|
 Alex213
Stranger
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 1,839
|
 Iran attack by spring? 
#6549552 - 02/10/07 02:15 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
US preparations for an air strike against Iran are at an advanced stage, in spite of repeated public denials by the Bush administration, according to informed sources in Washington.
The present military build-up in the Gulf would allow the US to mount an attack by the spring. But the sources said that if there was an attack, it was more likely next year, just before Mr Bush leaves office.
Neo-conservatives, particularly at the Washington-based American Enterprise Institute, are urging Mr Bush to open a new front against Iran. So too is the vice-president, Dick Cheney. The state department and the Pentagon are opposed, as are Democratic congressmen and the overwhelming majority of Republicans. The sources said Mr Bush had not yet made a decision. The Bush administration insists the military build-up is not offensive but aimed at containing Iran and forcing it to make diplomatic concessions. The aim is to persuade Tehran to curb its suspect nuclear weapons programme and abandon ambitions for regional expansion.
Colonel Sam Gardiner, a former air force officer who has carried out war games with Iran as the target, supported the view that planning for an air strike was under way: "Gates said there is no planning for war. We know this is not true. He possibly meant there is no plan for an immediate strike. It was sloppy wording.
"All the moves being made over the last few weeks are consistent with what you would do if you were going to do an air strike. We have to throw away the notion the US could not do it because it is too tied up in Iraq. It is an air operation."
"I do not think anyone in the US is talking about invasion. We have been chastened by the experience of Iraq, even a hawk like myself." But an air strike was another matter.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,2010086,00.html
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger
Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Alex213]
#6550784 - 02/10/07 02:02 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I blame the American Enterprise Institute.
|
 Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Alex213]
#6550845 - 02/10/07 02:23 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
A real Bush doesn't move aircraft carriers around just as a warning. That would be a waste of gas.
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 15 days
|
|
In a real Bush' mind, the only waste of gas is unused gas.
--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.
|
carbonhoots
old hand
Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,351
Loc: BC Canada
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Alex213]
#6550903 - 02/10/07 02:46 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
How much more money can America give to it's military industrial complex? Fuck man, the Iraq war has cost how much so far? A trillion or so? Now tack on another war to that tab. At some point it's going to become a big drag.
It's funny that so many Americans think the governmnet spending all this money on killing foreigners and making the world hate America and enriching Lockheed Martin is better than say, paying the health insurance bill for the population.
Lots of other countries seem to get by just fine without running around the world picking fights. America likes to send ignorant 19 year olds into other countries with the latest in weapons technology. Next thing you know, some are killed, more are maimed and some are saving brains from their kills and puting them in the refrigerator. Not exactly a wholesome activity.
I can only shake my head and thank God I'm not a part of it.
--------------------
-I'd rather have a frontal lobotomy than a bottle in front of me
CANADIAN CENTER FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES
|
Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Seuss]
#6550908 - 02/10/07 02:50 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said:
In a real Bush' mind, the only waste of gas is unused gas.
Same goes for an undeployed soldier, or an unspent treasury dollar.
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
The_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth
 
Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN 
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Alex213]
#6550912 - 02/10/07 02:51 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The US cant afford to put boots down in Iran, Since Irans economy is at 30-40% unemployment, We are going to use subversive elements in Iran to collapse the government, Probably Azeris,Kurds and Bolochs.
the US has also positioned strong FOBs in Bolochistan, If Iran attacks these positions it will tangle Pakistan as well, Saudia Arabia, Turkey, Hezbollah,Lebanon,Israel, and Afghanistan could be drawn into the fight.
Iran also in a recent comminique talked about abducting americans by the IRGC
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD145707
Quote:
In a January 29, 2007 article titled "Cheaper and Easier than Chinese Goods" in the Iranian weekly Sobh-e Sadeq, which is the mouthpiece of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei circulated among the Revolutionary Guards, elements in the Revolutionary Guards threatened to abduct U.S. soldiers around the world: "Top American officials must understand that because they deploy their troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, Central Asia and the Caucasus, Pakistan, India, the African continent, Latin America, and even in Europe, capturing them and transferring them to any destination is easier than preparing a container of cheap Chinese goods [for shipment].
"When the American security officers fall easily to the untrained and inexperienced Mahdi Army forces, and when a senior [Israeli] Mossad official is liquidated at the wave of a hand in Paris, and when a ship belonging to the English forces disappears in the Arvand River [in the Persian Gulf] under unclear circumstances - all these can constitute a clear message to those who entertain false imaginings in their minds... All it would take is for [Iran] to open its wallet a little [to its supporters in various parts of the world], and we will witness long lines of blond, blue-eyed officers who will become the prisoners of the fighting cocks who wait only for a signal - and a word to the wise is sufficient." [7]
In addition, Heshmatollah Falahat-Pishe, member of Iran's Parliamentary National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said: "There is a possibility of the outbreak of spreading war in the region, and this is because Iran has red lines that will be crossed [even] by the entrance of a single missile and by [any preparation] for war... Iran's red lines are different from those of the other countries. [The Americans] know very well that in the event of an attack on Iran, American interests in the [Middle East] region will be targeted, which would endanger 26% of the world's energy sources." [8]
Right now the situation is of Cold War status, And the two battlefields are Iraq and Lebanon, Iran is using its proxy armies like Hezbollah and Shiite militias in Iraq to get its dirty deeds done.
Iran has also been getting very buddy buddy with Syria, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hamas, flowing their coffers with money and arms.
If feedback loops are not reinstated then the outcome will usually be war. However though Iran has urged recently for talks on their nuclear programs but judgeing from their recent rhetoric i find it hard to believe.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/Talks-can-end-atom-standoff-Iran/2007/02/11/1171128794962.html
Quote:
Iran insisted on Saturday an escalating dispute with the West over its nuclear activity could be resolved by negotiation as its security chief arrived in Germany for meetings with EU leaders.
Edited by The_Red_Crayon (02/10/07 02:52 PM)
|
Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
Excellent assessment.
I predict Bush will agree to no talks, and a surgical airstrike of Iran's nuclear facility will ultimately result, including a total disregard of the anticipated consequences from Iran's response.
Because "America is badass just like Texas". Also because nothing bad can ever happen to the united States.
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
The_Red_Crayon
Exposer of Truth
Registered: 08/13/03
Posts: 13,673
Loc: Smokey Mtns. TN
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
|
Wars of such magnitude never play out like you want them, you need to appease the god of war because he's the great decider.
|
Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
Your extra $50 is in the bag. Spend it as soon as you get it would be my advice.
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
elbisivni
Registered: 10/01/06
Posts: 2,839
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Alex213]
#6551410 - 02/10/07 05:09 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Well, I'll ask the big question:
When WW3 begins which way will you go; north or south?
--------------------
From dust you are made and to dust you shall return.
|
Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: elbisivni]
#6551514 - 02/10/07 05:48 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I'm goin' North. I don't like tar Heroin or Schwag, but Vancouver rocks!
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
carbonhoots
old hand
Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,351
Loc: BC Canada
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Alex213]
#6556379 - 02/11/07 11:05 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
"When countries designated by the ... Report to have poor human rights records or serious patterns of abuse are factored in, 20 of the top 25 U.S. arms clients in the developing world in 2003 -- a full 80% -- were either undemocratic regimes or governments with records of major human rights abuses."
More bloodthristy propaganda on the way
by P.M. Carpenter | Feb 11 2007 - 10:46am | permalink
article tools: email | print | read more P.M. Carpenter
The Bush administration's crack propaganda team is once again working overtime, urging the American public into a distracted fit of martial indignation.
Accordingly, sometime today or tomorrow Neocon Central is "expected to make public ... some of what intelligence agencies regard as an increasing body of evidence pointing to an Iranian link" to Iraqi Shiite-deployed provisions of a deadly brand of I.E.D.s, known as "explosively formed penetrators."
Once again, its announcement "[will reflect] broad agreement among American intelligence agencies." (Can you hear the arm bones cracking with the twists?)
Once again, the administration's civilian and military officials swear they are "not trying to lay the basis for an American attack." You betcha. And I'm Paul Wolfowitz.
And once again -- and choicest of all -- they'll savor the coming blockbuster of absolute certainty by presently "acknowledg[ing] that the picture is not entirely complete."
But allow me to round out the picture for them now, and even assume for the moment that whatever they're selling this weekend is, or soon will be, as damningly complete as damning evidence can be.
First, to hear the Bush administration wax philosophically to our historically challenged citizenry, one would think foreign intervention into conflicts involving American forces is an insidiously novel development -- one we are just now waking up to, and up with which we will not put, to paraphrase Churchill's whimsical syntax.
Third-party foreign intervention, necocons either imply or declare, is an outrageous and intolerable provocation to be swiftly and militarily countered. They are puzzled, incensed, that outside forces could be so rude as to interfere with what should be our wholly owned war.
What's more, and more to the fear-inspiring point, they solemnly suggest such third-party interventionism is a new and dangerous terrorist trend, illustrative only of the new and dangerous "war on terror" in which we find ourselves.
Except, of course, it's not new at all. Proxy warfare among major powers is more the unfortunate norm.
For example in our last and longest excellent neocon adventure, the Vietnam War, the Soviet Union infused North Vietnam with military advisors, artillery, ground-to-air missiles and other assorted trifles of human destruction. But, thankfully and sanely, we didn't launch World War III against the Soviet Union.
During the Vietnam War the People's Republic of China sent arms, engineers and anti-aircraft personnel to North Vietnam. But, thankfully and sanely, we didn't launch World War III against China.
And during the Vietnam War, North Korea supplied North Vietnam with a fighter squadron and additional anti-aircraft artillery.
But, thankfully and sanely, we didn't launch what would have quickly transformed into World War III against North Korea, either.
On another front of clarification for our hopelessly hapless and hypocritical neocons, let us also be clear in acknowledging that the United States is the least noble schoolmaster of noninterventionist finger pointing and humanly rightful democracy building.
According to the World Policy Institute, "In 2003, the last year for which full information is available, the United States transferred weaponry to 18 of the 25 countries involved in active conflicts." The list of belligerents we aided circles the globe.
Furthermore, "In 2003, more than half of the top 25 recipients of U.S. arms transfers in the developing world (13 of 25) were defined as undemocratic by" our very own State Department’s Human Rights Report.
And "When countries designated by the ... Report to have poor human rights records or serious patterns of abuse are factored in, 20 of the top 25 U.S. arms clients in the developing world in 2003 -- a full 80% -- were either undemocratic regimes or governments with records of major human rights abuses."
In short, we possess a sorry record to be lecturing others on arms transfers to the less than democratically giddy. Nor will the historical record of third-party interventionism square with the "unique circumstances" of Iran's interference that we're about to be fed by the trigger-happy Bush administration.
As the neocons gin up the war drums again, it would be well advised to keep the above items uppermost in mind, rather than entertaining for even one minute their inventive propaganda.
_______
--------------------
-I'd rather have a frontal lobotomy than a bottle in front of me
CANADIAN CENTER FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES
|
Hank, FTW
Looking for the Answer
Registered: 05/04/06
Posts: 3,912
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: carbonhoots]
#6557538 - 02/12/07 10:09 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I wonder, if Iraq had of gone smoother, how much closer would we be to the end of the world. lol
It is time for change, but it seems change is impossible now.
--------------------
Capliberty:
"I'll blow the hinges off your freakin doors with my trips, level 5 been there, I personally like x, bud, acid and shroom oj, altogether, do that combination, and you'll meet some morbid figures, lol
Hell yeah I push the limits and hell yeah thats fucking cool, dope, bad ass and all that, I'm not changing shit, I'm cutting to to the chase and giving u shroom experience report. Real trippers aren't afraid to go beyond there comfort zone "
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Hank, FTW]
#6557557 - 02/12/07 10:16 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I think it's sad that this change will never come. It makes me feel ashamed that a President was almost impeached for lying about a blowjob, yet when a president lies about intelligence and brings America into a war under false pretenses (LIES) that Americans are jumping up and down yelling "impeach Bush". It would seem that we as a nation (or many of the citizens here) have lost sight of our priorities.
Iran, North Korea, and anyone else who stands for a different belief, here we come!!!
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
Well, it's a great time for anarchists and athiests everywhere! Bush's actions directly challenge any "God" which may happen to exist.
Soon we'll all know for sure if there's really a higher power or not.
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
trippindad82 said:
I think it's sad that this change will never come. It makes me feel ashamed that a President was almost impeached for lying about a blowjob, yet when a president lies about intelligence and brings America into a war under false pretenses (LIES) that Americans are jumping up and down yelling "impeach Bush". It would seem that we as a nation (or many of the citizens here) have lost sight of our priorities.
Iran, North Korea, and anyone else who stands for a different belief, here we come!!!
Please quote for us the lies. Thank you in advance for your failure.
--------------------
|
Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6557587 - 02/12/07 10:28 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
"There are WMD's in Iraq"? Why do you deny what everyone knows? Just to muddle the debate?
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
Lightningfractal said:
"There are WMD's in Iraq"? Why do you deny what everyone knows? Just to muddle the debate?
Thanks. Isn't this what led us into the war in the first place? And since the war haven't we learned that Bush and gang knew before they even went to war using these claims that there were no weapons of mass destruction? Did we already forget the Valorie Plume (and husband) incident? The very person who did the research came out and said "The report I handed in said there were no WMD." Therefore, IMO the reasons that we went to war with Iraq were LIES. And if our President lied, (like William Jefferson Clinton), can't he be impeached? Not only that, but hasn't it come out as well that there were ZERO ties between Iraq and alQaida? Yet another lie?
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 8 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
Isn't this what led us into the war in the first place?
It was one of the reasons Congress cited in its authorization for the use of military force in Iraq, yes.
Quote:
And since the war haven't we learned that Bush and gang knew before they even went to war using these claims that there were no weapons of mass destruction?
No, we haven't learned Bush knew beforehand.
Quote:
Did we already forget the Valorie Plume (and husband) incident?
You mean the incident where Joe Wilson was told by members of the government of Niger that a trade delegation from Iraq had visited in 1999 for the purpose of re-opening trade negotiations, and that since Iraq had bought yellowcake from Niger in the past, they interpreted this request to mean Iraq wanted to buy yellowcake again?
Yes, I remember it. Do you?
Quote:
Not only that, but hasn't it come out as well that there were ZERO ties between Iraq and alQaida?
No, it has been confirmed there were many ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda. More confirmation emerges every so often as more and more of the millions of captured documents are translated.
Phred
--------------------
|
Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
I would hope though that the delay is based on the Democrats in Congress looking for the proof they need before they proceed on an impeachment.
It would be an extremely grave event for the U.S. if an impeachment were initiated and then failed for whatever reason. The Bush admin would surely 'laud it as a vote of confidence.
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
You mean the incident where Joe Wilson was told by members of the government of Niger that a trade delegation from Iraq had visited in 1999 for the purpose of re-opening trade negotiations, and that since Iraq had bought yellowcake from Niger in the past, they interpreted this request to mean Iraq wanted to buy yellowcake again?
Yes, I remember it. Do you?
Yes I do remember it, I just didn't follow the mainstream media's version of the events. Her husband is the very person who did the research AND presented a report to the CIA/Pentagon (Rumsfeld???) stating that there was no threat assessed and that IN FACT no purchases had been made. 1999-2003 is a long time to claim that someone still had intent.
If you are driving through the city and a cop pulls you over and charges you with attempt to buy weed (when all you really did was drive down a street, no purchase was made), can and should you be charged with possession?
And for you claiming that the intel was 100% accurate:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2861168
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070209/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iraq_pentagon_intelligence
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17077437/
So, if it is wrong for Dan Rather to present false information and he was harshly punished for doing so, why aren't the above persons being held accountable? And when I say bush and crew, wouldn't Ashcroft and Rumsfeld and Rice be part of that group? Wasn't it Rumsfeld's pentagon that provided the WRONG intel? Doesn't that constitute a lie? Or do we not consider half truths lies around here?
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
Edited by trippindad82 (02/12/07 01:09 PM)
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 8 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
Yes I do remember it, I just didn't follow the mainstream media's version of the events. Her husband is the very person who did the research AND presented a report to the CIA/Pentagon (Rumsfeld???) stating that there was no threat assessed and that IN FACT no purchases had been made. 1999-2003 is a long time to claim that someone still had intent.
Wilson said the government officials in Niger told him they rejected Iraq's overtures. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't.
But even if they did reject the overtures, that doesn't make Bush's statement regarding their efforts to obtain yellowcake a lie. Hussein's minions did in fact attempt to obtain yellowcake from Niger.
Quote:
And for you claiming that the intel was 100% accurate:
Obviously the intel was not 100% accurate. But that doesn't mean anybody LIED about anything.
By the way, do you even bother to read the links you provide? The three links all refer to the same story. The allegation by some Democrat senators is that the Pentagon somehow did something wrong. In actual fact, it turns out the Pentagon did NOT "manipulate" anything. Senator Levin claims the report shows they did, when in fact the report shows nothing of the kind. That's why the Washington Post was forced to print a shamefaced retraction (the third link you provided).
Quote:
So, if it is wrong for Dan Rather to present false information and he was harshly punished for doing so...
The memos Rather presented were such blatantly obvious forgeries it took less than 24 hours for irrefutable proof of their falsity to appear.
The Pentagon's analysis of Iraq's repeated contacts with high ranking Al Qaeda members are factual and were widely reported previously by a number of sources, both American and international. One can put forth the argument that such contacts weren't of any significance, but it cannot be denied they occurred. There are just too many sources confirming the contacts.
Rather's SINGLE source for the memos was a deranged Bush hater.
And again, Rather wasn't punished by the government. He was shuffled off to greener pastures by his employer.
Phred
--------------------
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Phred]
#6558292 - 02/12/07 01:42 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
So...what you are saying is that it is acceptable for a nation to go to war against another NON THREATENING NATION over "we think this is correct" intel? Iraq was ZERO threat. Afghanistan was ZERO threat. At no time did either of those nations put out a DIRECT threat to the American people. I am sure there are peoples in every nation on this planet who support alQaida in some way or another, are we to jump into war with these NON THREATENING nations because we don't agree with SOME of their citizens?
Iran is ZERO threat. Who are we as a nation to say who can and cannot have nuclear warheads? If we can have them, then so should anybody else. We are no better. We have extremists in our very own nation who would like to see nuclear bombs dropped on certain parts of the world. To me, we shouldn't have them either if that's the view we uphold other nations to.
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
As soon as 9/11 happened I said that morning:
"This is way too big, and we have Bush, so entire states will be attacked now."
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
|
As they should have been. You know what I said that morning? As soon as the second plane hit? I said al qaeda and bin laden. The whackos in Afghanistan were given an opportunity to hand the asshole over. They didn't. Sadass (currently nicely chilled) had ample opportunity to prove he didn't have the weapons. He was in noncompliance with the contract he had agreed to. Oops, his bad, no pussy president this time, c'est la vie. Or morte. Too, too bad for both assholes, that a craven cowardly piece of shit wasn't president. Good for us. Of course, the douchebags on the left are doing everything they could possibly do to back away from their own votes to get some fucking balls and instead validate the rampant opinion among lunatics that America is seriously pussified.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
|
By the way, I don't believe you thought that at all. It sounds like revisionist bullshit. Even I, arch war monger that I am, wasn't familiar enough with the next hero president to trust that he would do the right thing. Mirabile dictu, he stepped up. Even Reagan caved.
--------------------
Edited by zappaisgod (02/12/07 02:11 PM)
|
Lightningfractal
Nutcase
Registered: 06/24/03
Posts: 14,899
Loc: Heaven and Hell
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6558547 - 02/12/07 02:35 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Mmmmmkay. Rah, rah, rah for bloodshed. 
--------------------
Hi how's it going, wanna kick Heroin basically painlessly on your own, in your own house, without any government "help" ,or the "help" of a crazy condescending, judgmental medical doctor? Read this:
https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=42&Number=7342616&page=0&fpart=all
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
|
Yep. Never been bloodshed before or by any others. Keep living in that castle in the sky. Iraq was a garden of Eden. Yep.
--------------------
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6559345 - 02/12/07 05:46 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Back on topic, folks. Iran, I run, I will run.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Redstorm]
#6559373 - 02/12/07 05:50 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
There may be a tiny Iran border violation by the US. Dwarfed, of course, by the meddling of Iran in Iraq. Which is itself dwarfed by the obviously justified meddling by a major consortium of other nations in Iraq to squelch a genocidal opportunist thug.
--------------------
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6560255 - 02/12/07 08:46 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
There may be a tiny Iran border violation by the US. Dwarfed, of course, by the meddling of Iran in Iraq. Which is itself dwarfed by the obviously justified meddling by a major consortium of other nations in Iraq to squelch a genocidal opportunist thug.
Is not our own military genocidal in a sense? We are using armor piercing shells that are made from depleted uranium. When they hit the side of a tank, they vaporize and turn into radio active dust. What's the problem with this? one might ask. Well, dust in a desert that can blow during sandstorms moves this radioactive dust into colonized areas. This dust is then breathed in and absorbed into the body where it causes other problems. There are children being born in Iraq right now without heads, their intestines outside their body, and many other health problems that did not exist until we began using these shells during and after Desert Storm. We still use them today. This to me is just as much a form of genocide as directly killing a group is. We are causing long term health effects (the half life for depleted uranium is a VERY long time) and could possibly cause enough damage to wipe out a group of people.
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
mattymonkey
Feel Like aStranger...
Registered: 11/07/04
Posts: 973
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
|
can you link a source for these alleged birth defects?
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: mattymonkey]
#6560554 - 02/12/07 09:43 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
|
Please review the definition of "genocide" before using it haphazardly.
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Redstorm]
#6561016 - 02/12/07 11:14 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I understand the definition of genocide. We are using weapons in a region that can have horrible consequences for the tribes/peoples whom live there. If the reproductive abilities of an entire clan/village are wrecked by radio active dust, isn't that in a form genocide? It would seem to me that the peoples, if unable to reproduce due to mutations and diseases caused by radio active sickness, that will wipe out a group. Maybe it's not instantaneous, but it's still happening non the less. 4.7 billion years for a half life. That dust is going to be there for a very long time. No one is standing there gassing or shooting the people directly, but that doesn't nullify the charges. And if we overthrew, charged, and killed Saddam Hussein on the basis of genocide, then shouldn't the very people who are choosing to use DU weapons be also charged for genocide? We are causing long term harm to the people of that region. And how about our own soldiers whom are also there breathing the same dust?
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
|
For it to be genocide, it has to be clearly intentional for those effects to be occurring to the civilians. It's awful what is happening to those civilians, but calling it genocide discounts the word.
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Redstorm]
#6561204 - 02/12/07 11:50 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Who is not to say it isn't on purpose? When the results were seen long before this second conflict (gulf war syndrome anyone?) in Iraq, our leaders have chosen to continue using them. That to me seems like an intentional effort. Then, they continue to deny that using radio active weapons isn't having any effect on the population when all studies prove otherwise. I can't think of another word, maybe murder, torture, inhumanity. But those don't even seem to sum it up.
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
DieCommie
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
|
I think collateral damage sums it up just fine. Its shittie but not intentional. Like death on the highways. Tens of thousands of innocent people die every year on the highways. Its not genocide, its collateral damage from our lifestyle.
|
Alex213
Stranger
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 1,839
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: DieCommie]
#6561774 - 02/13/07 04:07 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Nah, if someone machine guns your house that's a little more personal than a shunt on the freeway.
It may not be genocide but it's something more than collateral damage. We need another neat phrase for it.
|
Basilides
Servent ofWisdom
Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 7,059
Loc: Crown and Heart
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Alex213]
#6561871 - 02/13/07 05:37 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
At best, it's negligence. Certainly not itentional as the U.S. has nothing to gain by intently harming civilians, nor is it their policy/strategy to do so.
--------------------
    
"Have you found the beginning, then, that you are looking for the end? You see, the end will be where the beginning is. Congratulations to the one who stands at the beginning: that one will know the end and will not taste death."
|
GazzBut
Refraction
Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 3 years, 4 months
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6561927 - 02/13/07 06:19 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
the meddling of Iran in Iraq.
Oh my god. Its just like wmds all over again. Pity the blind fools.
Quote:
obviously unjustified meddling by two countries and a few token gestures in Iraq to try and protect the dollar and secure the last few drops of oil.
FYP
--------------------
Always Smi2le
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: GazzBut]
#6562149 - 02/13/07 08:53 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Just like the WMD argument in Iraq, I don't buy the one for Iran either. Don't we have allies? Why can't Iraq? Why can't Iran? Seems a little selfish for the US to claim we're the only "proper" thinking country who can have allies. Especially when Iraq's war has turned into a civil war for FREEDOM. Didn't the French help us during our fight for freedom?
And for those of you who claim the war was about terrorism, may I point out the name of the operation that over ran Iraq? Wasn't it Operation Iraqi Liberation? And isn't the acronym for that OIL? If you read even further into the operation, the action that captured the oil fields (so BIG oil can come in and pump it out) was called operation gemstone? A little strange if you ask me. But I don't claim to know everything or even be right.
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
trippindad82 said:
Quote:
mattymonkey said:
can you link a source for these alleged birth defects?
Happily
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/95178_du12.shtml
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/europe/2001/depleted_uranium/default.stm
http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/ud_main.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3627
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/37/11023
From the first one:
""The cause of all of these cancers and deformities remains theoretical "...and "The report also said, "Gulf War exposures to depleted uranium (DU) have not to date produced any observable adverse health effects attributable to DU's chemical toxicity or low-level radiation. . . .".....and
"Depleted uranium is a problem in other former war zones as well. Yesterday, U.N. experts said they found radioactive hot spots in Bosnia resulting from the use of depleted uranium during NATO air strikes in 1995." .... Without citing a similar increase in cancer and birth defects there. Further, the whole reportage of this increased cancer and birth defect "phenomenon" is somewhat dubious as it comes from Iraqi officials who are about to be but not yet invaded. Hmmm, Iraqi officials whining about a highly effective weapon just before they are about to get smacked again. Of course, they are entirely credible. If you're a knee-jerk whackjob with no critical thinking skills. College anyone?
From the second one:
" Depleted uranium (DU) used in Nato weapons in the Balkans has no detectable effect on human health, according a European Union panel of experts.
In the case of the average back garden, there is as much uranium as you would find in a shell
Prof Ian McAulay, EU expert
The European Commission ordered the investigations after claims that veterans of peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo had developed illnesses, particularly cancer, after being exposed to depleted uranium used in armour-piercing weapons."....
That kinda sucks for your point there doesn't it? If you think that you can just post a list of links and assume we will automatically believe they say what you say they do you are sadly mistaken. I caught on to that game a long time ago.
The third one is just a huge list of assorted whacko links with no scientific support. From the first one I read:
"Of the 580,000 US soldiers that served in Iraq in 1991, by mid 2004 518,739 were on medical disability pensions."
I seriously doubt this.
From the fourth one:
"DU is both radioactive and toxic. Past studies of DU in the environment have concluded that neither of these effects poses a significant risk. But some researchers are beginning to suspect that in combination, the two effects could do significant harm. Nobody has taken a hard look at the combined effect of both, says Alexandra Miller, a radiobiologist with the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute in Bethesda, Maryland. "The bottom line is it might contribute to the risk."...
Now that right there is 100% proof of your assertion. These brave scientists going so far out on a limb to take on the evil Amerikkka and prove that we are making mutant babies. Fight the Power.
And the final one is an alarmist screed from our good and credible friends at truthout. Anyway, the article in question makes several rather alarming charges and then lists a whole boatload of studies. I went through about 12 pages of summaries and results and didn't find a single one that supported the loons allegations. What I found was a whole lot of this..
"In its Report to Congressional Requestors dated March 29, 2000, the GAO responded to each of these issues. With respect to the health effects issue, the GAO cited the recent expert studies by RAND and by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), which concluded that "current evidence suggests that it is unlikely that inhaled or ingested depleted uranium poses a radiation health hazard, namely cancer."
Quote:
can you link a source for these alleged birth defects?
Apparently not, or you probably would have.
--------------------
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,223
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 1 hour, 43 minutes
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6563419 - 02/13/07 03:58 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
As they should have been. You know what I said that morning? As soon as the second plane hit? I said al qaeda and bin laden. The whackos in Afghanistan were given an opportunity to hand the asshole over. They didn't. Sadass (currently nicely chilled) had ample opportunity to prove he didn't have the weapons. He was in noncompliance with the contract he had agreed to. Oops, his bad, no pussy president this time, c'est la vie. Or morte. Too, too bad for both assholes, that a craven cowardly piece of shit wasn't president. Good for us. Of course, the douchebags on the left are doing everything they could possibly do to back away from their own votes to get some fucking balls and instead validate the rampant opinion among lunatics that America is seriously pussified.
I love it when people misrepresent what true cowardice is.
Cowardice is supporting the murder of tens of thousands of innocent to protect your own sorry ass. Explain to me exactly how hiking our collective skirts up and going "Eek! Terrorists!" and then in a paniced frenzy, murdering a bunch of women and children while accomplishing no increase in safey to yourself at all, makes us brave.
Now, it could be argued that the actual soldiers going into war are brave, but not the president hiding behind his desk saying "git 'em", or the people hiding under their beds saying "yeah, git 'em".
Methinks ye suffer from Machismo by Proxy Syndrome.
--------------------
(•_•)
<) )~ ANTIFA
/ \
\(•_•)
( (> SUPER
/ \
(•_•)
<) )> SOLDIERS
/ \
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
#6563469 - 02/13/07 04:14 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I don't think so, Baby. Carter was a coward for failing to act in Iran. Clinton was a coward for running his entire presidency on opinion polls. In your world is there only physical bravery? Because surely someone with a moniker such as yours is very brave to brandish it.
It takes courage to lead, not something parrots know anything about.
--------------------
|
zorbman
blarrr
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,952
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6564809 - 02/13/07 09:50 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Sadass (currently nicely chilled) had ample opportunity to prove he didn't have the weapons.
And he would have had to have been an absolute moron to admit that.
Let's see.. Saddam had recently fought a decade-long war with his arch rival, Iran, which was extremely costly in terms of lives and money. A fight which ended in a draw. He used chemical weapons on Iran which cost them 100,000 casualties.
Iran was itching for vengeance.
So why on earth would Saddam admit that he had actually complied with U.N. resolutions , ditching his WMDs thereby showing his mortal enemy how exposed and vulnerable he was? (Especially after his conventional military had been gutted by the U.S. during the Gulf War).
Do you think Saddam got where he was by being a moron?
It was up to Bush-chimp to prove he did not possess WMDs.
So why did he fail to give inspectors adequate time to do their job?
Answer: He had already decided to go to war evidence be damned. No rational, unbiased observer can deny at this point that this administration does not give a flying fuck about the facts, public opinion or ethics.
They care about raw power and global dominance.
Period.
--------------------
“The crisis takes a much longer time coming than you think, and then it happens much faster than you would have thought.” -- Rudiger Dornbusch
Edited by zorbman (02/14/07 01:52 AM)
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zorbman]
#6564919 - 02/13/07 10:22 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The third one is just a huge list of assorted whacko links with no scientific support. From the first one I read:
"Of the 580,000 US soldiers that served in Iraq in 1991, by mid 2004 518,739 were on medical disability pensions."
I seriously doubt this.
Why? Because the govt and mainstream media won't admit this? When will you stop believing everything the media says and covers. In a previous post I brought this up and many agreed that the media will lie and/or not cover a story to protect advertising revenue. If that's agreed upon, then let me offer this up. There are many companies making BILLIONS of dollars in revenue off this war. Many of these companies advertise on major networks. Many of these companies have board members (current or past) and CEO's whom are either in high political positions or military positions. Some examples for you are Dick Cheney (Haliburton/KBR), Condoleeza Rice (Chevron OIL), president George Bush (OIL), and Blackwater's CEO (ex-military). Why wouldn't the media lie for the protection of these peoples if they will lie about the effects of rBGH on cows and milk? 1+1=2 in my book.
Quote:
And he would have had to have been an absolute moron to admit that.
Let's see.. Saddam had recently fought a decade-long war with his arch rival, Iran, which was extremely costly in terms of lives and money. A fight which ended in a draw. He used chemical weapons on Iran which cost them 100,000 casualties.
Iran was itching for vengeance.
So why on earth would Saddam admit that he had actually complied with U.N. resolutions , ditching his WMDs thereby showing his mortal enemy how exposed and vulnerable he was? (Especially after his conventional military had been gutted by the U.S. during the Gulf War).
Do you think Saddam got where he was by being a moron?
It was up to Bush-chimp to prove he did not possess WMDs.
So why did he fail to give inspectors adequate time to do their job?
Answer: He had already decided to go to war evidence be damned. No rational, unbiased observer can deny at this point that this administration does not give a flying fuck about the facts, public opinion or ethics.
They care about power and global dominance.
Period
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
|
Why not address the rest of his post?
|
Alex213
Stranger
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 1,839
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Basilides]
#6565573 - 02/14/07 02:48 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Basilides said:
At best, it's negligence. Certainly not itentional as the U.S. has nothing to gain by intently harming civilians, nor is it their policy/strategy to do so.
I'm not sure. If the cops were chasing a bank robber and machine gunned half a dozen houses full of women and kids in the process I'm not sure I'd call that "negligence". It's the same situation if american soldiers are chasing insurgents. Lets just say if it was american civilians being killed they'd be taking a helluva lot more care.
I'm not sure the US has nothing to gain by harming civilians either. I'm sure 90-95% of all American attacks on civilians never get reported and keeping people scared is a good way of ruling them.
|
Alex213
Stranger
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 1,839
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6565581 - 02/14/07 02:51 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Carter was a coward for failing to act in Iran.
Failing to act in what way?
It takes courage to lead
Wrong. It takes courage to lead RESPONSIBLY. D
on't confuse eagerness to start wars with "courage". Cowards are notoriously courageous with other peoples lives but not their own. That's why Bush ran from Vietnam and why he spent 9/11 hiding down a hole a mile deep in Nebraska.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zorbman]
#6565897 - 02/14/07 08:08 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zorbman said:
Quote:
Sadass (currently nicely chilled) had ample opportunity to prove he didn't have the weapons.
And he would have had to have been an absolute moron to admit that.
That was nonetheless what he was obligated to do under the terms of the cease fire agreement, which was necessitated by his little expedition in Kuwait. Remember that? Obligated.Quote:
Let's see.. Saddam had recently fought a decade-long war with his arch rival, Iran, which was extremely costly in terms of lives and money. A fight which ended in a draw. He used chemical weapons on Iran which cost them 100,000 casualties.
Well, that incredibly costly war certainly didn't deter him from other projects, did it? See above if you are unclear on that.Quote:
Iran was itching for vengeance.
There is no evidence for thisQuote:
So why on earth would Saddam admit that he had actually complied with U.N. resolutions , ditching his WMDs thereby showing his mortal enemy how exposed and vulnerable he was? (Especially after his conventional military had been gutted by the U.S. during the Gulf War).
Because he was OBLIGED to. Those were the terms that he accepted. Really, that ends all discussion of this particularly moot matter. If the Iranians were so hell bent on revenge and saddass's military was eviscerated why didn't they act anyway? Because they were not hell bent on revenge and because I think they realized that the rest of the world would stop them anyway. The Mad Mullahs aren't stupid either and they sure didn't want us to do to them what we did to saddass. Quote:
Do you think Saddam got where he was by being a moron?
He was a cunning and particularly ruthless thug who covered up his incompetence with a viciousness not often seen. I would label him an Idiot Savant.Quote:
It was up to Bush-chimp to prove he did not possess WMDs.
So why did he fail to give inspectors adequate time to do their job?
I think you mis-spoke yourself here. Didn't you mean to say, "It was up to Bush-chimp to prove he DID possess WMDs." Which if you did mean is just wrong. It was saddass's obligation to prove he didn't (there's that word again) and not Bush's or Clinton's or anybody else's to prove he did. And the constant jerking around of inspectors went on for ten years. Five years should have been enough if he had cooperated. Let them in, kick them out, stop them here, let them in there. He had ample opportunity to comply. He didn't. Instead he tried to play this shell game, with apparently empty shells, although that certainly hasn't been proven.
And do not forget for an instant that there was a growing cry by the bribed (UN, France, Russia) to end the sanctions entirely and allow him to completely skate away. No, it was quite clearly time for him to go.Quote:
Answer: He had already decided to go to war evidence be damned. No rational, unbiased observer can deny at this point that this administration does not give a flying fuck about the facts, public opinion or ethics.
Saddam had ample opportunity to comply. He refused. No rational observer can deny that fact. He was a bona fide threat willing to aid and abet terrorists. That fact cannot be denied. The UN, France and Russia had been bribed to let him off the hook. That fact cannot be denied. And, in case you were 15 at the time, there was enormous public support for the war and there was enormous support in Congress for the war. Ethics? What the fuck are you talking about?Quote:
They care about raw power and global dominance.
Period.
Bullshit
--------------------
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6565924 - 02/14/07 08:20 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Saddam had ample opportunity to comply. He refused. No rational observer can deny that fact. He was a bona fide threat willing to aid and abet terrorists. That fact cannot be denied. The UN, France and Russia had been bribed to let him off the hook. That fact cannot be denied. And, in case you were 15 at the time, there was enormous public support for the war and there was enormous support in Congress for the war. Ethics? What the fuck are you talking about?
Some of this is BULLSHIT. We went to war in the first place under FALSE pretenses. Just like you can't be charged and jailed on somebody's whim, we as a nation should not be able to go to war on a whim. Now that our nation and congress know the truth (the was NO evidence of WMD's) the war has lost support. I am not buying into the stories of Iran anymore than the stories of Iraq. Here is an older post that might help explain why: PROPAGANDA and only one side (our President's desire for more war) of the story.
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Alex213]
#6565929 - 02/14/07 08:21 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alex213 said:
Carter was a coward for failing to act in Iran.
Failing to act in what way?
Defending by military action our territory and citizenry which had been attacked by Iran. But he was to cowardly to respond.Quote:
It takes courage to lead
Wrong. It takes courage to lead RESPONSIBLY. D
on't confuse eagerness to start wars with "courage".
Don't confuse a willingness to accept an unpleasant necessity as eagerness. If they were so eager why was saddass given so many chances? It is cowardice to run from an unpleasant necessity.Quote:
Cowards are notoriously courageous with other peoples lives but not their own. That's why Bush ran from Vietnam and why he spent 9/11 hiding down a hole a mile deep in Nebraska.
He was the President and as such more than the man. He does not have the option of not protecting himself. I have very little doubt that had he still been active and not President he would have been flying that day, but that is useless speculation.
Blah blah blah "chickenhawk". Nonsense that has been pounded numerous times. Is it your position that only the generals should decide when to go to war? Or the soldiers themselves? Because that's a pretty stupid position to take.
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
trippindad82 said:
Quote:
Saddam had ample opportunity to comply. He refused. No rational observer can deny that fact. He was a bona fide threat willing to aid and abet terrorists. That fact cannot be denied. The UN, France and Russia had been bribed to let him off the hook. That fact cannot be denied. And, in case you were 15 at the time, there was enormous public support for the war and there was enormous support in Congress for the war. Ethics? What the fuck are you talking about?
Some of this is BULLSHIT. We went to war in the first place under FALSE pretenses. Just like you can't be charged and jailed on somebody's whim, we as a nation should not be able to go to war on a whim. Now that our nation and congress know the truth (the was NO evidence of WMD's) the war has lost support. I am not buying into the stories of Iran anymore than the stories of Iraq. Here is an older post that might help explain why: PROPAGANDA and only one side (our President's desire for more war) of the story.
Which specific part is bullshit? Your entire position on everything seems to be that anything the government or the media says is a lie and the only people who can be trusted are the most outrageous and marginal blatherers who support their arguments with pretty much zero or distorted "facts". For instance this from a previous post of yours.
Quote:
Quote:
The third one is just a huge list of assorted whacko links with no scientific support. From the first one I read:
"Of the 580,000 US soldiers that served in Iraq in 1991, by mid 2004 518,739 were on medical disability pensions."
I seriously doubt this.
Why? Because the govt and mainstream media won't admit this? When will you stop believing everything the media says and covers.
It seems that any asshole can make any accusation and you'll believe it as long as it doesn't come from the media or the government. Which is clearly ridiculous. As is that dopes assertion that almost 90% of Gulf War 1 Veterans are on medical disability pensions. This you believe whole heartedly.
I don't argue with you for your sake. I do it for the children. I just don't want your nonsense to go unchallenged. Although relatively easy sport, it is nonetheless quite fun, like clubbing baby seals.
--------------------
|
Mourningdove
Stranger
Registered: 11/24/05
Posts: 399
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6566088 - 02/14/07 09:32 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
That slobbering retard is on the shitbox right now pretty much saying they're gonna invade Iran for sure. I'm sure the demoshits will roll over and let 'im do it...
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
Which specific part is bullshit? Your entire position on everything seems to be that anything the government or the media says is a lie and the only people who can be trusted are the most outrageous and marginal blatherers who support their arguments with pretty much zero or distorted "facts". For instance this from a previous post of yours.
When will we all finally admit that the war in Iraq was NEVER based on terrorism? Operation Iraqi Liberation (why not just use freedom???) or OIL for short. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and many others planned this attack before "facts" were lined up about the WMD.
Also, here as an excerpt from everybody's favorite site, wikipedia which also explains that Bush had preinauguration plans on attacking Iraq, whether or not they had ties with alQaida. It was just part of his administrative policy. IMO, more like he wanted to impress daddy.
Quote:
The United States Republican Party's campaign platform in the U.S. presidential election, 2000 called for "full implementation" of the Iraq Liberation Act and removal of Saddam Hussein with a focus on rebuilding a coalition, tougher sanctions, reinstating inspections, and support for the pro-democracy, opposition exile group, Iraqi National Congress then headed by Ahmed Chalabi.[16] Upon the election of George W. Bush as president, according to former treasury secretary Paul O'Neill, an attack was planned since the inauguration, and the first security council meeting discussed plans on invasion of the country. O'Neill later clarified that these discussions were part of a continuation of foreign policy first put into place by the Clinton Administration.[1
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
AlteredAgain
Visual Alchemist
Registered: 04/27/06
Posts: 11,180
Loc: Solar Circuit
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6567997 - 02/14/07 06:04 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
zapp, it is nothing new that government and media lie to their populace. you seem so surprised about this.
how many hours of television do you watch on average each day?
--------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
|
Almost none. How about you?
--------------------
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The third one is just a huge list of assorted whacko links with no scientific support. From the first one I read:
"Of the 580,000 US soldiers that served in Iraq in 1991, by mid 2004 518,739 were on medical disability pensions."
I seriously doubt this.
Why? Because the govt and mainstream media won't admit this? When will you stop believing everything the media says and covers.
It seems that any asshole can make any accusation and you'll believe it as long as it doesn't come from the media or the government. Which is clearly ridiculous. As is that dopes assertion that almost 90% of Gulf War 1 Veterans are on medical disability pensions. This you believe whole heartedly.
Not true at all. It also seems IMO that anything the US govt says is golden in your eyes. Why are you on this site if the govt doesn't lie at all? You shouldn't be touching marijuana and other psychotropic drugs because the govt says they are bad for you.
Maybe that number is a little high. I'm sorry I didn't read the whole way through. The numbers are far more conservative. But still, they currently range from 250,000-518,739.
Quote:
There is no such a thing as an unwounded soldier. While the US claimed 760 casualties in the 1991 Gulf War, by 2002 another 8,300 had died and 168,000 had been disabled by the effects of experimental vaccines, depleted uranium (DU), oil well fires, etc., and thousands of their children were born with disabilities. UK veterans suffered similarly and demanded recognition and compensation for “Gulf War Syndrome”.
In May 2004, Scottish veteran Alex Izett’s hunger strike (supported by Payday) won the Independent Inquiry on Gulf War Illnesses in London, which ackowledged that Gulf War Syndrome exists. However, the proposed “compensation” for 6,000 UK veterans and their families was an insult – £500 on average.
This movement for reparations is now widening to other wars. Two US states now provide DU screening for soldiers returning from Iraq. The Italian Senate is investigating the effects of DU on Italian soldiers and, for the first time, on civilians exposed during military exercises in Italy itself. The tragedy of possibly millions of similarly affected women, children and men in Iraq, former Yugoslavia, Somalia, and Afghanistan, is now on our agenda.
http://www.refusingtokill.net/UKGulfWar1/gulfwarsyndromeJournal2006.htm
----------------------------
Quote:
zapp, it is nothing new that government and media lie to their populace. you seem so surprised about this.
how many hours of television do you watch on average each day?
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
trippindad82 said:
Quote:
Which specific part is bullshit? Your entire position on everything seems to be that anything the government or the media says is a lie and the only people who can be trusted are the most outrageous and marginal blatherers who support their arguments with pretty much zero or distorted "facts". For instance this from a previous post of yours.
When will we all finally admit that the war in Iraq was NEVER based on terrorism? Operation Iraqi Liberation (why not just use freedom???) or OIL for short. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and many others planned this attack before "facts" were lined up about the WMD.
That's real specific there, pal, cut right to the bone. My god (zappa) I wish I had your focus. You're citing CBS News? And I thought the media were all liars. Oh, now I get it. They're liars if they don't support your preconceived notion of truth. No problemo. Sorry pal you're just wrong and there is no evidentiary support for your nonsense. But carry on. Quote:
Also, here as an excerpt from everybody's favorite site, wikipedia which also explains that Bush had preinauguration plans on attacking Iraq, whether or not they had ties with alQaida. It was just part of his administrative policy. IMO, more like he wanted to impress daddy.
Quote:
The United States Republican Party's campaign platform in the U.S. presidential election, 2000 called for "full implementation" of the Iraq Liberation Act and removal of Saddam Hussein with a focus on rebuilding a coalition, tougher sanctions, reinstating inspections, and support for the pro-democracy, opposition exile group, Iraqi National Congress then headed by Ahmed Chalabi.[16] Upon the election of George W. Bush as president, according to former treasury secretary Paul O'Neill, an attack was planned since the inauguration, and the first security council meeting discussed plans on invasion of the country. O'Neill later clarified that these discussions were part of a continuation of foreign policy first put into place by the Clinton Administration.[1
I might point out there pumpkin that that was a Clinton signed policy. Clinton. You know, the president before. Oh wait it said that didn't it. I should fucking hope they didn't wait until the last minute to draw up some sort of plan. I bet Clinton had a plan ready too, even though all he gave a shit about was scoring snapper and "legacy".
--------------------
|
AlteredAgain
Visual Alchemist
Registered: 04/27/06
Posts: 11,180
Loc: Solar Circuit
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6568152 - 02/14/07 06:43 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Almost none. How about you?
30min a week on average. i don't subscribe to network television in my home.
i kind of lost track of what's actually being debated here.
@main topic: iran attack by spring? i don't know, but i would definitely not rule it out. there are aircraft carriers in the gulf after all.
--------------------
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
I might point out there pumpkin that that was a Clinton signed policy. Clinton. You know, the president before. Oh wait it said that didn't it. I should fucking hope they didn't wait until the last minute to draw up some sort of plan. I bet Clinton had a plan ready too, even though all he gave a shit about was scoring snapper and "legacy".
It still doesn't downplay the fact that some of our politicians had plans on attacking Iraq before 9/11 even occurred. Why did we then blame (incorrectly I might add) our war policy on the 9/11 attacks when the policy was chosen long before 9/11 even happened?
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
Phred
Fred's son
Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 8 years, 2 months
|
|
Who blamed the war policy on 9/11?
Certainly Congress didn't when they authorized the use of military force in Iraq. Certainly Bush didn't when he chose to exercise that authorization.
Phred
--------------------
|
Alex213
Stranger
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 1,839
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6569705 - 02/15/07 02:26 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Defending by military action our territory and citizenry which had been attacked by Iran. But he was to cowardly to respond.
So what was Operation Eagle Claw?
If they were so eager why was saddass given so many chances?
Because Bush's father realised Saddam was a better option than fundamentalist shias and civil war?
I have very little doubt that had he still been active and not President he would have been flying that day, but that is useless speculation.
Are you joking? Would Dwight Eisenhower have gone awol on 9/11 and hid down a fucking hole in Nebraska? He wouldn't have put his foot outside Washington.
And why didn't the gutless coward go to Vietnam when he had the chance?
Blah blah blah "chickenhawk".
Well it's clear that Bush, Blair - the two leaders with no combat experience - were the most keen to start war. Chirac - a guy who has actually seen combat - didn't.
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: Alex213]
#6570042 - 02/15/07 08:39 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
If they were so eager why was saddass given so many chances?
Because Bush's father realised Saddam was a better option than fundamentalist shias and civil war?
Quote:
Well it's clear that Bush, Blair - the two leaders with no combat experience - were the most keen to start war. Chirac - a guy who has actually seen combat - didn't.
And don't we all remember Colin Powell? Isn't he another who knows the cost of war? Wasn't he adamantly against the war in Iraq? Whatever happened to Powell? Seems to me he didn't fit Bush's agenda after election. Wasn't there also the tension between Rumsfeld, another war hungry individual with ZERO war involvement, and Powell? Why was someone who had never seen or experienced battle in his life put in charge of the military (Pentagon)???
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole
Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 6 years, 9 months
|
|
Quote:
Alex213 said:
Defending by military action our territory and citizenry which had been attacked by Iran. But he was to cowardly to respond.
So what was Operation Eagle Claw?
A half-assed rescue mission. No courage on Carter's part required there. The courageous and proper choice would have been to tell them to release the hostages immediately or we lay waste to your entire country. And then do it. But no, he chose the politically correct non action.Quote:
If they were so eager why was saddass given so many chances?
Because Bush's father realised Saddam was a better option than fundamentalist shias and civil war?
He did, huh? And you know this how? Actually, the so many chances I was referring to were strictly those offered by Bush junior, and not Daddy or Clinton. But no, he kept playing games when America was clearly not willing to fool around with his nonsense anymore. Bad move.Quote:
I have very little doubt that had he still been active and not President he would have been flying that day, but that is useless speculation.
Are you joking? Would Dwight Eisenhower have gone awol on 9/11 and hid down a fucking hole in Nebraska? He wouldn't have put his foot outside Washington.
He fucking damn well better have done exactly the same thing or he wouldn't have been fit to be president. As I stated earlier, the president is more than the man, and no matter what his predilection for personal bravery might be it is not an option for him to put himself at risk. Maybe you think any president in an armored car is a coward. That's pretty stupid, isn't it? "Fuck yeah, he should ride right out front so any jagoff loser who wants can take their best shot." True genius there alex, what we most expect from you.Quote:
And why didn't the gutless coward go to Vietnam when he had the chance?
He chose to defend the homeland from direct attack by commie elements looking to strike on US soil. And you have done what?????? to defend your country????? Far less, I'm sure. Like me.Quote:
Blah blah blah "chickenhawk".
Well it's clear that Bush, Blair - the two leaders with no combat experience - were the most keen to start war. Chirac - a guy who has actually seen combat - didn't.
Chirac was bought and paid for. As was Putin and Annan.
--------------------
|
trippindad82
Trusted Cultivator of Trich
Registered: 01/07/07
Posts: 1,087
Loc: down, down the hole
Last seen: 10 years, 1 month
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6571860 - 02/15/07 06:27 PM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
He fucking damn well better have done exactly the same thing or he wouldn't have been fit to be president. As I stated earlier, the president is more than the man, and no matter what his predilection for personal bravery might be it is not an option for him to put himself at risk. Maybe you think any president in an armored car is a coward. That's pretty stupid, isn't it? "Fuck yeah, he should ride right out front so any jagoff loser who wants can take their best shot." True genius there alex, what we most expect from you.
If that sorry loser had been shot down, our constitution already provides for the next leader. There is ZERO bravery in asking every other parent out there to send their kid to war when his own two daughters are running around playing party girls. Had there been a true attack on American soil by another country, I would have no problem stepping up and defending my country (even though I am against war) but defending one's borders is a far different activity than attacking non threatening country.
--------------------
Trying to explain a journey to someone who has never experienced it is like trying to explain what a zebra looks like to blind person who has never seen a horse.
^^^The above matter may be a complete fantasy that I concocted out of possible boredom.^^^
--------------------------------------
|
Alex213
Stranger
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 1,839
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6573884 - 02/16/07 08:31 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
A half-assed rescue mission
It was only half-assed because the US special forces planned and executed in a half-assed way. Didn't they run out of petrol? What the fuck? The SAS would have done the job correctly.
Actually, the so many chances I was referring to were strictly those offered by Bush junior
What were these "chances"? The same kind of "chances" Hitler gave Poland? By chances do you mean "bullshit propaganda to justify a half-assed invasion"?
America was clearly not willing to fool around with his nonsense anymore. Bad move.
You think plunging Iraq into civil war was worth 3000 american dead and hundreds of thousands of dead civilians? Honestly?
He did, huh? And you know this how?
Because he encouraged the shias to rebel and then when they did he left them hanging with their ass in the wind and allowed Saddams helicopter gunships to break the no-fly zone and mow them down?
He fucking damn well better have done exactly the same thing or he wouldn't have been fit to be president
Bullshit. The presidents job is to be there in times of emergency and set an example. What example does it set to your country when in the slightest danger you run like a coward with water between your legs for a fucking hole in Nebraska?
What risk was there really? Didn't Cheney stay in the White house?
He chose to defend the homeland from direct attack by commie elements looking to strike on US soil
He did what?? How many of these "commie" attacks were there? Let me guess...none? Yeah, that's really brave of you shrub
|
zorbman
blarrr
Registered: 06/04/04
Posts: 5,952
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zappaisgod]
#6577148 - 02/17/07 02:45 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
He [Saddam] was a bona fide threat willing to aid and abet terrorists. That fact cannot be denied
A threat to whom?
Do you have any evidence that he was aiding terrorists who were seeking to attack the United States?
--------------------
“The crisis takes a much longer time coming than you think, and then it happens much faster than you would have thought.” -- Rudiger Dornbusch
|
Alex213
Stranger
Registered: 08/22/05
Posts: 1,839
|
Re: Iran attack by spring? [Re: zorbman]
#6577263 - 02/17/07 05:09 AM (16 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Not to mention the undeniable fact that the USA has aided and abetted a list of terrorists and vicious dictators as long as several peoples arms.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds 
Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
Diploid
SirTripAlot
Basilides
Alex213
wingnutx
Great_Satan
relativexistance
lonestar2004