Mitt Romney is clearly very familiar with nuclear weapons

[Cain]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/05/AR2010070502657.html

Unlike past treaty restrictions, ICBMs are not prohibited from bombers. This means that Russia is free to mount a nearly unlimited number of ICBMs on bombers — including MIRVs (multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles) or multiple warheads — without tripping the treaty's limits.

.....




Mounting...ICBMs....on....bombers....

[LMNO]

[Freeky]

Haha?

[Fredfredly ⊂(◉‿◉)つ]

looooool

[Dysfunctional Cunt]

You really don't know whether to laugh, cry or throw something!

[LMNO]

Strapping an ICBM onto a bomber is more badass than BEAR CAVALRY.

[Cain]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present the Washington Post op-ed page!

[Jasper]

I want more Romney.  He's FUNNY. 

[Adios]

Dear god. I just wanna see the bomber capable of carrying one, much less launching one.

[LMNO]

It's more like strapping the bomber to the missile, rather than the other way around.

[Adios]

It's more like strapping the bomber to the missile, rather than the other way around.

"In other news the new Titanic Series ICBM Bombers will be on sale this week only for $1.5 Billion US."

[AFK]

Cross reference this story with the NASA story and you have:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcW_Ygs6hm0

Replace the crazy white guy with a crazy Muslim guy with a space suit. 

[Suu]

I'mma going to photoshop a ICBM on a B-52...brb.

[Suu]

Bak.

[Faust]

It brings mutually assured destruction to an all new level:

Even if they can mount it on a bomber, and get the go ahead for use from command, the actual pilots would then have to launch knowing full well then ignition would blow them out of the sky.