Just read this article this afternoon. Apparently the dollars we have been spending buying Chi-com toxic products has been put to good use by our communist friends. Anyone else find this kind of scary that this vessel went undetected? Have the Chinese developed some new sort of stealth technology for their submarines? How many other secrets did the Chinese manage to acquire through their partership with the past Clinton administration?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/...2804&in_page_id=1811

[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 11-12-2007).]

If you had a stealth capability that the U.S. couldn't detect, would you waste the secret just by popping up during an exercise to show off?

There are no more secrets anymore, just things YOU don't know.

quote The Americans had no idea China's fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication, or that it posed such a threat.

Thats not true at all. We've known about these subs since they came out of the ship yards.

Be rest assured this won't happen again. The Chinese just showed their hand. Once that sub went back down it was tracked and all emissions were recorded. The US Navy now knows what to look for.

This isn't like a new sub technology, sure they can be dangerous but they are just diesel electric subs. I would not be surprised if they were already simply sitting on the bottom when the fleet came by. Maybe by chance? maybe they knew where to be.

In any event the Chinese are NOT our friends and people should wake the hell up and smell the coffee! quit buying their stuff for crying out loud!

We should go to war while we can still win.

quote Originally posted by Red88FF: We should go to war while we can still win.

Go to war with China? Dude, we borrow 1.4 billion a day to fund our nation and the war in Iraq from China. Why bite the hand that feeds?

quote Originally posted by IEatRice: Go to war with China? Dude, we borrow 1.4 billion a day to fund our nation and the war in Iraq from China. Why bite the hand that feeds?

To win. There is no doubt in my mind that we will be going to war with the Chinese at some point. We are already in an economic war with them now. My business school prof spelled that out pretty clearly and that was 27 years ago, and look what has happened so far. It won't take much of a push to take it to the next stage.
Just like the Japs they practice government sponsored predatory business strategies along with an artificially kept low value currency and zero ecological and worker safeguards and regulations designed to cripple US industry. Couple that with the US deflating the dollar which literally robs them of the money borrowed, we don't pay or pay 25 cents on the dollar, we stop buying because we are making things here and that would send them into financial ruin during the rise of their industrial era, and war is the inevitable recourse to put industry to work, create national pride, take revenge and restore world respect and cut down on their over population. With simple math you can figure there is not much time before they out grow their country to boot.

Sure I would rather we can all just get along,,, hehehe, but it aint going to happen.

Just can't resist that war with Iraq comments can you.

Those are some big subs, and they're not nuclear? Incredible

I'm afraid it's already to late. Honestly they could come at us with sticks and rocks and we wouldn't be able to kill them fast enough to win a war.

quote Originally posted by firstfiero: I'm afraid it's already to late. Honestly they could come at us with sticks and rocks and we wouldn't be able to kill them fast enough to win a war.

I fear we have also already LOST the economic war with them. I cannot find virtually any product that is not made in China.

Nothing going to change. We are addicted to their cheap products and their willingness to allow us to borrow, like a pay-day loan place.

I'm afraid that our Congress has no discipline to curb it's spending. They are too willing to buy votes for the sake of power than ever to worry about our debt or our future.

You think it's bad now? Wait until Universal Health Care, Baby bonds, 401K start-up funds come into being. The government is going to throw a ass-load of money away for the sake of votes.

quote Originally posted by Wichita: You think it's bad now? Wait until Universal Health Care, Baby bonds, 401K start-up funds come into being. The government is going to throw a ass-load of money away for the sake of votes.

***shudders***

Sad but true.

Just FYI this piece of news is about a year old (if not older). Word on the street (from knowledgeable submariners) is that, unlike the press would have you believe, the US fleet forced the sub to surface. I would agree with the poster that says we knew where these subs were from the moment they left port. Also, the carrier group's subs were probably well away from the main battle group because that it standard practice during exercises...things would be very different if we were at war with China.

Most newer subs can run virtually undetected. That's the point. The boat I was on had it's keel laid in 1959, and if we didn't want you to know we were there, you wouldn't. Sound insulation has just gotten better.

China has a history of sending us "messages". I agree that they've wasted an important tactical advantage, but perhaps they thought the political advantage of letting us know this outweighed the tactical advantages of us not knowing it.

Either way, bet that the Navy is going to step up its anti-sub measures and start training sonar operators like they did during the Cold War.

Heh.

Ed

After the whole gulf of tonkin, I cant believe any of these war stories. I have a few friends that are Iraq vets, they sorta go along with the whole separation between media and fact when it comes to wars.

I am surprised I have not seen any "9/11 conspiracy" threads on here, i would like to have a discussion with sane adults about the subject. The facts presented currently are quite convincing that all 3 world trade centers were taken down with bombs, not planes.

quote Originally posted by darkhorizon: After the whole gulf of tonkin, I cant believe any of these war stories. I have a few friends that are Iraq vets, they sorta go along with the whole separation between media and fact when it comes to wars. I am surprised I have not seen any "9/11 conspiracy" threads on here, i would like to have a discussion with sane adults about the subject. The facts presented currently are quite convincing that all 3 world trade centers were taken down with bombs, not planes.

yes, it is always fun to picture maniacs scheming
so, with the bombs - were they in the building before the planes hit, waiting, or where they brought in after the planes? and, were the bombers linked with the planes too?
and, what would make bombs more fun than airplanes full of fuel? seems the hi-jacking was uncertain enough. if the planes missed, would the bombs still have gone off? like, what if they just grazed the building, and tumbled into the city - not doing much damage - do you think they still would have detonated the bombs anyways? because having the planes hit so solidly & hard makes it look like they could make the buildings drop.

I am sure there was a "fail safe" plan by whoever set up this, but it wouldnt make any sense for the government to "deny" bombs being in these buildings, and they do.

The easiest way to be convinced on this is building 7 (1 and 2 were the tall ones hit by planes). this is very blatent, just search around for info on it.

Building 7 was just a normal large building a few blocks from 1+2, and it fell 8 hours later from as the government said "fires", when it was not even visible at all from many videos that taped it. No steel building has ever collapsed from any type of fire, there are plenty of buildings that have burned till there was nothing left but steel, and they were repaired and still occupied today.

One of the biggest flaws behind the "planes caused the collapse" on the 1+2 buildings, is the fact that the center of the building fell first from the VERY top on down, not from the center down. In a few videos you can see the antenne on top falling first, and it falls straight down, before the building moves at all, then the whole top parts of the buildings collapse into almost nothing, and THEN the part under the "plane struck" area.

I never saw small gauge alum do this to steel. angle cut steel with molten steel under it.



I have not found one piece of evidence anywhere that would suggest the governments story of "planes burned and warped steel into the shape of horseshoes". "jet fuel" aka kerosene, does not burn at 2800 degrees, at most it might burn at 1400, but only for a few minutes, then assuming it caught the rest of the building on fire and the fire suppression systems all failed at one time, the fire will sustain temps of 1000 degrees for a small time. Iron starts to fail at 2800 degrees, turns into a full liquid around 3500+ and you have to remember that this 1000 degree fire is just sitting in a building with no form of "furnace" type design. A wood burning stove will burn around 1000 degrees, which is the same temperature found in the WTC buildings, and I am fairly sure that a wood stove doesnt instantly (within 100 minutes) melt into a horseshoe. Ever try heating up steel to bend it? it takes many minutes of contact to actually get the steel warm because it acts like a giant heat sink. Projected actual steel temperatures reproduced in a lab for the fema report showed steel might have reached a maximum of 400 degrees.

A few other pictures I didnt find off hand include a picture of a giant I beam bent into a perfect horseshoe, A streaming flow of "molten steel" like found in a volcano, the antennae falling first, a woman standing in one of the giant holes the planes made (she was obviously johnny blaze's little sister, able to withstand the 1400 degree fire supposively burning there).

A very good research site made by architects, absolutely no bias towards government cover ups or anything, just pure facts.
http://www.ae911truth.net/ppt/index.php

well, as much as I like your thinking on temps & the fuel - bombs dont make much heat either. ever see a bomb make these shapes? which is more likely to make these shapes? and, there are other flammable things besides the fuel. and, add in air flow thru the building - which may have made blast furnace spots, and metal which is loaded - not just a I-beam laying there.

and, the 2 tall building would in fact look funny collapsing compared to other buildings. they are exoskeleton like a bug, vs the normal internal skelton like us mammels. the outside shell is stronger than the inside, and when the elevator cores collapse, the center will fall first.

and, being I really didnt like the folk who worked at the world trade center anyways - these are folk most of us would normally CHEER should something bad happen to them. thats why you only hear about the poor fireman. the good folk who had to run in the rescue the traders, bankers & lawyers who normally spend all day screwing you and I for an extra dollar.

so - now - to what end do you think it was bombed? and by whom?

[This message has been edited by Pyrthian (edited 11-13-2007).]

If you ever seen any demolition of buildings, it is always done from the bottom up and when you watch the collapse of any demolition building, you can clearly see that it collapses from the bottom first.

If pieces of building number seven from the lower part of the building is still standing, that means the building collapsed from the top down, meaning it suffered the same fate of the World Trade Buildings.

If you think there is a government conspiracy or that the government collapsed building number 7, then you are a complete idiot!

quote Originally posted by Wichita: If you think there is a government conspiracy or that the government collapsed building number 7, then you are a complete idiot!

Are you calling Rosie O'Donald an idiot !!!!!!

9-11 "truthers" piss me off to no end.

quote [BE]Originally posted by fortifier:[/BE] I'm afraid it's already to late. Honestly they could come at us with sticks and rocks and we wouldn't be able to kill them fast enough to win a war.

Yes, fortunately we have oceans separating us. For now, we have a nuclear advantage and technology advantage,,,, for now. Clinton was/is a traitor. Funny, but the Dems deny and ignore this but cry out against a queer in the bathroom.

China can muster a larger standing army than we have people in this country without even making much of a dent in their population. They also do not treasure human life the way we do and will not have a hissy fit with every soldier killed.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: If you had a stealth capability that the U.S. couldn't detect, would you waste the secret just by popping up during an exercise to show off?

Ditto!

quote Originally posted by CaliforniaSpeeder9: Those are some big subs, and they're not nuclear? Incredible

So they say they are not....

[This message has been edited by FierociousGT (edited 11-13-2007).]

quote Originally posted by Red88FF: Yes, fortunately we have oceans separating us. For now, we have a nuclear advantage and technology advantage,,,, for now. Clinton was/is a traitor. Funny, but the Dems deny and ignore this but cry out against a queer in the bathroom.

I was going to make mention of Clinton's policy of giving our technological knowledge to the Chinese, but thought that would drag things into the trash. That said, here is a juicy article detailing why the Chinese are so excited about the prospect of having another Clinton at the helm of your country.

http://www.hillaryproject.c...inese_re_connection/

[This message has been edited by loafer87gt (edited 11-13-2007).]

Originally posted by Pyrthian:

well, as much as I like your thinking on temps & the fuel - bombs dont make much heat either. ever see a bomb make these shapes? which is more likely to make these shapes? and, there are other flammable things besides the fuel. and, add in air flow thru the building - which may have made blast furnace spots, and metal which is loaded - not just a I-beam laying there.

Thermite cutting charges are used in all steel buildings, the beam is cut then blasted out of the way. Even oxygen rich fires with normal fuel such as gas and typical office stuff, will only get to temperatures of 1200 or 1400 degrees (there were no gas lines in the building so you cant say there was extra fuel)

and, the 2 tall building would in fact look funny collapsing compared to other buildings. they are exoskeleton like a bug, vs the normal internal skelton like us mammels. the outside shell is stronger than the inside, and when the elevator cores collapse, the center will fall first.

common misconception, while the outside of the building was a larger part, the inner core was the part of the building that held it up, the outside resisted wind and, well planes crashing into it.

and, being I really didnt like the folk who worked at the world trade center anyways - these are folk most of us would normally CHEER should something bad happen to them. thats why you only hear about the poor fireman. the good folk who had to run in the rescue the traders, bankers & lawyers who normally spend all day screwing you and I for an extra dollar.

so - now - to what end do you think it was bombed? and by whom?

I never said it was bombed by anyone, or anything, its just strange that there are blatant facts that there were explosives in the building (and a 2 month "core renovation" project the 2 months previous to 9/11, and bomb sniffing dogs being removed for a training operation a few days before.)

quote If you ever seen any demolition of buildings, it is always done from the bottom up and when you watch the collapse of any demolition building, you can clearly see that it collapses from the bottom first. If pieces of building number seven from the lower part of the building is still standing, that means the building collapsed from the top down, meaning it suffered the same fate of the World Trade Buildings.

There was nothing left of building 7, the owner of the buildings was quoted on PBS saying "I then gave the order to pull it" in reference to building 7, meaning he was going to demolish it. There are 2 news videos showing headlines "WTC building 7 has collapsed" 60-30minutes before it actually did.

The whole "top down" vs "bottom up" argument is irrelivent, there have been a few buildings that have been done every way, the simple fact about building 7 is that it buckled in the middle, then fell onto itself at FREE FALL speed, if 95% of the building was not on fire, like stated in the government reports, then it would have fallen much slower, same with the WTC 1-2.

quote 9-11 "truthers" piss me off to no end.

Then prove "us" wrong. I was in your seat not to long ago, phranc, I could NOT FIND ANY EVIDENCE supporting any of the government claims. The cell phone calls from the Pennsylvania flight, and lack of wreckage pictures, the pentagons obvious "lack of wreckage" and "strange damage", along with the ripped up not bent light poles. The seizure of all of the pentagon impact videos.

I really am not speculating anything here, I just want to know the truth about it, the government IS covering it up, it is very plain to me.

quote Originally posted by loafer87gt: I was going to make mention of Clinton's policy of giving our technological knowledge to the Chinese, but thought that would drag things into the trash.

Actually, you mentioned them in the opening post of this thread, heheheh You really can't talk about the Chinese problem without mentioning the Clintons, and tough F'ing luck if people don't want to hear it. That said, thanks for the link.

quote Originally posted by Red88FF: Actually, you mentioned them in the opening post of this thread, heheheh You really can't talk about the Chinese problem without mentioning the Clintons, and tough F'ing luck if people don't want to hear it. That said, thanks for the link.

Oops, thought I had edited that out of my original post as I thought it might be too inflamatory. Guess I thought wrong.

quote Originally posted by Wichita: If you think there is a government conspiracy or that the government collapsed building number 7, then you are a complete idiot!

Then please explain how WTC 7 fell. Please explain how a 47 story steal frame building fell for no reason at all. Please explain how WTC 5 and WTC 6, both steal frame buildings that absorbed 95% more damage from the falling towers than WTC 7 are still standing but WTC 7 just falls out of the air.

quote Originally posted by Wichita: meaning it suffered the same fate of the World Trade Buildings.

Surprisingly, I agree with you on that one!

Do 9-11 "truthers" realize how stupid they sound?

This goes back a long way to when the Japanese sold technology to the Russians, who are friends with the Chinese. I guess this answers why they have quiet subs. I would say it should not have been unexpected.
http://query.nytimes.com/gs...on=&pagewanted=print

[This message has been edited by avengador1 (edited 11-13-2007).]

They need to look for tacheon particle emissions. That's how you can find those sneaky Romulans.

------------------
Whade' "The Duck Formerly Known As Wade" Duck
'87 GT Auto
'88 Ferrario
'84 Indy

quote Originally posted by Phranc: Do 9-11 "truthers" realize how stupid they sound?

Oh please, do some research before you start the name calling this time.

quote Originally posted by AntiKev: Just FYI this piece of news is about a year old (if not older). Word on the street (from knowledgeable submariners) is that, unlike the press would have you believe, the US fleet forced the sub to surface. I would agree with the poster that says we knew where these subs were from the moment they left port. Also, the carrier group's subs were probably well away from the main battle group because that it standard practice during exercises...things would be very different if we were at war with China.

I was thinking something similar. I would bet they knew all along but there is some advantage to sounding surprised. Both sides are well ahead of the press in their thinking.

quote Originally posted by IEatRice: Then please explain how WTC 7 fell. Please explain how a 47 story steal frame building fell for no reason at all. Please explain how WTC 5 and WTC 6, both steal frame buildings that absorbed 95% more damage from the falling towers than WTC 7 are still standing but WTC 7 just falls out of the air.

I dunno exactly - but, one thing that I saw is part of the roof collapsing 1 min before the whole building collapsed. this is not something that normally happens in a "controlled" building drop. 1/4 of the roof collapses & falls down into the building. only 1 of the several videos I saw is at and angle that shows it - but it is NOT something that happens on a demolition.

I have never seen any angle or evidence that a small part of the building folded before the whole thing went down. I would be interested in you finding that.

quote Originally posted by IEatRice: Then please explain how WTC 7 fell. Please explain how a 47 story steal frame building fell for no reason at all. Please explain how WTC 5 and WTC 6, both steal frame buildings that absorbed 95% more damage from the falling towers than WTC 7 are still standing but WTC 7 just falls out of the air.

I don't give much credence to the "truthers" like you because, well...I saw what happened with my own eyes, granted on television, but I still saw it as it happened. Without any knowledge whatsoever of building 7 and having done no research I can give you a few explanations right now. One, there could be hidden underground damage. You don't know if one of these buildings had a crack in the foundation. Two, impurities in the steel, impurities and improper processing cause weak or brittle steel. Three, a large piece of one of the falling towers could have struck the building. I could continue, but I'd rather get into the science, rather than "what ifs."

Finally, what you forget, or perhaps don't know, is that there is no reason that the steel actually had to melt. With a structure of this mass, the margins aren't exactly large. Perhaps 1.5 times or maybe two if you're lucky. In any case, steel does not need to reach melting temperature (depending on carbon content, steel can melt as low as 1100 degrees centigrade), it just needs to soften. Now, anyone who knows anything about chemistry, combustion or thermodynamics can tell you that hydrocarbon flames can reach into the region of 1500K which means...*GASP* that you can easily get above the melting temperature of steel using jet fuel. Oxygen availability is the forcing function in this case. Since there was plenty of fuel and it was already burning. You're also forgetting all of the office supplies that suddenly become fuel for the fire, desks, printers, telephones, chairs, people, they all become fuel.

And just in case you're still unconvinced (I hold out no hope trying to convince you, you won't believe facts, you'd rather go on emotion and hatred for the president) think about a card house that you've surely tried to build when you were younger. Now try to take a card out of the middle of the stack. What happens? Exactly, the top falls, and then all of a sudden the whole thing collapses in upon itself. The same thing happened here. When you build a structure it is designed to support itself while intact...that's the only guarantee, damage voids any engineering analysis.

quote Originally posted by IEatRice: Oh please, do some research before you start the name calling this time.

Research? Like watching lose change? Or watching the actual experts refute ever one of its bullshit claims. Or maybe I should look for the still alive friend I lost that was on the plane that didn't fly into the Pentagon. The one I spend 9-11 with her family every year. Truthers are idiots. Every one of their retarded notions can be disproved and have been repeatedly.

quote Originally posted by IEatRice: Go to war with China? Dude, we borrow 1.4 billion a day to fund our nation and the war in Iraq from China. Why bite the hand that feeds?

Our national debt increases by 1.49 billion a day. Interest increase alone is over 100,000.00 every 4 seconds. Each and every one of us owes a little over thirty thousand dollars just for being born an American.
The war in Iraq has almost topped 2 trillion in costs. We owe almost 3.5 trillion to private or other than American interests. We owe our selves over 6 trillion meaning bonds/bailouts/pension funds/commercial banks/credit unions/states.

China continues to enjoy a trade handicap and we still refuse to promote a manufacturing base. Every time I hear a politician or union man saying we are protecting our way of life I smile.


The only reason we won't go to war with China is because we won't have the resources to do it. The best way to overcome a enemy is to choke their supply. China has done one better. they are the supply and we pay them to do it to us.

steels melting point is 2800 degrees, no doubts there, even if it is horrid steel (it had fire resistant coating on it, along with being attached to the largest heat sink in new york) your 2000 degree point is still not at all obtainable. I dont think my Chinese wood stove is melting into a pile any time soon, that has to have the worst steel you could imagine in it. Also you have to remember you have to sustain this heat for a time, and you have a very large heat sink effect with a building of this size. Focusing significant heat in a perfectly uniform manner when the building was only hit on one side is impossible. The official report says that the steel "sagged" 46 inches in the center across a 12 foot span.

The FEMA report states that they could not heat steel to more than 400 degrees F while reproducing the situation found in that building.

Do i have to post the picture of the woman standing in one of the entrance holes for you to believe me that fire was not hot enough to do anything?

The problem with your card theory is the fact that that is not what happened. You can clearly see the center of the building falling first, by looking at the antenna sitting on top, attached to the center structure. If that "card" was pulled out, you would see that side of the building falling in one piece, as it is bound together, so it would fall sideways. Basicly the top should have cocked a bit, then "pile drived" the rest of the building. It is easy to see that 90% of the top of the building was utterly destroyed before impacting the parts of the building that were un damaged. EVEN IF what we are seeing on video is wrong, and it just fell like a hammer crushing everything, last time I checked a hammer falling through 60 stories of concrete and steel, will reach the ground significantly slower than one falling next to it at free fall.

It is a confirmed fact that if you were standing at the very top of the building (not on the antenna), and jumped just after the antenne fell (the outside of the building still hasn't moved even though the antennae dropped ~75ft), you would reach the ground at the same time the antenna would. The majority of the structural integrity of building 1+2, was the core of the building, that was hardly damaged at all by the planes, and could never of saw direct heat, and would easily resist the "accordion effect" that the government claims happened by steel sagging and pulling the outside of the building inward.