Syrian Nuclear Reactor - Now you see it, Now you don't!

We have nuclear reactor here in Slovenia. We will even probably start building second one or something.

Nuclear reactor is not nuclear bomb man ....

 

no, but it has the word "nuclear" in it

 

We already had this lame discussion Gtech, you always bitch and moan for links. Yet when they are given to you, you still use it and say no link was given. You continue to show yourself as a hypocrite to the fullest extent.

I am not agenda driven one bit, that would fall onto you. I have read those articles and none of them are 'proof' a link to a search is exactly what you have ripped on others for. Is this seriously the best you can do, yet more failed attempts.

My only 'agenda' was hopes to see something with substance.

LOL

I said it was not working? Seriously. I could have sworn I said it was to early to tell, there was more to the story, you know the whole cease fire and all that you failed to even respond to. Plus the facts that your numbers of going down month after month were not fully correct.

Talk about agenda, how about you being owned and wrong on the GC being applicable. I have left that thread slide as there is no point, should I feel the need to though I'll take you to school there as well again

This is where you are totally wrong Gtech, you're not even close to being in reality. I have no agenda, what is my agenda here? All I wanted was a fuxxing article, something you can not even come up with to show proof that it was in fact a nuke site.

If anyone follows blindly or has an agenda that would be you If anyone has been wrong time and time again that would be you.

In fact the definition of OWNED should have a pic of you.

Yet again you love to blindly believe, the surge thread is a perfect example. You take a few months and latch onto it as it's fully working, numbers are shown to differ with yours and you take that as it's against you so right onto the attack to say it's not working. You have seriously got to wake up to reality one of these days, it's simply shocking you are so close minded.

Asking for the full story, saying it's to soon to tell is not the same is disputing something not working. To grasp as quickly as you do to everything is the very definition of following blindly, you have proven it time and time again.

You know what's funny, I unlike you will argue the case at hand, but you, nope you will twist to anything but the case at hand.

Again all I wanted was a link, wow if you were so worried about Syria I'd think you'd have one. I ask for links in threads all the time, so do you. You on the other hand attack when asked for a link, all the while attacking any time someone doesn't 'and even when they do' post a link.

Talk about hypocrisy...................................................

If anyone has any article showing something with actual substance, please post a link. I'd love to read the article, I guess some find that to hard to do, what does the article not exist? If it doesn't exist are you in fact following blindly?

Following blindly is your right to do, you did it with Iraq, don't worry I wont stop you from being mindless drones, I however will not be a mindless drone myself.

--edit

Blind people like you who are proven wrong time and time again.

Thank you for posting some links, nothing I did not read before, nothing substantial, less 'proof' then the 'proof' Iraq was stock piling WMD's.

Hopefully it was a Nuke site, good job being destroyed. So far though a building near water with coolant, trucks, similiar structure sure appears far from 'proof'

I know of lots of buildings near water, with trucks, should they all be bombed?

 

Interesting. Your defense is that I do what you are doing. That's what a hypocrite is. Welcome to the club, my grand poobah!

You are so agenda driven, it's absolutely hilarious when you say you are not! The proof is more than there. That you are too stubborn and blind to see it is your problem, not mine. You'd argue my brown shoes are actually white.

It was presented, you simply refused to look. I can't be held responsible for your willful ignorance.

They were quite correct. You can lie to try and weasel your way out, but everyone saw your disappointment and how you were nearly crying, because it was working. Proof, shown once again, that you chose to willfully ignore, because of your agenda. In fact, you even confirmed your agenda...that it was about Bush, in that very discourse.

I wasn't owned on any such thing. In fact, a number of people saw your pathetic comments. You, however, WERE owned for directly saying that "we" were no better than terrorists. And you got stomped on for saying such ridiculous things.

Please! Who do you think you are trying to fool by saying you have no agenda? You got your articles and your proof and like a twit, are still in denial. Just like everything else that doesn't serve your agenda. I can offer you a tissue if you need one, again?

I don't mind if you continue to project all your shortcomings onto me. It helps me identify your weaknesses.

LMAO! Only in your delusional mind. However, a pic of a dumb ass...

Projecting again. Thank you. It helps me point out your weaknesses. By projecting your own shortcomings, that of blindly believing or disbelieving, that you latch onto anything that falls into your agenda with never a question, and present a closed mind argument to everything, helps paint your true colors.

Nope. Willfully ignoring the evidence, as you are doing once again here, is the issue. You follow your agenda blindly, and refuse any evidence (as you've once again done here) to suggest your little world isn't as accurate as you wish it were.

Playing the victim role again? I love making you my victim It's so easy. If only the gym had a machine for the mind, you might be worthy. No, unlike you, I'll stand by my principles despite how many are against them. You, on the other hand, will ONLY take the popular position, because you are so afraid of being wrong. Unlike you, I don't sell my principles out on what is popular and if it's popular enough to elicit support from others.

You got over eight hundred of them, including some direct ones. Yet you are still crying about being proven wrong again. As if anyone really believes that you would take the evidence presented? Please, boy! Your ego is way too big for that!

That's already happened. You proved I was correct, that you would simply go into denial over them. What more could I ask for? You are as predictable as farm animals at feeding time.

Demanding evidence, then avoiding it when presented is your right. Apparently it's a right you like to invoke quite often.

Once again, denial and projectionism, coupled with a touch of narcissism, are your only tools for defense on the actual issue.

 

GTech your response doesn't even deserve an answer as it's so far off as usual.

I however do post links when asked, you however bitch and whine and complain. Last time we had this little argument you were owned and I could have sworn you actually appologized.

There was no ill will, I simply wanted a simple link. No agenda, I do believe in first strikes if they need to be done. I actually had hoped someone had a good link, I do like to read articles.

I guess yet again the articles do not exist, if / when they exist please someone post it.

You're about to go on ignore again as you are a blow hard who can do nothing more than change the subject, refuse to admit when wrong, put words into others mouths among others. Deceit and lying might be your strong suit, it however is laughable at how you think that makes you correct.

/

Back to my request, if anyone has a good link to read on this please post. No strings attached, I simply am looking for more info on the subject. Nothing I have read so far suggests any true proof by any standard.

---edit
LOL I will only take the 'popular' stance. Give me a break, I was against Iraq when it was the very unpopular stance. I take the stance where logic appears to point to, not any agenda. Seriously Gtech you need to do some soul searching and see just how wrong and miserable you trully are. I do hope some day you see it, I would love to have actual discussions. You refuse to see it but many things we do actually agree on, you however take anything that isn't 100% on your side as being attacked.

I don't know why this is, but it's VERY noticable. Even those on the same sides can and SHOULD have discussions, when done right it can improve things, when however always used as a way to attack if it's not 100% what you think it can only lead to failure.

 

But you just can't resist It's the narcissism, I know!

No worries, I'm familiar with the rotating victim stages now.

I predicted you would go into denial over the sources I provided. I appreciate you taking the time to prove me right.

I also predicted someone would stand up for Syria. You've done that through denial of the very evidence you demanded. Thank you again!

As as in our last heated debate when you were saying that "we" are no better than terrorists, I noted that if you give a narcissist the last word, they will generally shut up. You were kind enough to prove me right then, as well.

I'm a nice guy. I know you can't help it, so I'll let you have that last word. Thanks for being my victim again!

I yield the floor to you, my bumpy poobah

 

Here is a link : http://militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=2836153&postcount=18

 

'victim' oh please, you couldn't argue your way out of a wet paper bag. I have owned you so many times I lost count, you have yet, not once to own me

I asked for a link, nothing more. You chose to go out of your way to turn the subject.

As far as your links they are far from proof. I am not arguing for Syria, jesus get the fuck over yourself, seriously.

Vague assumptions of what something could be is hardly 'proof' I would think you'd of learned your lesson from being owned and proven wrong time and time again from Iraq, I guess I was wrong. An old dog like you never does learn does he?

----------------

Yet again back to the subject at hand, if anyone has any good links with actual proof please post them or pm them. I would very much like to read something above and beyond 'assumptions'

 

While far from proof and I am not taking that post with much merit I am enjoying reading the thead itself. Many images, explanations, more information on the subject at hand.

I like as much information as possible, not just 1 or 2 articles pointing me to the conclusion I'd like to have.

If I had a conclusion I'd want to have, I'd hope it was a nuke site and that Israel did the right thing. I however will not jump for that, especially on something such as this without something with some substance.

 

Sounds like the US government.

 

Whatever it was it's gone, deal with it

 

Thats what guru said as well....

its so easy to go with that answer these days...but hey, I am glad its gone...I hoped they learned a lesson from Israel.