Titanic.com - Titanic News, Photos, Articles & Research | Forum Index Titanic news New Titanic |
Browsing this Thread:
32 Anonymous Users
Bottom Previous Topic Next Topic | 5 |
|
|
|
---|
Poster | Thread | Rated: 3 Votes |
---|
|
Re: New Titanic | #27 |
|
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/3/14
From New Hampshire
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
you're right. a pirate is a terrorist.
|
||
_________________
myspace: www.myspace.com/woahitzswazy facebook: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/profile.php?id=524623472&ref=profile |
|||
Posted on: 2005/3/21 18:08
|
|
Re: New Titanic | #26 |
|
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/2/13
From Scotland
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Pirates now theres a topic to be made
They should make a new olympic, not a new titanic |
||
Posted on: 2005/3/21 17:58
|
|
Re: New Titanic | #25 |
||
---|---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/1/2
From United Kingdom
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Or nutter's or headcases, but it was johno that mentioned pirates, then we moved on to terrorists, he nor myself said a terorist is a pirate.
|
|||
_________________
Where the hell did my 1800 posts GO!!!!????? :P |
||||
Posted on: 2005/3/21 17:45
|
|
Re: New Titanic | #24 |
|
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/3/14
From New Hampshire
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
I don't know why you guys call them pirates. they're more like lunatics.
|
||
_________________
myspace: www.myspace.com/woahitzswazy facebook: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/profile.php?id=524623472&ref=profile |
|||
Posted on: 2005/3/21 17:22
|
|
Re: New Titanic | #23 |
|
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/2/13
From Scotland
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Yeah i doubt pirates will reach up to a giant ship like the qm2
But has anyone thought that a possible terrorist atack could be simple to do on a ship. security these days on ships is not up to scratch |
||
Posted on: 2005/3/21 16:05
|
|
Re: New Titanic | #22 |
||
---|---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/1/2
From United Kingdom
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
Pirates eh, I doubt the Qm2 will have to worry about that lol.
There not exactly delicate, but I see you'r point, they can sink if something bad happens to them. |
|||
_________________
Where the hell did my 1800 posts GO!!!!????? :P |
||||
Posted on: 2005/3/20 16:20
|
|
Re: New Titanic | #21 |
|
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/2/13
From Scotland
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
yeah i see your point bell big boats are more likely to hit something and sink but smaller boats can be capsized or even in extreme cases been taken over by pirates (if you would call them that) in the open sea.
My point is that all ships are delicate things and can be destroyed by the click of a finger. Crossing the seas was man's once dream and it came true but there was always dangers. |
||
Posted on: 2005/3/20 13:13
|
|
Re: New Titanic | #20 |
||
---|---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/1/2
From United Kingdom
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
I don't see how a big ship is more likely to sink. By far more small ships sank than large ones. Titanic was the first large one to sink (by today’s standards at least), but smaller ones had sank due to ice-bergs before.
I am convinced that the reason people think big ones sink is due to the fact, a large one will get more press than a smaller one. I mean a small fishing boat sank off the coast of Norway not long ago, I only know of it because I read it on a linked web site. However if the QM2 where to sink, it would be all over the papers. Logically a large ship is more likely to hit something, but not more likely to sink, if anything less likely, due to it's many compartments, which are more evident in a large one to a small one. |
|||
_________________
Where the hell did my 1800 posts GO!!!!????? :P |
||||
Posted on: 2005/3/19 16:50
|
|
Re: New Titanic | #19 |
|
---|---|---|---|
Joined: 2005/2/13
From Scotland
Posts: -1
Group:
Registered Users |
In logic terms, big things sink easier
But in our age just now, big ships have more advanced handling and technology The lutsitania sank because it was carrying diamonds, platinum and other precious stones which in world war 1 annoyed the germans who torpeoded it. It had a reason to sink because it was valuable. Brittanic went along the same lines and got torpeoded. |
||
Posted on: 2005/3/19 15:57
|
Top Previous Topic Next Topic | 5 |
|