Planetarion Forums

Makain · 3 Dec 2002, 05:51

Quote:

MOSCOW, Russia
(CNN) --Perry Heimer, Co-Chairman of Greenearth, a break-off organization of Greenpeace, annouced it had closed a deal with the Russian Federation earlier this week concerning the fate of three FE003 Battlecruisers (nicknamed Red Strikers during the Cold War).

Russian officials would not verify or deny the report, but confirmed that some sort of agreement had taken place in the last few days.

Greenearth, composed of ultra-radical environmentalists, broke away from Greenpeace in 1999 after a series of infamous clashes with French authorities.

After its break away, Greenearth went on to woo private investors, mainly in Taiwan's Superconductor industry, which has been making strides to conform with the Pan-Asian Pollution Act.

Mr Heimer went on to say that the ships have been acquired at a bargain price totaling $375 million Euros, or $365 million US dollars. The cost to construct one of these mid-sized battlecruisers was never released by the Russian government, but is estimated at about $300 million US dollars a ship.

When asked what Greenearth proposed to do with the ships, Mr. Heimer left little in doubt.

"We plan to aggresively enforce implied international agreements and will blockade third world countries whose citizens continue to hunt endangered sealife," responded Heimer.

France, India, and China already have policies that ban Greenearth members from their countires and waters, but there are no restrictions to International waters, where many whalers operate.

Taiwan expressed optimism to the move, hoping it will reduce the danger posed to whales and endangered fish.

Only a few FE003 Battlecruisers are still in commision today, as they are only useful in ship to ship combat. They are approx. 110m long and can be crewed by up to 75 personal.

Heimer said part of the bargain was to have the large diesel engines that the battlecruisers use, replaced with more fuel-efficient motors.

Greenearth purchases Russian battlecruisers

Dilly_D · 3 Dec 2002, 06:02

heh...something else for G.W. to play with

Auro · 3 Dec 2002, 06:03

Mods. If I post a YAMSE! link, would I get banned?

Grimble · 3 Dec 2002, 06:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Auro
Mods. If I post a YAMSE! link, would I get banned?

either way it'd be

dude

Sandsnake · 3 Dec 2002, 06:59

heh something tells me there are 3 battlecruisers with their names etched onto some Harpoon missiles.

I don't see any combat ship that has no national/international affiliation acting aggressively and not being hunted down and destroyed.

The idiots will probably end up firing on an international battle group sent to arrest them and being laid down to the waterline.

W · 3 Dec 2002, 07:05

I know what'd happen if they ever entered norwegian waters

We're not exactly fond of the greenies.

Kileman · 3 Dec 2002, 07:23

They'll cruise down to antarctica, scare the **** out of some Japanese whalers and send them on there merry way

________
ALASKA MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARY

Auro · 3 Dec 2002, 07:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Grimble
either way it'd be dude

Getting myself banned isn't quite amusing to me

And how much porn do you have to warrent yourself of being the PA Porn King

Grimble · 3 Dec 2002, 09:04

Less than 95% of the posters on this board I assume

I can't quite remember how it came about, I think I blame Kura though

Legolas · 3 Dec 2002, 09:15

Good luck to them.

Yes, that is a genuine comment.

W · 3 Dec 2002, 09:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Legolas
Good luck to them.

Yes, that is a genuine comment.

You are aware of how bogus 90% of their arguments are?

Cyp · 3 Dec 2002, 09:53

Interesting article on that page. I don't think third world countries are fair targets, though. Probably just because they are easy targets. I think Greenearth helping shut down old nuclear powerplants is a bit worrying after hearing that they got battlecruisers... ("Related Articles" links on site) Maybe they kept some of the fission material...

Mong · 3 Dec 2002, 11:33

This Is A Hoax

Just wanted to make this clear.

Much searching of the web and CNN.Com proves my initial doubts were correct...

M.

3 Dec 2002, 11:36

Why do I keep seeing the scene of two undercover cops trying to arrest each others in my mind?

at0mic.c0w · 3 Dec 2002, 11:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Demon1411
Why do I keep seeing the scene of two undercover cops trying to arrest each others in my mind?

cause u get turned on by roleplays ?

W · 3 Dec 2002, 11:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Mong
This Is A Hoax

Just wanted to make this clear.

Much searching of the web and CNN.Com proves my initial doubts were correct...

M.

It's believeable tho. There are militant greenies, and there are people desperate enough to sell them heavy weaponry.

3 Dec 2002, 13:14

Quote:

I don't see any combat ship that has no national/international affiliation acting aggressively and not being hunted down and destroyed.

I think its safe to assume that you are (and everyone else is) aware that international waters are completely lawless, so they wouldn't be doing anything wrong, unless you harbor a certain type of morals, but then you would probably object to the whalings in international waters anyway. I don't think any countries will do anything.

Quote:

I don't think third world countries are fair targets

One of those radicals would probably say "Their economic weakness does not make their crimes against walruses less hainous (sp)." I myself am not opposed to targeting third-world countries.

Quote:

Maybe they kept some of the fission material

And are really al Queda in disguise. . .

I know the whole story is a hoax, I'm just contributing regardless.

W · 3 Dec 2002, 13:30

Quote:

Originally posted by MonotoneMan
I think its safe to assume that you are (and everyone else is) aware that international waters are completely lawless, so they wouldn't be doing anything wrong, unless you harbor a certain type of morals, but then you would probably object to the whalings in international waters anyway. I don't think any countries will do anything.

I am quite sure that if they start shooting, or threatening to shoot, on ships registered to some country, that country would care less if they were in international waters, and even less whether they had broken a law or rule or anything. They'd just sink them.

Makain · 3 Dec 2002, 15:28

Im glad my lack of a social life provided so much entertainment to you all. I typed it up using a real CNN article as my basis, and I think if you bothered to click the link you would know it was a hoax. It is a funny concept.

3 Dec 2002, 16:58

Even if it wasn't a hoax, I doubt a 688 or a Ticonderoga would have too much trouble dispatching three out of date Russian warships.

Snurx · 3 Dec 2002, 17:07

Even if this "article" is a hoax, it still is a valid discussion, beacause there ARE greenieraddies out there that are crazy enough to start bombing and shooting people.
Plus, there are enough crazy russians to sell them the weaponary they need.

Anyways, even if they are crazy, idiotick (in many ways) and a lot off other strange things, i would still say a hooray or two if they could create a stir.

Vermillion · 3 Dec 2002, 17:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Snurx

Plus, there are enough crazy russians to sell them the weaponary they need.

Speaking of Hoaxes...

This is a bit of an aside, but I have to comment. The whole idea that everything in the former Red Army from AK-74s to Typhoon class Boomers is for sale to any joe with a bankroll is almost entirely fiction propagated by Hollywood to make for spine-tingling suspense stories.

Yes it is true the Russian Military is selling off a lot of stuff to raise funds, and yes it is true that they are being somewhat unscrupulous in terms of their buyers, such as China for example. But Russian sales still require government approval, and still require sales to governments not private individuals. If Soviet weapons are so readily available, then why in the last 10 years has the tebel/terrorist weapon of choice gone from the AK series to the M-16? If, as Hollywood likes to pretend, anyone can go to Moscow with $100,000 dollars and walk away with a nuke, why has this never happened?

The fact is, yes there is corruption, and for small scale weapons (rifles, pistols, small explosives) you could probably buy these things in Russia from the Mafia. But then again, you can buy them in the US at perfectly legal gun shows.

Larger scale weapons, modern armour, modern aircraft, WMD, etc, are probably as well guarded and certified in Russia as they are in the US. A few years ago, some newsman released a story about how Russia had several dozen or more nuclear weapons 'unaccounted for'. But they then made the assumption that these had been stolen or lost. In fact the Russian administration system is weak, but the security system is not. Far more likely is that these warheads were destroyed under START or the various other arms control treaties, and record was not updated.

Trust me, you take a briefcase full of Money and go to a Russian missile base and try and buy a nuke, and you will be in jail in 20 minutes. And unlike in the US, you will likely be executed for the attempt.

Bin Laden before Sept. 11th had a TON of money, plenty of will, and old contacts with the USSR. If it was in ANY way possible to buy a nuke from Soviet sources, he would have. And a surplus Navy missile Cruiser would be even HARDER to arrange.

Cyp · 3 Dec 2002, 20:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Makain
Im glad my lack of a social life provided so much entertainment to you all. I typed it up using a real CNN article as my basis, and I think if you bothered to click the link you would know it was a hoax. It is a funny concept.

Damn, didn't realize it was a hoax, I thought they had just changed the layout of the CNN site a bit. Perhaps something to do with the government sharing it's views on the general public, via the CNN site.

Maybe I also just hallucinated the "Related Articles" link on that site, to Greenearth aquiring nuclear weapons materials...

MrPeach · 3 Dec 2002, 21:14

errrr, can a mod change the topic to include HOAX or something?! as i doubted the initial report but didnt really want to have to scroll down a mile to actually see...

id actually already checked on CNN.com by that point.

3 Dec 2002, 21:14

Quote:

I am quite sure that if they start shooting, or threatening to shoot, on ships registered to some country, that country would care less if they were in international waters, and even less whether they had broken a law or rule or anything. They'd just sink them.

Well yes, if they belonged to a certain country. I was talking about commercial fishing ships.

Quote:

Im glad my lack of a social life provided so much entertainment to you all. I typed it up using a real CNN article as my basis, and I think if you bothered to click the link you would know it was a hoax. It is a funny concept.

"I know the whole story is a hoax, I'm just contributing regardless."

W · 3 Dec 2002, 21:48

Quote:

Originally posted by MonotoneMan
Well yes, if they belonged to a certain country. I was talking about commercial fishing ships.

Yes, cause everyone knows that commercial fishing ships and their crew live and breed in international waters, never setting foot on land. They're people without citizenship, who live off what the sea gives, including new engine parts and fishing tools.

Vermillion · 3 Dec 2002, 22:04

Quote:

Originally posted by W
Yes, cause everyone knows that commercial fishing ships and their crew live and breed in international waters, never setting foot on land. They're people without citizenship, who live off what the sea gives, including new engine parts and fishing tools.

As an aside, most fishing ships actually do not come from the countries they really come from. According to their flags and registries, the Turks and Cacos, as well as Panama and a few other 'Flags of convenience' states have the largest fishing fleets in the world.

I have always wondered what happens if someone torpedoes a Japanese fishing ship with is running under Panamanian flag and registry. I suppose since the crew are japanese citizens that gives them the right to get involved...

Makain · 3 Dec 2002, 22:04

Quote:

Originally posted by MonotoneMan
Well yes, if they belonged to a certain country. I was talking about commercial fishing ships.

"I know the whole story is a hoax, I'm just contributing regardless."

I was refering to the others who were still taking it seriously.

And for the person too lazy to scroll down, but adamant enough to check cnn.com, by the time you finish reading this you should know your mistake.

3 Dec 2002, 23:49

Quote:

Originally posted by W
Yes, cause everyone knows that commercial fishing ships and their crew live and breed in international waters, never setting foot on land. They're people without citizenship, who live off what the sea gives, including new engine parts and fishing tools.

How about this:
Their countries of residence *gasp* might neglect to give a **** about a few citizens! If they cared about every last sad sap with bad fortune, there would no homeless people. Even if they will donate a tiny sphincter nugget, it probably isn't enough to inspire them to fight a naval battle over a shipload of tuna.

W · 4 Dec 2002, 02:01

Quote:

Originally posted by MonotoneMan
How about this:
Their countries of residence *gasp* might neglect to give a **** about a few citizens! If they cared about every last sad sap with bad fortune, there would no homeless people. Even if they will donate a tiny sphincter nugget, it probably isn't enough to inspire them to fight a naval battle over a shipload of tuna.

Well, it all depends on the nation of course. Some nations are more protective than others. Norwegian vessels have fired on islandic fishing boats before over fishing rights.

Helveticus · 4 Dec 2002, 02:15

Quote:

Originally posted by MonotoneMan
"Their economic weakness does not make their crimes against walruses less hainous (sp)."

'Heinous'.

Zither · 4 Dec 2002, 02:30

Quote:

Originally posted by W
Well, it all depends on the nation of course. Some nations are more protective than others. Norwegian vessels have fired on islandic fishing boats before over fishing rights.

UK has had 3 'cod wars' (i believe) with iceland which has included sending of Royal Navy frigates which fired shots.

WarFalcon · 4 Dec 2002, 03:48

If those greenpeople gave any of my citizens problems I would give the fishers commissions for privateers and let them blow the earthies out of the water.

Makain · 4 Dec 2002, 04:02

All crazy cults aside, the environment is a real problem that needs to be addressed. Which is why I will be voting for Gore in the 2004 election (turning 18 soon). Bush has been neglecting the environment in pure favor of big business and oil, and from what I read in Time Magazine I believe Gore will do something, if just to differeniate himself from Bush.

Auro · 4 Dec 2002, 04:16

I am not amused by the prospect that the hippies can acquire an AK-47 as easily as I can: with a credit card and a internet connection

WarFalcon · 4 Dec 2002, 05:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Makain
All crazy cults aside, the environment is a real problem that needs to be addressed. Which is why I will be voting for Gore in the 2004 election (turning 18 soon). Bush has been neglecting the environment in pure favor of big business and oil, and from what I read in Time Magazine I believe Gore will do something, if just to differeniate himself from Bush.

Gore's a joke, I figure Kerry will give him a run for his primary. Then there are plenty of other msc. people toying with a run too, even Gephart. Once the Democrats get done bludgening each other into a pulp they can run against the most popular President in recent memory, during a war no less.

in summation

'ha'

Makain · 4 Dec 2002, 06:17

Quote:

Originally posted by WarFalcon
Gore's a joke, I figure Kerry will give him a run for his primary. Then there are plenty of other msc. people toying with a run too, even Gephart. Once the Democrats get done bludgening each other into a pulp they can run against the most popular President in recent memory, during a war no less.

in summation

'ha'

Read the news dumbass. Kerry is a joke, he is only looking at it so he might get the VP slot, or set himself up for 2008. He is just trying to boost his recognition level. Over 50% of democrats polled said they would prefer Gore in the election. Hilary Clinton is the only other possible canidate that pushed Gore under the 50% mark, and Gore still held onto 38% compared to her 28%.

If you truly believe either Bush or Gore is fit to be the President then you don't even know what your talking about. However, to pick the lesser of the two evils, Gore has more experience with the economy and Iraq, he probably wont try to pass bills the restrict our freedoms and increase Presidential power, and if you had done any research you would see that he is a viable canidate for 2004.

I know exactly where you got Kerry from, because I saw the same god damn headline two days ago, but it takes more then skimming an optimisitc article on cnn.com about an explatory committee to give such a well-known canidate a run for his money. Especially since Kerry is ranked 5th out of the 6 possible canidates, only out-ranking Gephart (sp).

Bush will probably win, but that doesn't make him any less then a joke to the rest of the world and 52% of the people who voted in the 2000 campaign. It should be clear to anyone who looked at it, that the only reason that dumbass has an approval rating is because its impossible to screw up enough when given such a window to rally the American public. He's even turned the sweep of patriotism into a majority margain for a previously completely unwanted war.

Toop · 4 Dec 2002, 09:06

well, no more whale-hunting for Norway/Japan it seems

WarFalcon · 4 Dec 2002, 14:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Makain
Read the news dumbass. Kerry is a joke, he is only looking at it so he might get the VP slot, or set himself up for 2008. He is just trying to boost his recognition level. Over 50% of democrats polled said they would prefer Gore in the election. Hilary Clinton is the only other possible canidate that pushed Gore under the 50% mark, and Gore still held onto 38% compared to her 28%.

You can make a poll say anything you want. Look at how inaccurate many predictions about the last few elections have been.

Quote:

If you truly believe either Bush or Gore is fit to be the President then you don't even know what your talking about. However, to pick the lesser of the two evils, Gore has more experience with the economy and Iraq, he probably wont try to pass bills the restrict our freedoms and increase Presidential power, and if you had done any research you would see that he is a viable canidate for 2004.

I watched Gore's long winded 'plan' for the economy. Frankly he hasn't a clue, but then, neither does Greenspan or hardly anyone else running the country right now. Bush will put in tax cuts, and that is the best we can hope for.

Gore is just another Clinton stooge, and like any good wind up toy he will perform the party line. I shudder to think what he would do in war, after all, last time he went to war he had a bodyguard.

Quote:

I know exactly where you got Kerry from, because I saw the same god damn headline two days ago, but it takes more then skimming an optimisitc article on cnn.com about an explatory committee to give such a well-known canidate a run for his money. Especially since Kerry is ranked 5th out of the 6 possible canidates, only out-ranking Gephart (sp).

I'm not suggesting Kerry could probably win, I just used him as an example. In the Democrat primary Gore will have to face those other opponents, they arn't going to say nice things about him, and after months of being bloodied and drained (of cash) by his own party then he will have to face Bush again. This Bush is more popular than the Bush of 2000 and Gore has little to offer except far left wing programs like single payer health care. America is still too conservative to fall for such overt governmental control tactics, we saw it with Hillary Health care (which ironically spawned HMOs)

Quote:

Bush will probably win, but that doesn't make him any less then a joke to the rest of the world and 52% of the people who voted in the 2000 campaign. It should be clear to anyone who looked at it, that the only reason that dumbass has an approval rating is because its impossible to screw up enough when given such a window to rally the American public. He's even turned the sweep of patriotism into a majority margain for a previously completely unwanted war.

I don't give .02 for the rest of the world's opinion, you can look at their countries and see why. Bush might not be perfect, but he's a far sight better than some environmental wacko Clinton left over.

WarFalcon · 4 Dec 2002, 14:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Rick

Maybe thats why when Regan lowreed the taxes on the (bad evil) rich from 74% to 28% the net revanues increased by double.

I think the top rates were as high as 93% !

Cyp · 5 Dec 2002, 09:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Makain
Greenearth purchases Russian battlecruisers

Mind if I borrow that link for another thread?

Makain · 5 Dec 2002, 16:57

Not at all!