What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
89 Comments
- GhostyBoy, on 07/02/2008, -3/+46At this point I really wouldn't be surprised if Dick Cheney's head morphed into a flaming skull and he started spewing acid on orphans.
- rahulbrown, on 07/01/2008, -3/+36Wonderful! Can Darth Vader pull off an attack on Iran before W is out?
- jiqiren, on 07/02/2008, -3/+16F**KING ELECTION SUCKS!
F**K IT!!! WE'LL DO IT NOW!!! - vsujohn2, on 07/03/2008, -0/+12You mean his head HASNT done that yet?
- evil-doer, on 07/03/2008, -2/+12actually they do.
they have the best anti ship cruise missiles in the world, bought from russia. - KyleGoetz, on 07/03/2008, -2/+11Cheney wants to war with Iran because of a nuclear threat and you're claiming they don't have the ability to fire saturation missiles at a body of water their country borders?
- Hartley1942, on 07/03/2008, -2/+11Someone SAYS he PREFERS. Rumor mongering.
- evil-doer, on 07/03/2008, -1/+9fearing anyone with brown skin is a pussy (you).
liberals dont want to go to war because they are NOT scared. - blankoboy, on 07/03/2008, -0/+8Morphed? I think you mean you wouldn't be surprised if he pulled the skintube off of his head to expose his true flaming skull form.
- Zarokima, on 07/03/2008, -0/+6It's okay, you can say "*****" here.
- golfzilla, on 07/03/2008, -1/+7Like him or hate him, he is right: we'll get blamed.
- Chaotyk, on 07/03/2008, -0/+6His mechanical heart will provide him with +1 to charging into battle and a +5 invulnerable save against chest wounds.
- zerries, on 07/03/2008, -2/+7While I don't want us to attack Iran. What you're saying won't happen. At least not by a "saturation missile attack."
- KyleGoetz, on 07/03/2008, -2/+7No country has an obligation to begin a preemptive war in order to defend an ally against a PERCEIVED threat.
- dizilbdog, on 07/03/2008, -3/+8Honestly what will American's do if America does attack Iran?? I mean seriously we did nothing with Afghanistan nothing with Iraq, I mean come on what's another country to destroy might as well while we are out there. Me personally I just hope Brittany and Lindsay Lohan get there life together and they keep the dollar menu up, and oh Oprah in the afternoon and the awesome Bill Oreilly at night. LIfe in the U.S.A really is a dream.
- Barackalypse, on 07/03/2008, -3/+8Iran has the same Chinese made missles Iraq had, perhaps they have more of them, but given we didn't lose a single warship to them in our last 2 engagements, I doubt the entire fleet is going to get sunk this time. For those who don't know, the missiles they have are just about 20 feet long and weigh over 3,500 pounds, so its not like some guy pops his head up on a cliff overlooking the Gulf and shoots it off: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silkworm_missile
- Barackalypse, on 07/03/2008, -3/+8OK, so did anyone actually bother addressing or refuting either of Dick's points or was this just another smear piece showing he's a violent warmongering man? Oh wait, this was from Thinkprogress, of course not. Buried.
- inactive, on 07/03/2008, -4/+8"saturation missle " ???
Sorry what ***** universe do YOU live in?
Air craft carriers have anti-aircraft and anti-air munitions defense where anything within about 200 miles is shot down easily!
And if Iran is attacked, guess what, it will be done in stealth and all missile, radar, and power stations will be destroyed.
If there is any saturation of any kind it will be b-52 bombers doing saturation bombings all over Iran turning it into a parking lot. Ok well... it's already mostly a parking lot, but more so!
And no Iran has not really ENGAGED anyone thus not lost any ship. The chinese missles they have are old technology. Lets just say, its like having a Tandy compared to today's laptop. I mean it IS scary and could do damage, but can and is shot down. And those would be high priority targets in the first attack of Iran. - inactive, on 07/02/2008, -1/+5But will Cheney lead the troops into battle?
- topgigmedia, on 07/03/2008, -1/+5Why don't we drop Cheney on Iran. Wait - we need smart bombs... never mind.
- noahhoward, on 07/03/2008, -1/+5He PREFERS, which likely means that is NOT the option they're going with.
- greenm1981, on 07/03/2008, -1/+5The right wing are the biggest pussies of all, what with their constant fear of "terror." It's pretty ***** pathetic to think that a nation that stood toe-to-toe with the Soviet Union for 40 years, on the brink of nuclear war, should be afraid of a loose-knit group of people in the middle east with homemade explosives.
The right wing gave us checkpoints at airports, terror alerts, domestic spying, all because they think we should be afraid. That's just shameful, and you are pathetic if you buy into this fear. - TinternAbbot, on 07/03/2008, -0/+4I just read the article and the transcript and all Cheney says is that he hopes Israel doesn't strike Iran. I don't understand where thinkprogress.com gets this.
- rhodydog, on 07/03/2008, -3/+7Don't be so melodramatic, it's nothing like the 1930s. If Israel wasn't so eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth maybe it wouldn't be in such a mess it is in now.
- cougar618, on 07/03/2008, -0/+4What does that mean? To impeach us for crimes..
- ad33lshahid, on 07/03/2008, -4/+7it seems as though the israelis are the only grave threat to peace in the middle east, having struck Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, and obvoiusly palestinians in the matter of a few years.
- danthek54, on 07/03/2008, -1/+4look i dunno what all the fuss and surprise is over, This is obvious. Israel & Iran are blood enemies and we are Israel's strongest ally. we will attack Iran no matter who is in charge should anything (serious) happen btw Iran and Israel. For all intensive purposes Cheney is stating fact.
- inactive, on 07/02/2008, -9/+12Yeah, that way we can murder the maximum number of innocent people and we don't have to see it.
- FrapFreak, on 07/03/2008, -1/+4LOL...
1) He is saying IF a strike was going to happen.
2) "And secondly, if they go, we’ll be blamed anyway." You can call the man a prophet for that comment. - sunburner, on 07/03/2008, -0/+3He'll do it live? But there are no words there.
- pond70, on 07/03/2008, -2/+5Check for new Halliburton contract bid's ..that will be a better indicator then Dick shooting his mouth off
- inactive, on 07/03/2008, -1/+4Only targets? I think you're forgetting the 5th fleet, which lies in the Gulf, overlooked by the Iranian mountains.
Iran has Russian built Moskit/Sunburn cruise missiles. These are the most advanced cruise missiles on Earth, no efficient defense exists against them. They can be launched from mobile platforms hidden in these mountains, against the carrier groups. These missiles are called the 'carrier killers' because their guidance systems can differentiate between large carriers and smaller escort ships.
I repeat: there is no current defense system that works against Sunburn missiles.
Even without low yield nuclear warheads mounted on those Sunburns, which some Israeli military analysts were saying Iran had bought in small numbers around 2002, the Sunburns will devastate the carrier group.
The Fifth Fleet is a sitting duck. Aerial bombardment will not be able to destroy the mobile launchers, because we will have to have reliable satellite data on their locations, and due to the fact the Iranians know we are about to attack them, they are probably not leaving them in the same places.
If we go against Iran we will probably suffer immense losses in the fleet. This is a given. Plus, after the attack, Iran will scuttle a bunch of large tankers in the Gulf and block oil exports via that route, along with any other of the military vessels that are there. This has already been predicted by the Pentagon.
It won't end there. Iran is not the busted and broke-ass military power that Iraq was. They have a large army, well trained and well equipped. It will not be possible to destroy this standing army with air strikes. In the event of attack, it is likely Iran will simply move across the boarder into Iraq and attempt to pincer our already thinly stretched troops there, at the same time that their Moslem brothers rise up en masse in Iraq itself.
Owing to the fact that this Iraq war was planned by morons, the supply route to our Iraq troops is mostly *over land* from Kuwait. Have a look at a map. The Iranians only have to come across and block that route to cut off supplies to our troops in Iraq.
That will not be good.
It could be Stalingrad II.
Add to this that Iran's major trading partner is China, who are getting a large percentage of their oil and gas from Iran these days after a big trade deal in 2004. China need these supplies and have already signalled their interest in Iran's security by *surfacing one of their nuclear subs less than a mile out from the 5th Fleet*. This was a clear message being sent. The sub went undetected until it breached the surface.
An attack against Iran would not go smoothly and would almost certainly require ground troops due to the possibilities I've touched on here, and they're just the beginning.
Pray that the Bush Administration is not stupid and insane enough to attack Iran. - DoscoJones, on 07/02/2008, -7/+10Any attack on Iran will result in our naval forces in the gulf getting shredded by saturation missle attack. It'd be the biggest black eye our military has received since Pearl.
- greenm1981, on 07/03/2008, -2/+4Yeah, go war profiteering!
- inactive, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3You're right we're in too deep with Israel to let it go... but that doesn't mean we shouldn't wait for them to make the first move if they even do. The right thing to do would be to play a strictly defensive role and strengthen Israel's borders with troops and missile defense systems if they decide to attack. Let Israel play urban warfare.
- Xihix, on 07/03/2008, -3/+5Whats with all these comments that Iran will stand no chance in the war? You have to consider that Iran would most likely be backed by Russia and China if a war was to happen. And any nuclear strike on the country would automatically turn the whole world against the U.S. or Israel (except the US).
- Pillage, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3The source went on to say that Cheney privately calls his daughter a dyke and his wife a *****...
- Iztikeit, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3"If Israel...."
How long has this been screaming Christian and Muslim Apocalypse?
Nothing like self fulfilled prophecies ending in nuclear war to wake up to. - oneeyejeff, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3We would not surprise that the unpredictable and dangerous man of Richard Cheney still lives in the underground bunker to seek out for the way to instigate Iran to attack us. When George Bush decides to attack on Iran with nuke weapons, George Bush, Richard Cheney and their crony inner circle will escape into a top secret underground city thru the monorail tunnel from the White House to beneath of Appalachian Mountains as soon as they will trigger for the Third World War. They will escort gullible young erotic secretaries and lustful nurses with tons of aphrodisiac pills to the secret underground cavern for using them for survival sex and breed for their future babies. The people on the surface will nearly wipe out by nuclear, biological and chemical warfare, and our advance human civilization will be lost forever. Only a handful of survivors will endure through the upheaval era on the ruined Earth. The rebirth of new human races on the surface will emerge and slowly recover, but in the underground cave, the new and future descendents of Bush/Cheney will transform to blue-skin mutants because of a lack of sunlight, a lack of purified air with build-up toxic gases in the air from environmental and human wastes, deteriorating quality of water, their food and medical supplies will run out, and other adverse cave environments. Gradually the human environment in the underground surface will become off-balanced, with disastrous results that will affect the long-term health and their DNA. Eventually, they will become a new race of sadistic, cannibalistic, high-intelligent Morlock in a few hundreds thousand years future. They will prey and feed on naïve and illiterate surface humanoid race, Eloi as cattle. The visionary of H.G. Wells “Time Machine” would become a post-apocalyptic realism in the future.
- edebolt, on 07/03/2008, -2/+4Hersh has been wrong so many times in the past. He won his Pulitzer way back and got a taste of the limelight and is now addicted. He keeps swinging for the fences and missing. It's just sad to see a journalist so desperate like that.
- Barackalypse, on 07/03/2008, -0/+2The government is going to do whatever the hell it wants, you may as well anticipate what its going to do and try and make some money off it. Besides, it doesn't really matter if there is a war or not, oil has static or declining production and increasing worldwide demand.
- Hartley1942, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3Pardon Israel for not taking any ***** form their neighbors.
- NotAChickenHawk, on 07/03/2008, -1/+3So the logic is that we might as well do it,because if we don't, Israel will and we'll get blamed. And this is all as if Cheney himself doesn't want us to attack Iran. Yeah right. The U.S. can wield tremendous influence over Israel. If Cheney is afraid that Israel will attack Iran and we'll get blamed, then if he doesn't want Iran to attack, he ought to tell Israel not to do it, and make sure that they don't!
- tehxen3, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2Yeah and what are arab countries doing with refugees from Darfur, or their own *women* and men anyway?
- tehxen3, on 07/03/2008, -1/+2Israel is a free liberal democracy with high level of civil rights for everyone, highest living standard in the entire region. It tolerates getting attacked by 70 rockets per day by palestinian subhuman religious fanatics.
Do you know any history? Israel was attacked by all those pathetic countries in the past and defeated them with ease because it is a free country, and freedom gets you wealth to have superior firepower. - Betrayer, on 07/03/2008, -2/+3and yet again another story to terrorize the citizens of Iran.
what makes our form of terror legal? - toowired77, on 07/03/2008, -2/+3There is actually a genocide going on in Darfur right now. Israel is rejecting refugees from Darfur and sending them back. Using the horrors of the 1930s does not do anything to enhance your argument. If Israel is willing to start world war 3 to prevent genocide, they should start by focusing on the genocide that is happening right now. Evey human life is worth saving.
- inactive, on 07/03/2008, -0/+1You only made one mistake: it will not be girls that they take with them
Bush's "Monica Moment"
http://www.nogw.com/images/bush_monica_moment.jpg
A Man Called Jeff
http://www.americablog.com/2005/02/man-called-jeff ... -
Show 51 - 94 of 94 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 