What are "most nations"? And if this is true, what does it say about or democracy? Now careful what you say, as there are ways to confirm what you are suggesting. Also, what you say is partially true of most countries. Most nations have a police force that is as large or larger than their military. The police is an internal peacekeeping role necessary for the ongoing maintenance of the laws of the land. Most countries view this as a more important role than having a large military. The police being paramilitary have the ability to be mobilized into a civil protection organization in the event of conflict. That is why the majority of officers have some form of military background. I think you better clairfy what you mean.
I would also advise you not to watch COPS. It's a load of B.S. What you see is 100% sanitized and sensationalistic crap. Before filming anything, the local and state have to give explicit written authorization to allow the production company to work with the department. The department then decides where the camera crew gets to operate and who they do their ride-along with. Nothing that could potentially put any intelligence assets at risk is filmed, and the department and state get to delete what ever they wish from the footage. There are laws and statutes that apply, and an agency is not going to risk their accreditation by allowing a TV crew to release information they should not.
Tht's what this whole thread is about. The test of a T2. What, do you think that the US just went and built the minuteman system and then stuffed it into silos all over the midwest? The system was tested extensively. Same with all systems. Oh, and here's some recent tests by the United States. Oh wait, I forgot, NO ONE tests missiles.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2566843.stm
http://goliath.ecnext.com/comsite5/b...d=0199-4222769
Here's some examples of other nations NOT testing their missiles.
http://www.nti.org/e_research/profil...4126_4339.html
http://www.bu.edu/globalbeat/southasia/CEIP041599.html
And here's a document that even explains the United States testing model.
http://www.fas.org/asmp/library/articles/ftb1995.htm
Yup, NO ONE tests these things.
WTF are you talking about? Can you please make your comments a little less cyptic. Are refering to the Aegis system, or something else? What ever it is, the United States has been unable to produce any verifiable results of shooting down missiles. And what do the SEALS have to do with anything? SEALS don't operate missile or anti-missile systems. SEALS are special operations forces used for specific covert operations. They have nothing to do with anything you suggest in this thread.
What the hell are you nattering on about? Conspiracy theories of secret technology 100 years a head of us? HAARP contrlling the weather and using it to kill poor black people in New Orleans? WTF are you talking about? Holy smokes, I like a good yarn, but take a step back into reality buddy, you've gone off the deep end.
HAARP is designed to heat the ionosphere. The experiments have been to try and stimulate the ionosphere and to eject chunks of it into space as a plasma jet. This proved to be useless and they tried to use it as a way of transmitting huge amounts of data in low frequency bursts, with some success. HAARP is an antenna array, not a laser, so it would be useless for many of the purposes you suggest like missile defense and killing asteroids in space. Man, at least have some idea what you are talking about.
Again, get the facts straight. The suspected terrorists were not captured in New York city. They were not even in the United States. They we in Lebanon and locations NOT released, but they were not in the United States. As well, what is suggested is impossible. Blowing up a tunnel would NOT flood Manhattan. Manhattan island is ABOVE sea level. To flood Manhattan island, terrorists would have to raise sea levels 20 feet or more. Now for that to happen, that would require them melting the ice caps. That ain't going to happen through the actions of a terrorist. As well, blowing up the tunnels under the east river would be very difficult. Those tunnels go through bed rock, and fracturing them to the point of collapse would take the explosive power of a small nuke. If someone had a small nuke, why use it on a tunnel? Why not just do a ground burst?
You know, this whole story reeks of B.S. It doesn't make much sense when you actually think about it. They had me until they said that the purpose was to flood Manhattan. Smells like fear mongering and propaganda. You know, the government relies on the stupidity of people like you to fall for crap like this. They exploit people who are willing to swallow what ever load of crap they float and make mindless drones out of them. Try doing some critical thought before believing everything that is fed through the media.
Is that a threat? Wow, a real internet tough guy. Funny, but I know lots of people that share my sentiments, and they ARE Americans. Do you put them in the hospital too? My boyfriend put me in the hospital after he pounded my butt. Hehehehe