Forums > Social Discussion > Why Iran wants nukes, why Bush wants to attack, and how it's all FUBAR
Login/Join to ParticipateGOLD Member
Basu gasu bakuhatsu - because sometimes buses explode
1,584 posts
Location: Angels Landing, USA
Basu gasu bakuhatsu - because sometimes buses explode
1,584 posts
Location: Angels Landing, USA
Posted:
Quoted from Fark.
Iran's recent History
1953. CIA back coup overthrows the democratically elected government.
Non-Https Image Link
1953-1979 The US Supported a brutal dictatorship. 1000's murdered, tortured by the SAVAK.
Non-Https Image Link
1980-1988 The US supported the aggressor in a war that cost Iran 500,000 killed
Non-Https Image Link
US Navy escorts shipping up/down the gulf, but allows Iraq to sink Iranian Shipping
Non-Https Image Link
US sells arms including chemical weapon to Iraq.
Non-Https Image Link
1988- USS ship shoots down a commercial flight operated by Iran Air. refuse to apoligise. Gives medals to the shooters.
George H. W. Bush declared, "I will never apologize for the United States of America — I don't care what the facts are" in reference to the incident.
Non-Https Image Link
US Labels Iran in the Axis of Evil
Non-Https Image Link
Regional neighbors, India/Pakistan get nukes
Non-Https Image Link
US invades Iran's neighbor Iraq, farking them up beyond repair.
Non-Https Image Link
Now why would they want nukes after that?
_________________________________________________________________________
In before "why do you hate america" Kael?
My perspective. I was always against the Iraq war. Simply going in after Saddam because he had/might have had WMD's was a ridiculous reason; Especially considering that during the Reagan administration we sold Saddam the technology for chemical weapons so he would gas the Iranians (who's government we hated more at the time). Since Congress still has incumbent congressmen from the Reagan administration, no one wants to admit they signed the bill selling chemical weapons tech to Iraq, which we apparently went to get rid of in this war. Turns out Saddam didn't have them anyway, they were already used or beyond their shelf life. Congratulations on the clusterfuck Congress and Bush.
Now we're seeing commercials for supporting the bombing of Iran. I don't want them to get nukes either. But considering we're raping their neighbor Iraq for oil and contracts (Did I mention I [censored] hate Halliburton?) to rebuild their country and that we pretty much screwed them in the past, I could see why Iran would want them. World War 3 anyone?
Not to mention our rivals China and Russia have lucrative contracts with Iran. It's almost like declaring war on them but not!
Best case scenario? Open conversation between the middle eastern countries, especially Iran, Syria, Israel, and the current lackeys in Iraq. Thwart the worse case scenario... can you say, 'glass parking lot'?
Parting thought - wikipedia on Iran
[sarcasm]AMERICA HAS ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH IRAN[/sarcasm]
I'm not proud to be an American sometimes.
Your thoughts?
Quoted from Fark.
Iran's recent History
1953. CIA back coup overthrows the democratically elected government.
Non-Https Image Link
1953-1979 The US Supported a brutal dictatorship. 1000's murdered, tortured by the SAVAK.
Non-Https Image Link
1980-1988 The US supported the aggressor in a war that cost Iran 500,000 killed
Non-Https Image Link
US Navy escorts shipping up/down the gulf, but allows Iraq to sink Iranian Shipping
Non-Https Image Link
US sells arms including chemical weapon to Iraq.
Non-Https Image Link
1988- USS ship shoots down a commercial flight operated by Iran Air. refuse to apoligise. Gives medals to the shooters.
George H. W. Bush declared, "I will never apologize for the United States of America — I don't care what the facts are" in reference to the incident.
Non-Https Image Link
US Labels Iran in the Axis of Evil
Non-Https Image Link
Regional neighbors, India/Pakistan get nukes
Non-Https Image Link
US invades Iran's neighbor Iraq, farking them up beyond repair.
Non-Https Image Link
Now why would they want nukes after that?
_________________________________________________________________________
In before "why do you hate america" Kael?
My perspective. I was always against the Iraq war. Simply going in after Saddam because he had/might have had WMD's was a ridiculous reason; Especially considering that during the Reagan administration we sold Saddam the technology for chemical weapons so he would gas the Iranians (who's government we hated more at the time). Since Congress still has incumbent congressmen from the Reagan administration, no one wants to admit they signed the bill selling chemical weapons tech to Iraq, which we apparently went to get rid of in this war. Turns out Saddam didn't have them anyway, they were already used or beyond their shelf life. Congratulations on the clusterfuck Congress and Bush.
Now we're seeing commercials for supporting the bombing of Iran. I don't want them to get nukes either. But considering we're raping their neighbor Iraq for oil and contracts (Did I mention I [censored] hate Halliburton?) to rebuild their country and that we pretty much screwed them in the past, I could see why Iran would want them. World War 3 anyone?
Not to mention our rivals China and Russia have lucrative contracts with Iran. It's almost like declaring war on them but not!
Best case scenario? Open conversation between the middle eastern countries, especially Iran, Syria, Israel, and the current lackeys in Iraq. Thwart the worse case scenario... can you say, 'glass parking lot'?
Parting thought - wikipedia on Iran
Written by:
Tens of thousands of Iranian civilians and military personnel were killed when Iraq used chemical weapons in its warfare. Iraq was financially backed by Egypt, the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf, the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact states, the United States (beginning in 1983), France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Brazil, and the People's Republic of China (which also sold weapons to Iran). All of these countries provided intelligence, agents for chemical weapons as well as other forms of military assistance to Saddam Hussein. Iran's principal allies during the war were Syria, Libya, and North Korea.
With more than 100,000 Iranian victims[37] of Iraq's chemical weapons during the eight-year war, Iran is the world's second-most afflicted country by weapons of mass destruction, only to Japan.
[sarcasm]AMERICA HAS ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH IRAN[/sarcasm]
I'm not proud to be an American sometimes.
Your thoughts?
To do: More Firedrums 08 video?
Wildfire/US East coast fire footage
LA/EDC glow/fire footage
Fresno fire
PLATINUM Member
bastard child of satan
1,113 posts
Location: Raanana, Israel
bastard child of satan
1,113 posts
Location: Raanana, Israel
Posted:
^also true, and this is why i hate religion. the bible is very unclear about a lot of things and its words can be twisted to manipulate religious people.
^also true, and this is why i hate religion. the bible is very unclear about a lot of things and its words can be twisted to manipulate religious people.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
It's an interesting idea as to how one would maintain a PC attitude and values while living under a radical Islam regime. Would one just swallow all the sectarian violence, suicide bombings, torture, and beheadings as an expression of cultural ethnocentricity and simply accept it for fear of not wanting to be labelled a racist?
Would living under Sharia law suddenly become cool, and be viewed as embracing diversity?
A while ago , there was a thread on here labelling Christian Voice as the most dangerous group in Britain because they stage protests re things like the Jerry Springer Opera, and homosexual rallies In the same decade however, Britain's had the London bombings, that shoe bomber guy, supposed plots to blow up 10 airliners using liquid explosives ( this was actually done in 1993 ) and most recently, a plot to kidnap a Muslim soldier ( in the UK ) behead him. and post it on Youtube.
I just don't get it...How can a group that simply complains be regarded as being more evil than a group that wants to kill people to forward their ideology ?
I could just be a little thick here, maybe all those stories in the media about groups like Hamas dedicating themselves to genocide, or stories about life under the Taliban in Afghanistan are grossly exaggerated. Maybe Islam really is the religion of peace and I'm being duped. Maybe Iran just wants nuclear weapons to keep America ( and every other country that's been active in Iran) at bay and all this talk about excising the cancer in the Middle East that is Israel. is simply just that...talk.
After all it's not like the Koran instructs the faithful to kill the non-believers
Am I wrong to fear and condemn a nuclear radical Islam ?
It's an interesting idea as to how one would maintain a PC attitude and values while living under a radical Islam regime. Would one just swallow all the sectarian violence, suicide bombings, torture, and beheadings as an expression of cultural ethnocentricity and simply accept it for fear of not wanting to be labelled a racist?
Would living under Sharia law suddenly become cool, and be viewed as embracing diversity?
A while ago , there was a thread on here labelling Christian Voice as the most dangerous group in Britain because they stage protests re things like the Jerry Springer Opera, and homosexual rallies In the same decade however, Britain's had the London bombings, that shoe bomber guy, supposed plots to blow up 10 airliners using liquid explosives ( this was actually done in 1993 ) and most recently, a plot to kidnap a Muslim soldier ( in the UK ) behead him. and post it on Youtube.
I just don't get it...How can a group that simply complains be regarded as being more evil than a group that wants to kill people to forward their ideology ?
I could just be a little thick here, maybe all those stories in the media about groups like Hamas dedicating themselves to genocide, or stories about life under the Taliban in Afghanistan are grossly exaggerated. Maybe Islam really is the religion of peace and I'm being duped. Maybe Iran just wants nuclear weapons to keep America ( and every other country that's been active in Iran) at bay and all this talk about excising the cancer in the Middle East that is Israel. is simply just that...talk.
After all it's not like the Koran instructs the faithful to kill the non-believers
Am I wrong to fear and condemn a nuclear radical Islam ?
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
i don't see how you can say that.
first, namecalling only lowers you to their level...i believe someone had a sig say don't fight an idiot because they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience...if you insist on calling the president of US names...i hope he does beat you
second, most people disagree with him now anyways, so your manipulation point is pointless
third, we are not a Christian theocracy and far from it...the freedoms allowed here for religious and faith observations are far from what you would have in a theocracy where everyone is supposed to have the same beliefs...i would be able to lead a prayer in a public school, the ten commandments would be in front of any public building so chosing, abortions may end up illegal, i would not be verbally attacked by professors and students and people on the street, for believing my faith and having the morals that i have
don't you even try and say that we are anything close to a theocracy because the president happens to refuse to hide his faith and has made decisions or has made decisions that you disagree with
ok done now
EDITED_BY: faithinfire (1171140883)
Written by: SymWritten by: Poiboy
but let's face it, muslim countries have a very religious society, so it's easy for any nutjob to manipulate them by calling everyone he hates infidels and using the word allah in every sentence.
Whilst we're at it:
let's face it, amarica has a very religious society, so it's easy for any nutjob to manipulate them by calling everyone he hates terrorist and using the word god in every sentence.
i don't see how you can say that. first, namecalling only lowers you to their level...i believe someone had a sig say don't fight an idiot because they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience...if you insist on calling the president of US names...i hope he does beat you
second, most people disagree with him now anyways, so your manipulation point is pointless
third, we are not a Christian theocracy and far from it...the freedoms allowed here for religious and faith observations are far from what you would have in a theocracy where everyone is supposed to have the same beliefs...i would be able to lead a prayer in a public school, the ten commandments would be in front of any public building so chosing, abortions may end up illegal, i would not be verbally attacked by professors and students and people on the street, for believing my faith and having the morals that i have
don't you even try and say that we are anything close to a theocracy because the president happens to refuse to hide his faith and has made decisions or has made decisions that you disagree with
ok done now
EDITED_BY: faithinfire (1171140883)
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
For those who don't live in the UK, I'll point out that this has yet to go to court and there's, as yet, no public evidence that this plot was real.
Of the other high publicity raids against 'terror plots' in the UK, it seems that around 50% of them turn out to be completely unsubstantiated.
As a result, the muslim community, most of which are peaceful and reasonable, are feeling oppressed and victimised, as any community would when its members are imprisoned for indefinite periods with no evidence or charges.
Is it worth reminding everyone again that, during a period of 'terror attack' paranoia, the UK police executed a man later found to be completely innocent, with 6 bullets to the head, in public.
Despite lying to the media afterwords (claiming that he was wearing bulky clothing that could have been hiding a bomb and that he ran when challenged) there have been no charges brought against any officer, nor is there any likelihood in the near future.
Written by: Stout
.......and most recently, a plot to kidnap a Muslim soldier ( in the UK ) behead him. and post it on Youtube.
For those who don't live in the UK, I'll point out that this has yet to go to court and there's, as yet, no public evidence that this plot was real.
Of the other high publicity raids against 'terror plots' in the UK, it seems that around 50% of them turn out to be completely unsubstantiated.
As a result, the muslim community, most of which are peaceful and reasonable, are feeling oppressed and victimised, as any community would when its members are imprisoned for indefinite periods with no evidence or charges.
Is it worth reminding everyone again that, during a period of 'terror attack' paranoia, the UK police executed a man later found to be completely innocent, with 6 bullets to the head, in public.
Despite lying to the media afterwords (claiming that he was wearing bulky clothing that could have been hiding a bomb and that he ran when challenged) there have been no charges brought against any officer, nor is there any likelihood in the near future.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Not according to my anatomy professor who had to pull his family out of Baghdad. See, they're Sunnis and they were sick of bombs going off, of police raping women and girls, of vigilantes.
Said he: "At least with Saddam, life was horrible, but you could predict it. Now with the Americans life is just as bad, although in different ways, but you never know what horrible thing is going to happen next. Will a grenade come in through your window? Will you get your ten minutes of hot water this morning? Will there be antibiotics or fluids at the hospital? Life there is far worse now."
He says that the only thing that's changed is that everyone has cell phones now, so at least when there's a bombing you can call your family to make sure they're OK.
Basically, he says that life in Baghdad is like having the Tube bombings of 2005 happening a few times a week. But nobody reports on it.
Written by: DJ Dantana
Contrary to popular belief new infastructure and schools and hospitals are being built every day in iraq, raising the standard of living for everybody. How is this a bad thing? The USA is helping the Iraqi people, despite the efforts of iran to destablize the region.
Not according to my anatomy professor who had to pull his family out of Baghdad. See, they're Sunnis and they were sick of bombs going off, of police raping women and girls, of vigilantes.
Said he: "At least with Saddam, life was horrible, but you could predict it. Now with the Americans life is just as bad, although in different ways, but you never know what horrible thing is going to happen next. Will a grenade come in through your window? Will you get your ten minutes of hot water this morning? Will there be antibiotics or fluids at the hospital? Life there is far worse now."
He says that the only thing that's changed is that everyone has cell phones now, so at least when there's a bombing you can call your family to make sure they're OK.
Basically, he says that life in Baghdad is like having the Tube bombings of 2005 happening a few times a week. But nobody reports on it.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
50% of the high profile raids are unsubstantiated... I don't know what to make of that figure given the nature of the offense involved and the relatively few high profile raids that I can read about on the internet.
But surely the Muslim community is aware that the vast majority of terrorists getting all the press have been themselves Muslims and surely they realise that anti terror legislation applies to everyone and that a group like the IRA, were they to go back into business, would be subjected to the same scrutiny.
Out of curiosity is the Muslim community in the UK openly condemning terrorist activities ?
50% of the high profile raids are unsubstantiated... I don't know what to make of that figure given the nature of the offense involved and the relatively few high profile raids that I can read about on the internet.
But surely the Muslim community is aware that the vast majority of terrorists getting all the press have been themselves Muslims and surely they realise that anti terror legislation applies to everyone and that a group like the IRA, were they to go back into business, would be subjected to the same scrutiny.
Out of curiosity is the Muslim community in the UK openly condemning terrorist activities ?
GOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Posted:
50% is my 'guestimation' (which is why I preceeded it with 'seems to be').
There havn't been that many high profile raids, but, of that few, several seem to have come to naught- including one that i recall where two brothers were raided, one was shot (by a police officer), then both were released without charge.
See-
https://www.sweetness-light.com/archive/muslims-angered-by-arrrests-in-uk-beheading-plot
The consequences of UK anti-terror legislation, are not 'applying to everyone' though, it's pretty much exclusively the muslim community who are being raided.
Think about what a 'raid' is- it's a large number of heavily armed police (dressed and armed like militia) kicking in the door of your family home at 5 in the morning.
You, your wife and your children, are dragged out of bed- cos the police suspect you of being killers, they are very much on edge and there is a real possibility that, even if you cooperate, you could be shot.
You are then kept locked up for, with each change in legislation, an increasing length of time without charge- and interrogated.
After that, assuming you're not charged with anything, you're released without apology and with those responsible left unnacountable.
This has happened to innocent muslim families and communities time and again.
At least one innocent muslim has been shot during a raid and the poor brazilian who was executed in public by UK terror police looked like a muslim.
Most UK muslims are not extremists and they have nothing to do with terror.
They could probably be the best help the UK govt could have in their battle against terror, if they weren't being alienated by these mistake-ridden 'raids'.
There is no single unified muslim community spokes-group.
Some muslim groups publicly condemn terrorist activites, others don't.
There's a bigger picture here as well- Uk muslims have family connections worldwide and often their relatives are subject to oppression.
For example, the US has imprisoned muslims for durations of years, without charges. They have exported imprisoned muslims to countires where they can be tortured- breaking international rules.
It's no wonder many UK muslims feel afraid.
50% is my 'guestimation' (which is why I preceeded it with 'seems to be').
There havn't been that many high profile raids, but, of that few, several seem to have come to naught- including one that i recall where two brothers were raided, one was shot (by a police officer), then both were released without charge.
See-
https://www.sweetness-light.com/archive/muslims-angered-by-arrrests-in-uk-beheading-plot
Written by:
Police had come under harsh criticism over its anti-terror swoops in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.
Some 1,047 people were arrested in high-profile raids between September 2001 and June 30 last year under the Terrorism Act 2000, according to Scotland Yard figures.
Only 158 - 10 percent of those arrested - have been charged with terrorist-related offences.
Last year, two British Muslims were arrested on suspicion of involvement in a terrorist plot after a dramatic anti-terror swoop on their home in Forest Gate, east London, which saw the shooting of one of the pair in his shoulder.
The brothers were later released without charges.
Written by: Stout
But surely the Muslim community is aware that the vast majority of terrorists getting all the press have been themselves Muslims and surely they realise that anti terror legislation applies to everyone .......
The consequences of UK anti-terror legislation, are not 'applying to everyone' though, it's pretty much exclusively the muslim community who are being raided.
Think about what a 'raid' is- it's a large number of heavily armed police (dressed and armed like militia) kicking in the door of your family home at 5 in the morning.
You, your wife and your children, are dragged out of bed- cos the police suspect you of being killers, they are very much on edge and there is a real possibility that, even if you cooperate, you could be shot.
You are then kept locked up for, with each change in legislation, an increasing length of time without charge- and interrogated.
After that, assuming you're not charged with anything, you're released without apology and with those responsible left unnacountable.
This has happened to innocent muslim families and communities time and again.
At least one innocent muslim has been shot during a raid and the poor brazilian who was executed in public by UK terror police looked like a muslim.
Most UK muslims are not extremists and they have nothing to do with terror.
They could probably be the best help the UK govt could have in their battle against terror, if they weren't being alienated by these mistake-ridden 'raids'.
Written by:
Out of curiosity is the Muslim community in the UK openly condemning terrorist activities ?
There is no single unified muslim community spokes-group.
Some muslim groups publicly condemn terrorist activites, others don't.
There's a bigger picture here as well- Uk muslims have family connections worldwide and often their relatives are subject to oppression.
For example, the US has imprisoned muslims for durations of years, without charges. They have exported imprisoned muslims to countires where they can be tortured- breaking international rules.
It's no wonder many UK muslims feel afraid.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
i have stated this before, my friends over there are busy with the infastructure, helping set up schools and fix roads...one guy help set up a fresh water pump to a town that had a well...they had been afraid that someone might poison it so they were overjoyed to get the pump\
he has pictures of him with school kids and their new supplies, pictures that they drew...i like the photo he has of him buried in kids
roads that had been destroyed, ieds or our bombings are being repaired, my rotc sargeant is out there right now working on the tranportation infrastructure as an independent contractor with the military
yes, there is violence, but a lot of good is happening there too
i have stated this before, my friends over there are busy with the infastructure, helping set up schools and fix roads...one guy help set up a fresh water pump to a town that had a well...they had been afraid that someone might poison it so they were overjoyed to get the pump\
he has pictures of him with school kids and their new supplies, pictures that they drew...i like the photo he has of him buried in kids
roads that had been destroyed, ieds or our bombings are being repaired, my rotc sargeant is out there right now working on the tranportation infrastructure as an independent contractor with the military
yes, there is violence, but a lot of good is happening there too
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
50% sounds about right, given the relatively few high profile raids I can read about online ( less than 10 ) but it's the 10 percent of arrests resulting in charges that has me wondering... and then there's the conviction rate, which has to be less than 10 % doesn't it ?.
The big problem with a crime like terrorism is, how do you fight it ? Usual police procedure has suspects turning in other suspects..ie people talk , so one has to assume the police get some of their info from those that they arrest, but I agree, backing down with the raids and establishing a amicable relationship with the Muslim community is probably going to yield more useful info than a terrified suspect just saying what he thinks the authorities want to hear.
Sometimes when I'm here on Hop, I have to remind myself that I don't actually live in Britain. Locally, we don't have much of a Muslim community, so my experience with Muslims is basically limited to to the Media ( well, there was that month I spent riding a motorcycle around Turkey, but that's different ) so when I read that almost 40% of British Muslim youth want Sharia law, I can't help but wonder why. I sure couldn't live under it and I suspect there's very few non Muslims that could. Surely the Muslim population is aware of this, and the sheer idiocy ( from a public relations perspective ) of answering yes to wanting that system has to register with the British Muslim Community.
If anything, wanting Sharia law would only further serve to alienate Muslims from the non Muslims. I'd be none to happy with a local proposal to adopt this system, and would fight tooth and nail to see it rejected.
This is off topic in relation to the intention of the thread, but it does relate to what actually motivates terrorists. How much of terrorism revolves around the "we hate the west and their cultural values" compared to "we want non Muslims off of Muslim lands" ( like the case with Israel ) the former, I have no tolerance for and simply suggest Muslims move to Muslim countries , or shut up, the second I can at least understand, but that puts us on a war footing and given that outlook, I can see the need for the raiding style of enforcement.
What motivated those guys to carry out the London bombings ? was it ideology, or bringing "the war" top the home front. Didn't they care about the negative feelings that their actions would generate against the Muslim population ? Shouldn't they share at least some responsibility about what happened to the Brazilian ? They had to know that the police, along with the general public, would be very edgy towards Muslim ( or Muslim looking ) "suspects" as a result of what they did.. Surely they must have.
How well do the different types of Muslims get along in Britain ? is there any sectarian ill will going on there. Did you bring up the Islamic thinkers website and did you notice the anti Shia propaganda on the second page..keep in mind, the Islamic thinkers are American, also keep in mind that no other religious groups seem to hate each other as much as the Muslim sects.
No doubt the reason the Muslim community is being targeted and raided, is because Muslims terrorists are getting all the press. Sure, there's non-Muslim terrorist groups, but ever since the IRA mellowed out, Muslims are all I ever read about. Hummm..I wonder what ever happened to the neo-Nazis and white supremacists ?
50% sounds about right, given the relatively few high profile raids I can read about online ( less than 10 ) but it's the 10 percent of arrests resulting in charges that has me wondering... and then there's the conviction rate, which has to be less than 10 % doesn't it ?.
The big problem with a crime like terrorism is, how do you fight it ? Usual police procedure has suspects turning in other suspects..ie people talk , so one has to assume the police get some of their info from those that they arrest, but I agree, backing down with the raids and establishing a amicable relationship with the Muslim community is probably going to yield more useful info than a terrified suspect just saying what he thinks the authorities want to hear.
Sometimes when I'm here on Hop, I have to remind myself that I don't actually live in Britain. Locally, we don't have much of a Muslim community, so my experience with Muslims is basically limited to to the Media ( well, there was that month I spent riding a motorcycle around Turkey, but that's different ) so when I read that almost 40% of British Muslim youth want Sharia law, I can't help but wonder why. I sure couldn't live under it and I suspect there's very few non Muslims that could. Surely the Muslim population is aware of this, and the sheer idiocy ( from a public relations perspective ) of answering yes to wanting that system has to register with the British Muslim Community.
If anything, wanting Sharia law would only further serve to alienate Muslims from the non Muslims. I'd be none to happy with a local proposal to adopt this system, and would fight tooth and nail to see it rejected.
This is off topic in relation to the intention of the thread, but it does relate to what actually motivates terrorists. How much of terrorism revolves around the "we hate the west and their cultural values" compared to "we want non Muslims off of Muslim lands" ( like the case with Israel ) the former, I have no tolerance for and simply suggest Muslims move to Muslim countries , or shut up, the second I can at least understand, but that puts us on a war footing and given that outlook, I can see the need for the raiding style of enforcement.
What motivated those guys to carry out the London bombings ? was it ideology, or bringing "the war" top the home front. Didn't they care about the negative feelings that their actions would generate against the Muslim population ? Shouldn't they share at least some responsibility about what happened to the Brazilian ? They had to know that the police, along with the general public, would be very edgy towards Muslim ( or Muslim looking ) "suspects" as a result of what they did.. Surely they must have.
How well do the different types of Muslims get along in Britain ? is there any sectarian ill will going on there. Did you bring up the Islamic thinkers website and did you notice the anti Shia propaganda on the second page..keep in mind, the Islamic thinkers are American, also keep in mind that no other religious groups seem to hate each other as much as the Muslim sects.
No doubt the reason the Muslim community is being targeted and raided, is because Muslims terrorists are getting all the press. Sure, there's non-Muslim terrorist groups, but ever since the IRA mellowed out, Muslims are all I ever read about. Hummm..I wonder what ever happened to the neo-Nazis and white supremacists ?
SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posted:
Would you care to provide a source for this fantastic 250,000 dead in SE Asia every year figure?? I had no idea that 'islamofacists' killed more people each year in SE Asia than have died in Iraq since the US invaded!!!
Regarding the 30% young UK muslims supporting sharia law story, as a matter of fact it was on the BBC, on a number of occassions. In fact, judging from your 250,000 figure it sounds like you (and many others) should be watching a little more BBC and a little less Fox!
Written by: DJ Dantana
Islamo-facism is taking over the world, 250,000 dead every year (mostly in SE asia), innocent women and children and civilians killed at random by islamofacists every year, and rising.
Eurabia Union is going to be the new name of the EU if things keep going like they are. London has what, 1.2 million muslims now? With the younger genereation more and more leaning towards radical islam. (30% of youngsters support having sharia law, according to the latest survey) bet you didn't see that on the bbc.
Would you care to provide a source for this fantastic 250,000 dead in SE Asia every year figure?? I had no idea that 'islamofacists' killed more people each year in SE Asia than have died in Iraq since the US invaded!!!
Regarding the 30% young UK muslims supporting sharia law story, as a matter of fact it was on the BBC, on a number of occassions. In fact, judging from your 250,000 figure it sounds like you (and many others) should be watching a little more BBC and a little less Fox!
SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posted:
Why do you so easily forget that the only country to have ever killed innocent civilians using nukes is the US?
Would you care to provide some evidence of the fact that Iran is in fact trying to build nukes / doing something illegal and not just trying to generate electricity?
Written by: DJ Dantana
And when (not IF) Iran starts dropping nukes, will you still think it would have been rediculous to stop them when we can before they murdered millions of innocent jews and who knows who else?
Why do you so easily forget that the only country to have ever killed innocent civilians using nukes is the US?
Would you care to provide some evidence of the fact that Iran is in fact trying to build nukes / doing something illegal and not just trying to generate electricity?
SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posted:
Care to explain why you are calling Hugo Chavez a dictator? Is it because you are simply not aware of the fact that he is democratically elected and has the support of most Venezuelans, or is it because in your opinion the working class Venezuelans who support and vote for him are worth less than rich Venezuelans???
Written by: DJ Dantana
Venezuelan has uranium ore, and is involved with heavy trade with Iran president/dictator Hugo Chavez is best buds with Iranian nutjob president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Care to explain why you are calling Hugo Chavez a dictator? Is it because you are simply not aware of the fact that he is democratically elected and has the support of most Venezuelans, or is it because in your opinion the working class Venezuelans who support and vote for him are worth less than rich Venezuelans???
SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posted:
I think radical Islam taking over the world is not a very likely scenario. You seem to forget that radical Islam as a political movement has not been contained by the American empire, it mainly exists as a reaction to the American empire! Over the years more and more moderate Muslims have started sympathising with radical Islam because of very real western supported injustices that they see around them. Many people seem to forget that radical Islam is primarily a political movement, not a religeous one.
Written by: Poiboy
as much as i hate bush, he's much better than islam extremists.
if america falls as an empire, radical islam will probably take it's place.
I think radical Islam taking over the world is not a very likely scenario. You seem to forget that radical Islam as a political movement has not been contained by the American empire, it mainly exists as a reaction to the American empire! Over the years more and more moderate Muslims have started sympathising with radical Islam because of very real western supported injustices that they see around them. Many people seem to forget that radical Islam is primarily a political movement, not a religeous one.
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
as their countries are mainly theocracies, the difference is minimalized. the faith is an integral part of their government.
and sorry but the whole radical movement in response to western injustices is a load of bull. the west is just the current focus. no one really cared until they started to target us. has the west done things that can be considered harmful, absolutely, but the radical movement was already there, just fighting elsewhere.
Written by: Yell fire!Written by: Poiboy
as much as i hate bush, he's much better than islam extremists.
if america falls as an empire, radical islam will probably take it's place.
I think radical Islam taking over the world is not a very likely scenario. You seem to forget that radical Islam as a political movement has not been contained by the American empire, it mainly exists as a reaction to the American empire! Over the years more and more moderate Muslims have started sympathising with radical Islam because of very real western supported injustices that they see around them. Many people seem to forget that radical Islam is primarily a political movement, not a religeous one.
as their countries are mainly theocracies, the difference is minimalized. the faith is an integral part of their government.
and sorry but the whole radical movement in response to western injustices is a load of bull. the west is just the current focus. no one really cared until they started to target us. has the west done things that can be considered harmful, absolutely, but the radical movement was already there, just fighting elsewhere.
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
SILVER Member
veteran
1,228 posts
Location: on the wrong planet, United Kingdom
veteran
1,228 posts
Location: on the wrong planet, United Kingdom
Posted:
How about a little history lesson then, for those who aren't going to get the truth from their schools and media:
Way back before WWI the arab world was considerably more stable than it is today. It was comprised of many different tribes organised into the Ottoman Empire under the Sultan's rule.
During WWI and WWII the empire was broken up, and the western countries decided on how to divide up the land (creating countries like Iran and Iraq) and they were given governmental control of these countries. Not even Germany had a foreign government installed after the wars.
When the foriegn powers left, they were replaced by military leaders approved of by the western powers. Saddam Hussein was one of these.
The Iran Iraq war was about borders (the ones drawn up by the West) and because Iran (having just had a revolution to remove it's military leaders) wanted to remove Saddam's regieme.
In this war the west supplied chemical and biological weapons to Saddam, who used them against the Iranians, and against people in his own country (Halabja).
The people of Iraq for many years pleaded for aid from the west, in removing Saddam from power, as he continued in human rights abuses.
In the first Gulf War President Bush called for the Iraqi people to rise up against Saddam, promising to give them aid. As soon as Saddam was kicked out of Kuwait, he went about punishing those who did rise up, as none of the promised help was given.
The second Gulf War occured, most likely because Saddam was considering trading his oil in Euros instead of Dollars (If you can't understand elementary economics, this would have caused a collapse of the US's economy, as the only value the dollar has is through it's use in international trade).
The western powers used the excuse that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons as a pretext to invade, and 'liberate' the people, then went about bombing the cities.
Now that Iran has been considering trading it's oil in Euros too, the west is pushing for another war.
Democracy is not going to be of any help to these countries, as it is a flawed political system that allows the largest group of people to rule all the others, and there are many small groups in these countries.
The west's treatment of the Arab peoples has been entirely self serving and hypocritical. Is it any wonder they hate us?
How about a little history lesson then, for those who aren't going to get the truth from their schools and media:
Way back before WWI the arab world was considerably more stable than it is today. It was comprised of many different tribes organised into the Ottoman Empire under the Sultan's rule.
During WWI and WWII the empire was broken up, and the western countries decided on how to divide up the land (creating countries like Iran and Iraq) and they were given governmental control of these countries. Not even Germany had a foreign government installed after the wars.
When the foriegn powers left, they were replaced by military leaders approved of by the western powers. Saddam Hussein was one of these.
The Iran Iraq war was about borders (the ones drawn up by the West) and because Iran (having just had a revolution to remove it's military leaders) wanted to remove Saddam's regieme.
In this war the west supplied chemical and biological weapons to Saddam, who used them against the Iranians, and against people in his own country (Halabja).
The people of Iraq for many years pleaded for aid from the west, in removing Saddam from power, as he continued in human rights abuses.
In the first Gulf War President Bush called for the Iraqi people to rise up against Saddam, promising to give them aid. As soon as Saddam was kicked out of Kuwait, he went about punishing those who did rise up, as none of the promised help was given.
The second Gulf War occured, most likely because Saddam was considering trading his oil in Euros instead of Dollars (If you can't understand elementary economics, this would have caused a collapse of the US's economy, as the only value the dollar has is through it's use in international trade).
The western powers used the excuse that Saddam had chemical and biological weapons as a pretext to invade, and 'liberate' the people, then went about bombing the cities.
Now that Iran has been considering trading it's oil in Euros too, the west is pushing for another war.
Democracy is not going to be of any help to these countries, as it is a flawed political system that allows the largest group of people to rule all the others, and there are many small groups in these countries.
The west's treatment of the Arab peoples has been entirely self serving and hypocritical. Is it any wonder they hate us?
You aren't thinking or really existing unless you're willing to risk even your own sanity in the judgment of your existence.
Green peppers, lime pickle and whole-grain mustard = best sandwich filling.
BRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posted:
I think I should probably refrain from having a discussion with you, lest I offend you by inadvertently ridiculing your ridiculous president!
Written by: faithinfire
and sorry but the whole radical movement in response to western injustices is a load of bull.
I think I should probably refrain from having a discussion with you, lest I offend you by inadvertently ridiculing your ridiculous president!
PLATINUM Member
bastard child of satan
1,113 posts
Location: Raanana, Israel
bastard child of satan
1,113 posts
Location: Raanana, Israel
Posted:
so was hitler... so he wasnt a dictator according to you?
i might not have proof that they're building nukes, but i would never trust a man who says he wants to wipe a country off the map with materials for nukes.
and i think radical islam trying to take the US's place if it falls as an empire is very likely. it might be a political movement, but their faith is still a huge part of it, and most of the muslim countries are theocracies. i would never want a theocracy (of any religion... not just islam) with that much power.
Written by:
Care to explain why you are calling Hugo Chavez a dictator? Is it because you are simply not aware of the fact that he is democratically elected
so was hitler... so he wasnt a dictator according to you?
Written by:
Would you care to provide some evidence of the fact that Iran is in fact trying to build nukes / doing something illegal and not just trying to generate electricity?
i might not have proof that they're building nukes, but i would never trust a man who says he wants to wipe a country off the map with materials for nukes.
and i think radical islam trying to take the US's place if it falls as an empire is very likely. it might be a political movement, but their faith is still a huge part of it, and most of the muslim countries are theocracies. i would never want a theocracy (of any religion... not just islam) with that much power.
SILVER Member
veteran
1,228 posts
Location: on the wrong planet, United Kingdom
veteran
1,228 posts
Location: on the wrong planet, United Kingdom
Posted:
Well here's something else you won't see on the news.
Radical Islam would have to get rid or China and Russia to replace the US, as together they are next in line as world superpower, something that seems more inevitable as the US economy is further crippled by huge military spending.
All it would take is for China to float the yuan on the international currency markets, instead of having it tied to the dollar, and the US would be sent back to the stone age. It's not going to happen though so long as the US is China's biggest export market, but if the economy gets too weak China may well pull the plug. Given that China has arranged with Iran to buy a huge amount of natural gas from Iran for several years, any interruption of this supply by western powers could result in the axe being held over their heads being allowed to drop.
Well here's something else you won't see on the news.
Radical Islam would have to get rid or China and Russia to replace the US, as together they are next in line as world superpower, something that seems more inevitable as the US economy is further crippled by huge military spending.
All it would take is for China to float the yuan on the international currency markets, instead of having it tied to the dollar, and the US would be sent back to the stone age. It's not going to happen though so long as the US is China's biggest export market, but if the economy gets too weak China may well pull the plug. Given that China has arranged with Iran to buy a huge amount of natural gas from Iran for several years, any interruption of this supply by western powers could result in the axe being held over their heads being allowed to drop.
You aren't thinking or really existing unless you're willing to risk even your own sanity in the judgment of your existence.
Green peppers, lime pickle and whole-grain mustard = best sandwich filling.
SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posted:
And how exactly is Hugo Chavez similar to Hitler??? Just because he is one of the world's few independent minded leaders does not make him a dictator! There are many other current and former leaders who bear a much closer resemblence to Hitler, such as Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert, George Bush, Tony Blair, etc. Are they all dictators?
EDITED_BY: Yell fire! (1172590513)
Written by: PoiboyWritten by:
Care to explain why you are calling Hugo Chavez a dictator? Is it because you are simply not aware of the fact that he is democratically elected
so was hitler... so he wasnt a dictator according to you?
And how exactly is Hugo Chavez similar to Hitler??? Just because he is one of the world's few independent minded leaders does not make him a dictator! There are many other current and former leaders who bear a much closer resemblence to Hitler, such as Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert, George Bush, Tony Blair, etc. Are they all dictators?
EDITED_BY: Yell fire! (1172590513)
BRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Posted:
Yell fire, I don't agree that Bush and Blair are like Hitler: at least he had the support of most of the population at the time of his election and he was elected in a almost revolutionary way.
However, I really support Chavez in what he is trying to do - the world needs more leaders like him (what would the UK be like if we had someone so brave?!) to try to remove the American empire from its top spot and replace it with open fair rule rather than market led rule.
To the others: where are you getting your information about Chavez? I assume you have extensively read up about him, how he came in to power, what he has done since he came to power etc? Maybe you missed the part where he limited the presidential term to 2? Or the bit where he reformed the tax system so that the big business in the country got taxed according to the law? Or maybe the bit where he stopped the nationalisation of the countries infrastructure so that he could increase spending on public services?
Maybe you're just looking at the Enabling Act? I don't know. But I do know that the UK government has been trying to do the same thing in the form of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, yet some how we're all right?
I'm sorry to ask these questions, but what you are saying doesn't seem to tie in with the facts, and they look to me like they have just come from headlines in newspapers. If I am wrong then I am sorry and I will look forward to reading your cited sources.
Yell fire, I don't agree that Bush and Blair are like Hitler: at least he had the support of most of the population at the time of his election and he was elected in a almost revolutionary way.
However, I really support Chavez in what he is trying to do - the world needs more leaders like him (what would the UK be like if we had someone so brave?!) to try to remove the American empire from its top spot and replace it with open fair rule rather than market led rule.
To the others: where are you getting your information about Chavez? I assume you have extensively read up about him, how he came in to power, what he has done since he came to power etc? Maybe you missed the part where he limited the presidential term to 2? Or the bit where he reformed the tax system so that the big business in the country got taxed according to the law? Or maybe the bit where he stopped the nationalisation of the countries infrastructure so that he could increase spending on public services?
Maybe you're just looking at the Enabling Act? I don't know. But I do know that the UK government has been trying to do the same thing in the form of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, yet some how we're all right?
I'm sorry to ask these questions, but what you are saying doesn't seem to tie in with the facts, and they look to me like they have just come from headlines in newspapers. If I am wrong then I am sorry and I will look forward to reading your cited sources.
There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees
GOLD Member
enthusiast
285 posts
Location: Paris 19e, France
enthusiast
285 posts
Location: Paris 19e, France
Posted:
Polarity / Sym .. Im totally in line w/ you
you've really provided me with some very interesting hyperlinks .. looking fwd to more
Polarity / Sym .. Im totally in line w/ you
you've really provided me with some very interesting hyperlinks .. looking fwd to more
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
Maybe...just maybe the reason the William Thomas story isn't in the the news is because it's a complete and utter load of...errrrr....codology.
Think about it...why would an obviously high level source in the Israeli military contact a chemtrails/ 911 conspiracy theory type author like Thomas with his story ? Why not contact a journalist who'll get the story out and past websites like prisonplanet..or the blogosphere?
Even if I reread that story with a triple thickness tinfoil hat on and ignore the overly sensationalistic style of the piece, I can't silence my critical thinking skills that raise questions like...
Was this story planted by the Israelis in an attempt to scare Iran?
Might this just have been a training mission ?
Why only three planes..and not missiles instead ?
And what just does Israel thing an American reaction to an unprovoked attack against what amounts to a civilian population ( remember the EM pulse ) would be..not to mention the international reaction ?
But then..the story was published on the internet..so it MUST be true...right ?
Maybe...just maybe the reason the William Thomas story isn't in the the news is because it's a complete and utter load of...errrrr....codology.
Think about it...why would an obviously high level source in the Israeli military contact a chemtrails/ 911 conspiracy theory type author like Thomas with his story ? Why not contact a journalist who'll get the story out and past websites like prisonplanet..or the blogosphere?
Even if I reread that story with a triple thickness tinfoil hat on and ignore the overly sensationalistic style of the piece, I can't silence my critical thinking skills that raise questions like...
Was this story planted by the Israelis in an attempt to scare Iran?
Might this just have been a training mission ?
Why only three planes..and not missiles instead ?
And what just does Israel thing an American reaction to an unprovoked attack against what amounts to a civilian population ( remember the EM pulse ) would be..not to mention the international reaction ?
But then..the story was published on the internet..so it MUST be true...right ?
SILVER Member
veteran
1,228 posts
Location: on the wrong planet, United Kingdom
veteran
1,228 posts
Location: on the wrong planet, United Kingdom
Posted:
https://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact
https://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?a...icle%2FShowFull
https://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1536265,00.html
Missions of this sort have already been planned, with the Americans, allowing for the Israelis to start the mission before informing the Americans (Time article). If Israeli intelligence thinks there is a credible threat from Iran, given the Iranian leader's attitude to Israel, then wouldn't it be better to destroy nuclear facilities before the nuclear material can be assmbled into warheads, and attached to Iran's existing ballistic missiles (If they had nuclear material it would only take a matter of days to assemble it into a warhead).
The situation is an extremely precarious one. On the one hand a nuclear device may be dropped on Israel by Iran, on the other hand are the repurcussions from using nuclear weapons to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities.
There is precedent of Israel destroying Iraq's nuclear facilities in 1981, with no concern given to the resulting dispersal of nuclear materials.
There has already been talk about the use of nuclear bunker-busters in the media in Afghanistan, with no real concern there either.
https://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060417fa_fact
https://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?a...icle%2FShowFull
https://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1536265,00.html
Missions of this sort have already been planned, with the Americans, allowing for the Israelis to start the mission before informing the Americans (Time article). If Israeli intelligence thinks there is a credible threat from Iran, given the Iranian leader's attitude to Israel, then wouldn't it be better to destroy nuclear facilities before the nuclear material can be assmbled into warheads, and attached to Iran's existing ballistic missiles (If they had nuclear material it would only take a matter of days to assemble it into a warhead).
The situation is an extremely precarious one. On the one hand a nuclear device may be dropped on Israel by Iran, on the other hand are the repurcussions from using nuclear weapons to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities.
There is precedent of Israel destroying Iraq's nuclear facilities in 1981, with no concern given to the resulting dispersal of nuclear materials.
There has already been talk about the use of nuclear bunker-busters in the media in Afghanistan, with no real concern there either.
You aren't thinking or really existing unless you're willing to risk even your own sanity in the judgment of your existence.
Green peppers, lime pickle and whole-grain mustard = best sandwich filling.
SILVER Member
veteran
1,228 posts
Location: on the wrong planet, United Kingdom
veteran
1,228 posts
Location: on the wrong planet, United Kingdom
Posted:
In addition, the bunker busters would be detonated below the ground, whereas an airburst is used against population areas.
The Nuclear facilities are sufficiently far from population centers that civilian casualties would be minimal. There would be no international reaction to the use of atomic weapons agains a population.
Whoever heard of the mainstream media talking about friendly operations that didn't happen. If it didn't happen, then the military can easily deny it. The media has already covered the fact that it is a possibility, and short of an actual strike happening, isn't likely to cover anything else on the topic without some military personel on camera admitting to it. Since when did the military give information on it's operations freely?
In addition, the bunker busters would be detonated below the ground, whereas an airburst is used against population areas.
The Nuclear facilities are sufficiently far from population centers that civilian casualties would be minimal. There would be no international reaction to the use of atomic weapons agains a population.
Whoever heard of the mainstream media talking about friendly operations that didn't happen. If it didn't happen, then the military can easily deny it. The media has already covered the fact that it is a possibility, and short of an actual strike happening, isn't likely to cover anything else on the topic without some military personel on camera admitting to it. Since when did the military give information on it's operations freely?
You aren't thinking or really existing unless you're willing to risk even your own sanity in the judgment of your existence.
Green peppers, lime pickle and whole-grain mustard = best sandwich filling.
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
The scenarios outlined in those articles differ wildly from the one presented in the Thomas story, and make more sense too. Sure use the tactical nukes to open up the bunkers and as much as I don't want to see this war happen, at least I can see some logic to the strategies discussed.
One of my questions got answered too, the one about the planes as opposed to missiles...the missiles suck...apparently.
The scenarios outlined in those articles differ wildly from the one presented in the Thomas story, and make more sense too. Sure use the tactical nukes to open up the bunkers and as much as I don't want to see this war happen, at least I can see some logic to the strategies discussed.
One of my questions got answered too, the one about the planes as opposed to missiles...the missiles suck...apparently.
BRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom
Posted:
Just read the wikipedia page about them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-16
I can't tell you why they wouldn't use missiles, but it looks like planes aren't out of the ordinary for that sort of thing.
The other option is that (assuming it happened) they never actually intended to get to Iran. It could just have been a way of putting pressure on the states to step up the proceedings.
By the way, I am a full believer in the CIA tactic that aims to create "wave of resentment" by carrying out some terrible act that looks like a grass roots attack. I call it "astroturf terrorism". I fully expect some horrid attack on the people of Iraq within the next month or two that will be linked to Iran and given as a reason to bomb them. I'm Talking about a chemical bomb truck going off in a remote city that we've not heard much about before, something like that.
I may be wrong, and people might say that even if it does happen, Iran actually did do it - I donno.
Just read the wikipedia page about them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-16
I can't tell you why they wouldn't use missiles, but it looks like planes aren't out of the ordinary for that sort of thing.
The other option is that (assuming it happened) they never actually intended to get to Iran. It could just have been a way of putting pressure on the states to step up the proceedings.
By the way, I am a full believer in the CIA tactic that aims to create "wave of resentment" by carrying out some terrible act that looks like a grass roots attack. I call it "astroturf terrorism". I fully expect some horrid attack on the people of Iraq within the next month or two that will be linked to Iran and given as a reason to bomb them. I'm Talking about a chemical bomb truck going off in a remote city that we've not heard much about before, something like that.
I may be wrong, and people might say that even if it does happen, Iran actually did do it - I donno.
There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees
SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posted:
Here's a useful (mainstream) article on why the US economy may eventually collapse:
https://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_10/b4024037.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5
Written by: polarity
All it would take is for China to float the yuan on the international currency markets, instead of having it tied to the dollar, and the US would be sent back to the stone age.
Here's a useful (mainstream) article on why the US economy may eventually collapse:
https://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_10/b4024037.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
As a Canadian living literally within sight of America, I have grave concerns just as to what, exactly would America do if their economy did collapse ? We have oil.. lots of it and let's face it it would be no problem for America to invade us.
All they'd need to do is instruct their civilian population to grab their handguns, walk across the border, shoot everyone they see smoking a joint, and...bada bing...were occupied.
I know it's self centered, but if America HAS to blow up other countries in order to maintain their lifestyle, I'm glad those countries are half way round the world.
Sym...I'm cynically expecting the same thing...I like the astroturf terrorism term.
As a Canadian living literally within sight of America, I have grave concerns just as to what, exactly would America do if their economy did collapse ? We have oil.. lots of it and let's face it it would be no problem for America to invade us.
All they'd need to do is instruct their civilian population to grab their handguns, walk across the border, shoot everyone they see smoking a joint, and...bada bing...were occupied.
I know it's self centered, but if America HAS to blow up other countries in order to maintain their lifestyle, I'm glad those countries are half way round the world.
Sym...I'm cynically expecting the same thing...I like the astroturf terrorism term.
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
what does smoking a joint have to do with anything
what does smoking a joint have to do with anything
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [iran want * nuke * bush want * attack] we found the following existing topics.
Show more..
© 1998 - 2025 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com