regularly used to snuff flaming wells |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
alphafemale (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 05:59 AM Response to Reply #16 |
102. Explosives work on a "flaming" well because it uses up the oxygen. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TheManInTheMac (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 09:25 AM Response to Reply #9 |
109. They use explosions to put out oil well fires |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spanone (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:11 PM Response to Original message |
8. why don't we all swim out...all 300,000,000 & change of us and pray over the leak |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
awoke_in_2003 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 05:28 PM Response to Reply #8 |
91. Prayer |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
customerserviceguy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:17 PM Response to Original message |
11. From the looks of that picture |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tesha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 07:36 PM Response to Reply #11 |
37. There's nothing special about that "device". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FLPanhandle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:19 PM Response to Original message |
12. What makes you think it just wont make it worse. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:20 PM Response to Reply #12 |
14. That magnitude? 10 tons? Really? Thats just silly. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FLPanhandle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:38 PM Response to Reply #14 |
20. Doesn't matter how far down. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:43 PM Response to Reply #20 |
23. What happens to tons of rock when you vaporize it... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FLPanhandle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:18 PM Response to Reply #23 |
24. and the oil pressure is continuous. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:30 PM Response to Reply #24 |
26. Too bad it worked when the Russians did it multiple times. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FLPanhandle (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:36 PM Response to Reply #26 |
29. With none of them underwater |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:40 PM Response to Reply #29 |
30. Any you think the added water pressure pressing the oil column down... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:42 PM Response to Reply #26 |
32. I don't believe that story about the Soviets using nuclear bombs to stop leaking oil wells |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Codeine (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 10:29 AM Response to Reply #26 |
58. Which wells? When? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Rex (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 04:26 AM Response to Reply #26 |
98. Sorry but you have no proof that the Russians 'did it' and using |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
L0oniX (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 08:56 PM Response to Reply #23 |
95. I would suggest a "bunker buster" type of bomb that bores down into the land. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
salguine (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 06:23 AM Response to Reply #95 |
103. Those only work when they don't have to travel through two miles of water to reach the rock. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Warren Stupidity (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:33 PM Response to Original message |
18. Oh fuck yes, that is just the ticket! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BlueJazz (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:35 PM Response to Original message |
19. Sweet Jesus...it would look like this >> |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 04:43 PM Response to Original message |
22. The Russians used nukes five times to control similiar leaks ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Taitertots (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:05 PM Response to Reply #22 |
67. The Russian history of nuclear and environmental calamity is not something we should emulate |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:22 PM Response to Reply #67 |
73. Ya, certainly not that component of it where they seal wells effectively. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Taitertots (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:37 PM Response to Reply #73 |
78. Don't they have a burning pit that they can't figure out how to put out |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:59 PM Response to Reply #78 |
82. Deleted message |
Hempathy (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:24 PM Response to Original message |
25. Are you at all familiar with the geology of the bottom of the gulf? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:32 PM Response to Reply #25 |
27. Well, I could get the Russians to explain how they did it over and over... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hempathy (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 07:20 PM Response to Reply #27 |
35. In the exact same type of scenario? with the same type of seabed? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 07:52 PM Response to Reply #35 |
39. Your suggesting every variable be identical? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hempathy (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 08:49 PM Response to Reply #39 |
40. First of all- it's "you're", and no, not every variable- just the major ones- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat May-29-10 09:02 PM Response to Reply #40 |
42. You forgot to capitalize the first letter of your second sentence there grammar Nazi... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Catherina (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 02:56 AM Response to Reply #42 |
48. And radioactive tidal waves are good right? n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 08:39 AM Response to Reply #48 |
53. Sigh... how is it so many people here cant tell the difference between... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Chan790 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 10:43 AM Response to Reply #48 |
59. As much as I'm not in favor of the nuke idea... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 12:53 PM Response to Reply #59 |
63. OMG - someone that understands at least the radiation aspect. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hempathy (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 10:04 AM Response to Reply #42 |
55. Please answr the question- How deep underwater were the Russian wells that were sealed by nukes? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Chan790 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 10:49 AM Response to Reply #55 |
60. I suspect the Russians consider that data to be classified and have never revealed those details. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hempathy (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 04:10 PM Response to Reply #60 |
85. Which means that any claims that they successfully accomplished the task are just as suspect. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Chan790 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 08:13 AM Response to Reply #85 |
105. I'd concede that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 12:58 PM Response to Reply #55 |
64. Soon as you tell me why it matters... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Codeine (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:14 PM Response to Reply #64 |
69. Eisenstein was a filmmaker. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hempathy (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 04:02 PM Response to Reply #64 |
84. Well- for one thing, it's under 5000 ft. of water... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 04:20 PM Response to Reply #84 |
86. Deleted message |
Swamp Rat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:33 PM Response to Original message |
28. I think digging relief wells and sucking out the remaining oil is a much better idea. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:40 PM Response to Original message |
31. As one with a bit of experience with explosives, I have one thing to say and I'll try to be tactful |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 05:48 PM Response to Reply #31 |
33. Given 10 tons of TNT isn't enough power to move a mile of cotton candy... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 06:26 PM Response to Reply #33 |
34. It might replace the one big leak with thousands of little ones |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 07:40 PM Response to Reply #34 |
38. I think that knee jerk mentality has some issues... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
iamthebandfanman (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 03:39 AM Response to Reply #38 |
51. lmao |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tammywammy (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sat May-29-10 09:13 PM Response to Reply #34 |
43. +1 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 02:43 AM Response to Reply #43 |
45. Especially when there is NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE that a nuke has ever been used in that manner before |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Chan790 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 11:00 AM Response to Reply #43 |
61. Um, there has been a strong pro-nuclear position on DU for a while... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:16 PM Response to Reply #61 |
70. Actually your correct. It's a good stepping stone until at least fusion gets here. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Chan790 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 11:01 AM Response to Reply #43 |
62. dupe. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hempathy (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 08:55 PM Response to Reply #33 |
41. Can you say for certain how much pressure there is in the oil deposit...? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:19 PM Response to Reply #41 |
71. Obviously a "large enough explosion" could rip the earth apart... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hempathy (292 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 01:40 PM Response to Reply #71 |
111. And when you combine the explosive force with the pressures exerted in the area of the oil deposits- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
peacefreak (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-28-10 07:22 PM Response to Original message |
36. Well, it worked so well on Lost. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 02:44 AM Response to Reply #36 |
46. I've never watched Lost, but this reply is as good as any to explain where the stupid idea came from |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Rex (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 02:52 AM Response to Original message |
47. You can guess all you want to, no thanks to the nuke idea |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:02 PM Response to Reply #47 |
66. Risky? are you one of those that think its going to blow the planet apart also? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bonobo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 03:13 AM Response to Original message |
49. Yeah, what could possibly go wrong? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Catherina (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 03:16 AM Response to Original message |
50. A suggestion for your high school project |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 03:41 AM Response to Original message |
52. Deleted message |
guitar man (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 09:12 AM Response to Original message |
54. No no no!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
adamuu (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 10:21 AM Response to Original message |
57. won't that turn our hole into a crater with a hole in the bottom? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:00 PM Response to Reply #57 |
65. It's exactly this uncritical type of thinking that cant tell 10T vs 10KT vs 10MT |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
adamuu (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 08:40 AM Response to Reply #65 |
106. How rude. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Taitertots (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:12 PM Response to Original message |
68. Is that going to smash the tube |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:21 PM Response to Reply #68 |
72. Why do people keep confusing 10T vs 10MT... sigh. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Taitertots (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:32 PM Response to Reply #72 |
75. I know the difference between the two |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:35 PM Response to Reply #75 |
77. No it cant. Your wrong and I think you know it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
johnaries (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:29 PM Response to Original message |
74. How would an explosion seal the well? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:33 PM Response to Reply #74 |
76. The Russians have already done this a few times... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
johnaries (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 03:29 PM Response to Reply #76 |
83. That's an urban legend. Explosions have only been used to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BootinUp (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 06:34 PM Response to Reply #83 |
112. I suspect this is correct. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TampaAnimus2010 (111 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:45 PM Response to Reply #74 |
80. Watch this video of Matt Simmons |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Tesha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 08:11 PM Response to Reply #74 |
93. Imagine drilling a new hole next to the old hole (paralleling the old hole). |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
daleo (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:44 PM Response to Original message |
79. Do you mean detonate on the seafloor? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 01:46 PM Response to Reply #79 |
81. Deleted message |
Skip Intro (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 04:24 PM Response to Original message |
87. It''s the only way to get us off this God-foresaken Island!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
madinmaryland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 04:33 PM Response to Original message |
88. And what happens when the nuke causes a much larger gash to open up and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Shadow Creature (105 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 05:29 PM Response to Original message |
92. unless |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
deaniac21 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 08:22 PM Response to Original message |
94. This is a truly stupid post. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
L0oniX (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 08:58 PM Response to Reply #94 |
96. Thanks for the warning ...glad I didn't read it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
adamuu (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 08:41 AM Response to Reply #94 |
107. Then the OP went through with hostile responses to the criticism and, in my case, doubt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
flvegan (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Sun May-30-10 09:13 PM Response to Original message |
97. It would appear that the OP is no longer with us. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
B Calm (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 05:24 AM Response to Original message |
99. Forgetting the earthquake fault lines in the Gulf of Mexico? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mendocino (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 05:26 AM Response to Original message |
100. "The guys from Mad Men examine their latest ad project" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BootinUp (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 05:51 AM Response to Original message |
101. I am starting to think that folks who suggest nuking it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mendocino (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 09:58 AM Response to Reply #101 |
110. I remember some advocating |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Renew Deal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 06:45 AM Response to Original message |
104. What could possibly go wrong? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ezlivin (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon May-31-10 09:19 AM Response to Original message |
108. Moot point: We no longer have that weapon |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Thu May 09th 2024, 12:57 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC