olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Tell that to the Ukrainians, Chechens, Georgians, and eastern Europeans. And if that doesn't satisfy you, the Russians being less aggressive is a result of the butt whipping NATO handed them. Don't mess with Texas! Georgia invaded the break away regions and russia stopped the invasion russia was in the right chechens are terrorists btw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 funny how canada is all of a sudden moral when it exports killer asbestos to poor countries Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 funny how canada is all of a sudden moral when it exports killer asbestos to poor countries More moral than the countries who demand said asbestos and don't use it safely. No demand means no mining. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Georgia invaded the break away regions and russia stopped the invasion russia was in the right chechens are terrorists btw Wikipedia says that Georgia was responding to shelling meaning the who started the war is up for debate. So Russia gets a free pass for doing any means necessary for dealing with terrorists, but NATO gets to be mired in red tape. Heads I win tails you lose in your eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 (edited) Wikipedia says that Georgia was responding to shelling meaning the who started the war is up for debate. So Russia gets a free pass for doing any means necessary for dealing with terrorists, but NATO gets to be mired in red tape. Heads I win tails you lose in your eyes. if the terrorists are on your border or in your country you can defend yourself if you wish but to go half way across the world to the mid east? thats far beyond anything russias done in decades btw, i dont believe russia attacked georgia first but the russians sure knew what was going on before it happened Edited November 22, 2011 by olp1fan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 More moral than the countries who demand said asbestos and don't use it safely. No demand means no mining. lmao you are such a homer canada is morally bankrupt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 More moral than the countries who demand said asbestos and don't use it safely. No demand means no mining. So you are actually for legalized heroin then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 So you are actually for legalized heroin then? Yeah...that's what he said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Yeah...that's what he said. But you get the analogy right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 So you are actually for legalized heroin then? Nope, asbestos doesn't screw ones mind up and make them unproductive, all it screws up is the lungs like coal mining, working in dust, etc. Although asbestos does it faster. But if your comparing it to drugs, it still stands, the user is IMO more morally bankrupt than the supplier because without the user wanting to screw himself up, there would be no supplier to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Nope, asbestos doesn't screw ones mind up and make them unproductive, all it screws up is the lungs like coal mining, working in dust, etc. Although asbestos does it faster. But if your comparing it to drugs, it still stands, the user is IMO more morally bankrupt than the supplier because without the user wanting to screw himself up, there would be no supplier to begin with. So you just contradicted yourself. It appears YOU ARE in favour of legalized heroin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Nope, asbestos doesn't screw ones mind up and make them unproductive, all it screws up is the lungs like coal mining, working in dust, etc. Although asbestos does it faster. But if your comparing it to drugs, it still stands, the user is IMO more morally bankrupt than the supplier because without the user wanting to screw himself up, there would be no supplier to begin with. so youd have no objection to having asbestos in your house... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 so youd have no objection to having asbestos in your house... Asbestos is fine if it's not disturbed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 (edited) But if your comparing it to drugs, it still stands, the user is IMO more morally bankrupt than the supplier because without the user wanting to screw himself up, there would be no supplier to begin with. I am not comparing it to drugs, I am using heroin as an analogy for the type of argument you are presenting in order to sort it out. So what you are saying is that the user is "more morally bankrupt" than the supplier, so to track it back to the selling of asbestos, you are agreeing with olp1fan that Canada is indeed "morally bankrupt" the only difference being, in your eyes, a mere matter of degrees. And, when talking about bankruptcy - again, an analogy - those matters of degrees are very slight since bankruptcy tends to be an end state before some sort of change is introduced. See? It isn't very hard for you to agree with olp1fan after all. Edited November 22, 2011 by Shwa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Asbestos is fine if it's not disturbed. so your word is better than scientists and health professionals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 so your word is better than scientists and health professionals? If it's not disturbed and it is properly sealed, then there is no risk. But that is not the case in many instances. Off topic, but... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 If it's not disturbed and it is properly sealed, then there is no risk. But that is not the case in many instances. Off topic, but... my uncle builds houses and that is not what he told me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 If it's not disturbed and it is properly sealed, then there is no risk. But that is not the case in many instances. Off topic, but... if its so safe why did its #1 defender stephen harper remove it from his residence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 my uncle builds houses and that is not what he told me You could start another thread: War mongering neo cons ready to bomb Syria with disturbed asbestos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charter.rights Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 my uncle builds houses and that is not what he told me GH is correct. Asbestos in homes is sufficiently safe providing the surface of the insulation isn't broken or exposed to potential mechanical damage. Like coal, it is mainly just a dangerous material to mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 GH is correct. Asbestos in homes is sufficiently safe providing the surface of the insulation isn't broken or exposed to potential mechanical damage. Like coal, it is mainly just a dangerous material to mine. yet harper just removed it from his home Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted November 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 You could start another thread: War mongering neo cons ready to bomb Syria with disturbed asbestos. check out the new title Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 check out the new title Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 Georgia invaded the break away regions and russia stopped the invasionrussia was in the right chechens are terrorists btw Do you always pull facts out your ass, or have you done any research on this at all Comrad.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted November 22, 2011 Report Share Posted November 22, 2011 if its so safe why did its #1 defender stephen harper remove it from his residence? Because slamming the door is enough to disturb asbestos. But GH is right: if it is sealed it isn't a danger. But, they didn't seal-in asbestos in the good ol' days. Spray-on practically... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.