It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

War Machine marches on, Syria is next.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Duzey
The US has been very adamant in their refusal to sign any agreement that would ban the use of landmines. So that means that they can use them any time they want, and I'm sure they have a good supply on hand and could get more pretty fast.


America is always very cautious about getting tied up with promises to foreign governments, but we know that landmines are an extremely evil thin and our goal is not to use them whenever it can be avoided.



If there were ever a good reason for the use of them, I think this could be one. You can catch those that try the checkpoint, and the ones that try to cross, well..... boom. The only problem would be keeping civilians from blowing up.
edit spelling
[edit on 13-1-2005 by Duzey]


I've got to humbly disagree. Landmines are not intelligent devices- they kill indiscriminately and can be easily defeated by the enemy. I would be nervous doing it, but if I really had to, I could cross a minefield. I would be willing to risk it simply because that's my best bet of getting through an area undetected and unexpected.

What you need is a discriminate killer which wont hurt civilians and can't be worked around by the enemy. In Vietnam there was an attempt at an electronic "McNamara Wall" which would have detected any movement into South Vietnam. Technology at the time was insufficient for that terrain, but with modern technology on the open terrain of Iraq we could easily monitor the Syrian Border and respond to crossings with troops or UCAVs.

America isn't having difficulties in Iraq because we're incapable. We're having difficulties because the military brass hasn't stood up to the politicians and demanded that we fight to win. We don't need the mines.



Sep

posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Current day Iran is economically and militarily weaker then Iraq was.


Militarily, that is arguable, but economically? Iraq was broke, how were they stronger than Iran today?



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 05:51 AM
link   


The insurgents can't fight Americans head on. They aren't a military threat to us.


If they aren't a military threat, then why are they winning? The insergentancy keeps getting more effective and causing more havok now than when the war started. It doesn't matter if they don't fight the troops head on, it's called warfare.




As for Opium, we can't just destroy the fields because then you're just putting farmers out of work. That would destroy the economy, and no one wins. Right now we're teaching them to farm other things.


So much for the War on Drugs eh? Hardly a good reason to allow them to traffic drugs "for their economy" you know the CIA trafficks drugs right?

[edit on 13-1-2005 by ProphetOfYahweh]



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProphetOfYahweh



The insurgents can't fight Americans head on. They aren't a military threat to us.


If they aren't a military threat, then why are they winning? The insergentancy keeps getting more effective and causing more havok now than when the war started. It doesn't matter if they don't fight the troops head on, it's called warfare.


Yes, terrorisim is warfare. In country funding in Iraq has been cut off therefore the terrorist are getting funding from outside countries. SYRIA and IRAN. To stop the attacks one must stop the money flow. No guns, bombs or bullets, no terrorisim. The only thing the terrorist are winning is the hearts of the liberal media and the bush hateing leftist.

I am becoming impatient with this war also. It is being fought too PC. Bush seems to be afraid of winning. Afraid of offending Muslim's as seen throught the eyes of the Liberal Media. Not one American should die in this cause. NOT ONE MORE. If someone shoots at our forces from a house. Level the area for 1 mile around the house. If a city has "terrorist" in it. Level it and 10 miles around it. Kill every living thing. Period. Patrol the borders with Syria and Iran with F16's. Shoot anything that crosses the line. ANYTHING.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 06:13 AM
link   
Funny how the brain washing of American society is working so well, people that fight in their own lands against invasion of foreign forces are tag "insurgents" and " terrorist" I wonder if the situation was reverser and it was the fight in American soil against invaders we will never called ourself "terrorist" or "insurgents" we will be patriots.

I say it again the brain washing is working like magic.

Yeah the middle east is all terrorist and insurgents because they want US and infidels out of their lands.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Yes, terrorisim is warfare. In country funding in Iraq has been cut off therefore the terrorist are getting funding from outside countries. SYRIA and IRAN. To stop the attacks one must stop the money flow. No guns, bombs or bullets, no terrorisim. The only thing the terrorist are winning is the hearts of the liberal media and the bush hateing leftist.

yes, most of the "terrorist" organisations, that are operational in the world today, are founded by "outside countires", and most of the time this "outside country" is USA, which founded more terrorist organisations, than any other nation.
so basicly, you created the enemies you are now fighting against.
sad, but true.



The U.S. government gives more than $10 billion in foreign aid each year to foreign governments and foreign and international organizations. Tyrannical regimes are the worst terrorist organizations in the world, with respect to racking up impressive body counts. Foreign aid has been aptly described as handouts “from governments, to governments, for governments.

The U.S. government will give more than $120 million this year to the government of Uzbekistan, a convenient ally in the war against the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The nitpickers at Human Rights Watch have complained about Uzbek government officials seeking to enlighten dissidents with methods such as “beatings, electric shock, temporary suffocation, hanging by the ankles or wrists, removal of fingernails, and punctures with sharp objects.” Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.), who supports the aid to Uzbekistan, stressed that it is “terribly important that we not uncritically align ourselves with governments which torture citizens.” But what is the difference between uncritically and critically using U.S. tax dollars to underwrite torture?

Many regimes with dubious human-rights records collect windfalls from American taxpayers, including Egypt (which routinely uses torture), Israel (which has a formal policy of assassinating suspected Palestinian militants), and Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, two repressive countries with “poor” human rights records, according to the U.S. State Department. In 1998, the U.S. government condemned the Kosovo Liberation Army for its “terrorist action”; in 1999, the United States christened the KLA “freedom fighters” and deluged them with arms and aid.

Unfortunately, the U.S. government does not pass the Bush “one dime” standard. The U.S. government is probably spending far more to finance terrorist activities with its foreign-aid programs than Muslim charities are raising in the United States. The only defense for U.S. foreign-aid programs is that terrorism is not terrorizing if it is inflicted by people wearing government uniforms. But this is a distinction that guts human-rights protections for the vast majority of people in the world.

If the U.S. government wants to reduce funding for terrorism, it should cease all aid to foreign governments and organizations such as the World Bank. In the same way that Bush is shutting down Muslim charities suspected of misdirecting contributions, the federal government must abandon its addiction to throwing money at foreign governments. There are much better ways to help the poor people of the world than throwing more money at their rulers.

James Bovard



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 06:49 AM
link   
Souljah

On this point you and I AGREE. Ok take a deep breath. Try to hold on. Are you OK?

No one penny should leave the US for any foreign aid except for one counrty. All aid should stay here in the US.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 08:05 AM
link   
If your so gung~ho to drop bombs and blow up miles of peoples homes why don't you go to Iraq and fight....I always notice people who talk the talk can't walk the walk.

Your words: "someone shoots at our forces from a house. Level the area for 1 mile around the house. If a city has "terrorist" in it. Level it and 10 miles around it. Kill every living thing. Period. Patrol the borders with Syria and Iran with F16's. Shoot anything that crosses the line. ANYTHING. "

Come on now....go....go to Iraq and do this otherwise "shut" your big yap.

You war hungry evil people will pay when you are at the gate of hevan....because _od see's you always and will remind you of your was'zzz on this planet.

Your Canadian friend,
Sven



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
I think we have some satellite pics of Terrorist training camps in Syria and also evidence of people crossing the border to help distablize Iraq. Soon they might be getting some cruise missile sent there way. No American troops no planes just Cruise missiles and maybe a few UCAVS. Very select targets and the Syrian goverment wont be doing anything about it.



the US could just get some pics of syria and photoshop some terrorist camp
either way to the rest of the world it will be another cry wolf.
the US really does love conflict and blood of other ( must be the bloodiest nation in history )



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul
the US really does love conflict and blood of other ( must be the bloodiest nation in history )


Actually, it's the most restrained superpower in World history. The US can't even compare (as far as bloodshed) to the Greek, Roman, British, etc. empires.



Soon they might be getting some cruise missile sent there way. No American troops no planes just Cruise missiles and maybe a few UCAVS. Very select targets and the Syrian goverment wont be doing anything about it.

Best post in this thread. Why people are talking about invasion is beyond me. If we do attack, we won't use any ground troops (unless special forces go in a few times).




Funny how the brain washing of American society is working so well, people that fight in their own lands against invasion of foreign forces are tag "insurgents" and " terrorist" I wonder if the situation was reverser and it was the fight in American soil against invaders we will never called ourself "terrorist" or "insurgents" we will be patriots.

...and here we have the worst post in this thread.
Don't be ignorant Marg.
Do you honestly believe the majority of insurgents in Iraq are Iraqis fighting for their own land?
Of course they're not, that's why they have no problem blowing up police officers and army recruits (protecters of Iraqis).
Do you honestly believe that Iraqis are blowing themselves up and hundreds of others because they believe that the best way to stabalize the country is to disrupt elections and cause havoc?
Get real...



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   
ThatsJustWeird

It seems to me that the only ignorant post is yours, the middle east belong to the people of that area, borders or not borders they share common ground, ethnic, racial, culture and origins.

Obviously something that US will never know due to the fact that US is mixing pot of cultures.

The middle east people has been struggling all their lives against big interest that wants out of them only one thing that they have and others don't Oil.

How do you feel if you see outsiders come to your land no because they want to help but with destruction and death.

Open your eyes that is all the people in the middle east are seen destruction and death at the hands of foreigners.

Occurs we all ready did that in the US to the natives Americans so what the hell who cares about the middle east.

The natives American did to the invaders the same thing they terrorized them and they fought for their lands, but occurs the power of the invaders of their lands won and they became submitted to the will of the invaders, that is what is going on in the middle east, invaded submit, relegate and win.

Denied Ignorance or join your Military and fight for Bush



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   


It seems to me that the only ignorant post is yours, the middle east belong to the people of that area, borders or not borders they share common ground, ethnic, racial, culture and origins.

You obviously have no idea about the history of that region or you wouldn't have posted that. So...I'll just past this statement off as ignorace. But for the record....you couldn't be more wrong. Believe it or not, not all middle eastern countries get along with each other and no, they're not all the same.



Obviously something that US will never know due to the fact that US is mixing pot of cultures.

I know you're probably not suggesting it, but you make it sound like a mixing pot is a bad thing.




How do you feel if you see outsiders come to your land no(t) because they want to help but with destruction and death.

If "outsiders" came to the US with the intention of nothing but destruction and death, they (the outsiders) would get what they were looking for at the hands of the millions of Americans who would destroy them.

What does have to do with anything though?




Open your eyes that is all the people in the middle east are seen destruction and death at the hands of foreigners.

Ohhh.
So the people of the middle east just ignore the hundreds of car and suicide bombings that have killed and maimed thousands...they ignore all that and just focus on what America is doing.

I see it now.


Again, get real.
Deny ignorance.

You still haven't answered my questions. Do you believe that Iraqis are blowing up their own police officers and army recruits that are there to protect them?





Denied Ignorance or join your Military and fight for Bush

Just because I believe there are really insurgents, I should join the army?
lol

nice logic



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Duzey
The US has been very adamant in their refusal to sign any agreement that would ban the use of landmines. So that means that they can use them any time they want, and I'm sure they have a good supply on hand and could get more pretty fast. If there were ever a good reason for the use of them, I think this could be one. You can catch those that try the checkpoint, and the ones that try to cross, well..... boom. The only problem would be keeping civilians from blowing up.

edit spelling

[edit on 13-1-2005 by Duzey]


I agree what the US wants to do is just stop using mines that remain armed for many years. They also want to make sure all mines are able to be defused. The Russian Valmara-69 has a "antihandling" device so that if you try to disarm it ,it explodes. It also has not set lifespan and could kill a kid 10 years after the war it was used in.

They are already working on the next gen land mine so they are going to be around for a long time.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Think again as why US has been hated so much by the middle east people but Israel.

You talk about history well go back and see what the US has done in the area, yeah..........Bush brainwashing only shows the evil of the "radical Islam" go ahead and do your homework, get out there and smell the arms deals and the broken promises.

Go out there and read about the support for Bin-laden and the propaganda of elusive "Terrorist" leaders.

Perhaps you will learn and Denied ignorances.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   


If a city has "terrorist" in it. Level it and 10 miles around it.


They already did that to Fallujah to "brake the back of the insurgency" and it didn't work. All it did was cause Iraqis to hate us more for destroying their homes and families and cause insurgents to go else where and regroup.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Why has Syria come back in the picture in the last 2 weeks, what about the Iran invasion? Or do the iranians have the bomb already (possibly from china) ?



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 11:18 AM
link   
2 weeks of bombing them every 2 minutes would level a city wouldnt it.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

Originally posted by bodrul
the US really does love conflict and blood of other ( must be the bloodiest nation in history )


Actually, it's the most restrained superpower in World history. The US can't even compare (as far as bloodshed) to the Greek, Roman, British, etc. empires.

It's true. The First Anglo-Afghan war was started because Afghanistan refused a British diplomatic mission. You insult the British Empire- you fight a war over it.
The British and Russians took it upon themselves to arbitrarily render a verdict in the border dispute between Persia and the Ottoman Empire over the Shaat Al Arab water way, but the verdict never lasted because of the outbreak of WWI.





Soon they might be getting some cruise missile sent there way. No American troops no planes just Cruise missiles and maybe a few UCAVS. Very select targets and the Syrian goverment wont be doing anything about it.

Best post in this thread. Why people are talking about invasion is beyond me. If we do attack, we won't use any ground troops (unless special forces go in a few times).


The obvious concern is "what if they start a ground war?". That is what I was addressing. The answer is we can handle it, but it wouldn't be pretty.





Funny how the brain washing of American society is working so well, people that fight in their own lands against invasion of foreign forces are tag "insurgents" and " terrorist" I wonder if the situation was reverser and it was the fight in American soil against invaders we will never called ourself "terrorist" or "insurgents" we will be patriots.

...and here we have the worst post in this thread.
Don't be ignorant Marg.
Do you honestly believe the majority of insurgents in Iraq are Iraqis fighting for their own land?
Of course they're not, that's why they have no problem blowing up police officers and army recruits (protecters of Iraqis).
Do you honestly believe that Iraqis are blowing themselves up and hundreds of others because they believe that the best way to stabalize the country is to disrupt elections and cause havoc?
Get real...


In all fairness, we haven't actually taken a count of who is and is not Iraqi among the insurgents. I guess they figured that the poll was just a trap.

What if somebody invaded America? I'd kill Americans who volunteered for the military force organized by our occupier. I'd boycott elections held by our occupier because I wouldn't want to legitimize a rigged election.

-I don't know for sure, one way or another- I'm just saying that the answer isn't one readily determined by logic. We can't just reason that Iraqis wouldn't do the things that insurgents are doing. The test is to see what happens if and when we successfully train a large number of Iraqi forces. If they can't stabilize their own country even when we leave, or if they turn on the government, then the insurgency is an Iraqi phenomenon. If everything goes great, the insurgents were foreigners just coming to Iraq to fight the USA.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 11:32 AM
link   
The Vagabond

I tell you what Vagabond If my country was invaded in this time and age, I will fight the invaders I would terrorized them and I will die for my country too, even as a women.

I will have not problem giving my children up for the cause either.

Now I bet that would be the mentality of most Americans in a situation like that to be called heros and patriots , so how about the Iraqi people.



posted on Jan, 13 2005 @ 06:05 PM
link   

If they aren't a military threat, then why are they winning? The insergentancy keeps getting more effective and causing more havok now than when the war started. It doesn't matter if they don't fight the troops head on, it's called warfare.


A military threat can actually beat you militarily, not just scare politicians at home. What they're doing doesn't even scratch the American war machine. A thousand soldiers is nothing to America's military.


So much for the War on Drugs eh? Hardly a good reason to allow them to traffic drugs "for their economy" you know the CIA trafficks drugs right?


You know, you just repeated the statement I addressed. We ARE doing something about the Opium. Just destroy a bunch of poor farmer's fields won't get the job done, though. Teaching them to grow other things is far more effective and helpful for everyone.

As for everyone talking about how we're making Muslims hate us, who the hell cares? Honestly, all of our enemies have always hated us.

The Japanese and Germans hated us a hell of a lot more then these Muslims do. We bombed their cities a whole lot worse than anything we've done in Iraq or Afghanistan. They were close allies just a few years later.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join