The American Civil War of 2005 as predicted by John Titor

Maybe this will make you feel better:

Sec. 3056A. Powers, authorities, and duties of United States Secret Service Uniformed Division

`(a) There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the `United States Secret Service Uniformed Division'. Subject to the supervision of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division shall perform such duties as the Director, United States Secret Service, may prescribe in connection with the protection of the following:

`(B) make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony; and

Here is the link to the INFOabove, But don't bother reading, TJW will read it for use and tell us what it means.

And for WMD, Israël is about to use them against Iran. This will lead to Pakistan and India to nuke each others. So we'll see in the next few weeks/months what happens!

a little off the current topic, but in light of the Recent release of Osama's greatest hits I have come to one possible senario that could potentially lead to Civil War in the U.S.A in a very short period of time.

Suppose, for one second that Osama has terrorists in the USA already planning to attack the homeland. Suppose Osama's target for this attack will be multible attacks in BLUE STATES (despite the fact that he said he wouldn't - which would have us looking the other way). Would the BLUE states turn against the RED states? Would conspiracy theorists feel that an Attack on Blue states was proof that Bush/Dick were behind the attacks? Would this devide America? And isn't the best way to defeat your enemy, divide and conquor?

Remember that TITOR said to take a look at the county by county voting for the 2000/04 election. Blue states and Red States....

Just a thought.

--------------------------------

Side note, I have come to 2 possible conclusions regarding SHP and TJW. Either they are Agents working for the Govt. to debunk anything on sites like these that would cast America in a bad light...or, they are affraid of Titors future and actually believe that they can stop it by making people that it isn't going to happen.

TJW and SPH, have you ever considered that perhaps the world would be better off if the nWo wasn't ruling the world? Maybe you should read George Washington's prophecy and the reasons why America was made to be a neutral nation without a forceful foriegn policy.

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Where2Hide2006]

Originally posted by LDragonFire
Maybe this will make you feel better

What are you blind?

I just posted the same stuff from the same link and actually gave some background and showed what it meant not just copied and pasted like you just did.

But don't bother reading, TJW will read it for use and tell us what it means.

Well, yeah...I did in my previous post.
Most people here just read the copy and paste and not the rest which gives you context. Also most people here have never even studied the law, so...why not tell you what it's talking about? You would rather stay ignorant?

And for WMD, Israël is about to use them against Iran. This will lead to Pakistan and India to nuke each others. So we'll see in the next few weeks/months what happens!

Are you willing to bet vit?
1. Isreal doesn't even have stable leadership right now and elections are coming up so I can guarentee you there won't be any huge actions for months.

2. Nuking Iran would be pointless and create unnecessary instability as well as get the world pissed at you. Isreal has no reason to do that.

3. Pakistan and India have no reason to nuke each other. Pakistan and especially India are on the verge of gaining international respect and become relevant in global politics. Why would they put that all at risk?

W2H:

Suppose, for one second that Osama has terrorists in the USA already planning to attack the homeland. Suppose Osama's target for this attack will be multible attacks in BLUE STATES (despite the fact that he said he wouldn't - which would have us looking the other way). Would the BLUE states turn against the RED states? Would conspiracy theorists feel that an Attack on Blue states was proof that Bush/Dick were behind the attacks? Would this devide America? And isn't the best way to defeat your enemy, divide and conquor?

Remember that TITOR said to take a look at the county by county voting for the 2000/04 election. Blue states and Red States....

1. There are no blue and red states. There are blue and red areas. You should listen to Titor and look at the county map. There are maybe one or two states that are all the same color (maps have been posted in this thread before). The US is just too mixed for any war to break out along political lines. There's not enough people here in the US willing to shoot and kill their neighbors over terrorist attacks.

2. Titor specifically stated that the war would not be democrat vs. republican.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

There's not enough people here in the US willing to shoot and kill their neighbors over terrorist attacks.

You don't have to go to far back in history, it wasn't 1000 years ago or even 500 years ago. The last American Civil War was only 150 (g/t) years ago. And during this civil war, Americans killed more Americans in that war than all other nations have in all World Wars since then.

And WHY would they do that? Why did Americans kill so many fellow Americans?

Most people would say it was because of slavery, but the real reason for the war was that the South LEGALLY under the US Constitution broke away from the northern states mostly because of the 40% tax that was exclusive to the southern states who imported goods.

This is the reason why Americans killed hundreds of thousands of fellow Americans.

So don't say that it can't happen for the various reasons posted in this thread...because it already has happened and for much less.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

2. Titor specifically stated that the war would not be democrat vs. republican.

Did I say it would be Rep vs. Dem??? Where did I say that? I said blue state vs. red state... but i also said look at the county by county voting maps. Their are many HAWKS in the DEM party, including H.Clinton who is the frontrunner for 2008... But there are also DOVES on both sides. In the republican/conservative side of the sprectrum these doves are called Libertarians, and well Howard Dean is the leader of the Dem Doves. SO, I didn't say Rep vs. Dem ... please learn how to read!

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
1. It DOESN'T create a new federal police force. I thought we've been through this already. The uniformed division has been around since 1860!!!

You said this compared to what the Law states:

`(a) There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the `United States Secret Service Uniformed Division'. Subject to the supervision of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division shall perform such duties as the Director, United States Secret Service, may prescribe in connection with the protection of the following:

Please Excuse me for coping and pasting, as if you don't do the same. As long as I follow the rules of this site, what are you giving me crap For?

Now Im not blind nor do I serve my masters well, I think you are a government agent sent to ATS to speak for there wishes, a propaganda toy boy, maybe I should start a thread about it....

First there is the discussion on this thread about The NEw powers of Government to take private proberty, you say its nothing new...did you read it?....Then Why did it goto the Supreme Court Last Year, Now you say that this patriot law is not going to Create a New Federal Police force Witch the Law posted By you and me, Shows otherwise....and of course the whole, Did you read it thing.....You act like everyone on here is benith you, that you for some reason are superior.

You seem like a city person to me, you know the side that looses this conflict.

1 Housing bubble is bursting
2 There will soon be mass unemployment in the USA :layoffs from the big 3 automakers is just the beginning.
3 Oil/Gas prices are at a all time high
4 Probable War with Iran
5 Probable terrorist strikes against the USA
6 Massive corruption in Government: Delay, Frisk...ECT...ECT
7 Voting problems in last three elections 2000, 2002, 2004
8 Wild weather only gonna get wilder
9 More government troubles with un-patriot act renewal
10 Illegal wiretaps against American Citizens

If anyone cares to add to this list feel free. Now who is the blind one here


Ok and what was the original Revolutionary War because of?

And what was the First American Civil War over?

3. Pakistan and India have no reason to nuke each other. Pakistan and especially India are on the verge of gaining international respect and become relevant in global politics. Why would they put that all at risk?

Might have something to do with, they have warred with each other for the past 60 + years...now we have the threat of Nuclear war over religion....

Originally posted by Where2Hide2006
You don't have to go to far back in history, it wasn't 1000 years ago or even 500 years ago. The last American Civil War was only 150 (g/t) years ago. And during this civil war, Americans killed more Americans in that war than all other nations have in all World Wars since then.

And WHY would they do that? Why did Americans kill so many fellow Americans?

Most people would say it was because of slavery, but the real reason for the war was that the South LEGALLY under the US Constitution broke away from the northern states mostly because of the 40% tax that was exclusive to the southern states who imported goods.

This is the reason why Americans killed hundreds of thousands of fellow Americans.

In case you haven't noticed
1. we're now in a modern era
2. the US has grown tremendously since then (in land area as well). The lines were clear back then, there are no lines today.

How is any of this relevant to the current discussion?

So don't say that it can't happen for the various reasons posted in this thread...because it already has happened and for much less.

The US wasn't even a third world country then....
Also, civil war just don't happen. It takes a WHOLE lot for a civil war to start in any country, are you saying that in the only superpower and one of the most advanced countries the world has ever seen it's only going to take a little? Well then why didn't one start during the civil rights movement? Or during the Vietnam war? The country was 1000x more unstable than it is now during those times, so why would one start now?

Did I say it would be Rep vs. Dem??? Where did I say that? I said blue state vs. red state... but i also said look at the county by county voting maps.

This a joke?
The blue and red states (and counties) are representations of the Democrats and Republicans.

What did you think they were?

Originally posted by LDragonFire

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
1. It DOESN'T create a new federal police force. I thought we've been through this already. The uniformed division has been around since 1860!!!

You said this compared to what the Law states:

`(a) There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the `United States Secret Service Uniformed Division'. Subject to the supervision of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division shall perform such duties as the Director, United States Secret Service, may prescribe in connection with the protection of the following:

Ok, maybe I can clear things up. What was so hard to understand about my other statements and the rest of the bill?
The first part of the bill says:
"In General- Chapter 203 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 3056 the following:"
This is in the US code. The only thing that's been changed is the part about it being subject to Homeland Security. Why? Because the Secret Service used to be under Treasury but is now under Homeland Security.

Did you not read my link? Are you seriously disputing the fact that the Uniformed Division has been around since the 1800s?

Please Excuse me for coping and pasting, as if you don't do the same. As long as I follow the rules of this site, what are you giving me crap For?

I have no problem with copying and pasteing. As long as it's in context or you give an explanation. You did neither.

Now Im not blind nor do I serve my masters well, I think you are a government agent sent to ATS to speak for there wishes, a propaganda toy boy, maybe I should start a thread about it....

Go ahead. Start a thread. You'll be just as easily debunked there as you are here.
Also, listen to yourself.
I don't believe a work of fiction about a time traveller is true so I must be a government agent? You can't possibly be serious

First there is the discussion on this thread about The NEw powers of Government to take private proberty, you say its nothing new...did you read it?....Then Why did it goto the Supreme Court Last Year

Yes I did read it. You obviously didn't.
Why did it go to the supreme court? Well because you can take just about any trial to the supreme court! The decisions of the lower courts were appealed all the way up to the supreme court.

Now you say that this patriot law is not going to Create a New Federal Police force Witch the Law posted By you and me, Shows otherwise....and of course the whole, Did you read it thing.....You act like everyone on here is benith you, that you for some reason are superior.

Yes I did read it, again, you obviously didn't. Or if you did, you didn't understand it.
I'm not superior to anyone. The motto of this site however is to Deny Ignorance. If you're not doing that I'm going to ask why?

You seem like a city person to me, you know the side that looses this conflict.

How does a city person act? How does a country person act?

Just for the record....I don't live in the city or country. I live in the suburbs like the vast majority of Americans.

1 Housing bubble is bursting
2 There will soon be mass unemployment in the USA :layoffs from the big 3 automakers is just the beginning.
3 Oil/Gas prices are at a all time high
4 Probable War with Iran
5 Probable terrorist strikes against the USA
6 Massive corruption in Government: Delay, Frisk...ECT...ECT
7 Voting problems in last three elections 2000, 2002, 2004
8 Wild weather only gonna get wilder
9 More government troubles with un-patriot act renewal
10 Illegal wiretaps against American Citizens

If anyone cares to add to this list feel free. Now who is the blind one here

You can add dozens of possibles to that list. It doesn't mean they're going to happen, and it certainly doesn't mean a civil war will break out. For almost 3 decades we were in worse shape (late 50s-early 80s) in every category. Explain why a civil war didn't erupt then and why one would erupt now.

Might have something to do with, they have warred with each other for the past 60 + years...now we have the threat of Nuclear war over religion....

Again, why would they nuke each other? If a war were to pop up between the two it would be a conventional war as the first to use the nuke would quickly become a worldwide enemy.
And what religion? Indians are mostly hindu...

Originally posted by Where2Hide2006


And WHY would they do that? Why did Americans kill so many fellow Americans?

Most people would say it was because of slavery, but the real reason for the war was that the South LEGALLY under the US Constitution broke away from the northern states mostly because of the 40% tax that was exclusive to the southern states who imported goods.

This is the reason why Americans killed hundreds of thousands of fellow Americans.

So don't say that it can't happen for the various reasons posted in this thread...because it already has happened and for much less.

To say it wasn't fought over slavery is also incorrect Slavery was a huge factor to the South's economy.The South's economic system was based upon cotton--and slavery. The South had many reasons to recede from the Union.

The people of the North didnt fight for Taxes or slavery they fought mainly to preserve the Union above all eles.

Your average person on both sides cared little about slaves either way. Most in the south were small farmers too poor to afford slaves. Many in the north were small farmers or tradesmen that had never even seen a slave. But the rich and political leaders on both sides did care a great deal about it.

The rich and powerful send men to wars its not your average joe

Originally posted by TheCrystalSword

whoa ! easy on the insults there sword. You and PP are the ones insulting me, I just try to interject a balance of reality and logic into the fantasy world y'all are so bent on keeping alive. If you don't like my posts, kindly put me on your ignore, as you and PP are now on mine

I'm sorry to read that you mention me as one of those who are insulting you. This is and was not my intention. Could you point out to me where I have done or what makes you believe so? Maybe I didn't express myself correctly.
I've always considered you to be one of best posters on this thread and I enjoy reading your posts very much.

As for your comments on SHP I agree with you, except for using foul terms to tag him with. If he wants to be a stubborn debunker, then we ought to leave him that way until he starts to realize that he his making himself a persona non grata. I offered to show him US patents describing certain phenomena that go beyond his own display of physisal knowledge and he hasn't requested the proof. So it's now up to himself if he thinks he has the right to redicule what he apperantly doesn't want others to believe.
Peter Paul

Are you willing to bet vit?

1. Isreal doesn't even have stable leadership right now and elections are coming up so I can guarentee you there won't be any huge actions for months.

2. Nuking Iran would be pointless and create unnecessary instability as well as get the world pissed at you. Isreal has no reason to do that.

3. Pakistan and India have no reason to nuke each other. Pakistan and especially India are on the verge of gaining international respect and become relevant in global politics. Why would they put that all at risk?

1. Can you expain to the rest of us what makes you so sure that you can garantee that no huge actions will occur within the next few months?
2. Why should nuking Iran be pointless, when creating instability is exactly what the warlords might want to achieve?
3. Pakistan and India have been at war with each other for decades now. Do you know the reasons why? And what about their neighbors in the north: Russia and China? Not to mention China's occupation of Tibet, destroying monastaries and killing monks which led the Dalei Lhama to flee his country.

Where do you get the confidence that makes you want to bet upon the future as if you were the one who is going to make all the decisions concerning world affairs? Can you be a little more precise instead of making global statements? It would be more helpful by pointing out some of the background information you seem to have to help others understand the true nature of your own viewpoint?
As for your bet, do you think betting on the lives of others is an appropriate way of dealing with the subject of war?
Peter Paul

Somewhere I've read there will be some very dramatic occurences in the second half of 2006, the first half of 2007 and the second half of 2007. It was a pretty interesting read and something that really struck me. I am not sure I believe the 'another time-traveller' part. I remember it was said the Empire State Building would be the next target. When I can make more time I'll try to find the postings.

UnExpecte

Originally posted by peterpaul
1. Can you expain to the rest of us what makes you so sure that you can garantee that no huge actions will occur within the next few months?

You gotta understand politics my man.
1. Like I said elections are coming up. No one will do anything stupid until they're elected.

2. Why? Why would Isreal just out of the blue use WMDs when they can do the job with conventional weapons? Why would they risk everything for no reason? Remember when they bombed Iraq's nuke plant? Did they use WMDs then? No.

2. Why should nuking Iran be pointless, when creating instability is exactly what the warlords might want to achieve?

Which warlords?
And it's pointless because anyone who does that would draw unnecessary hatred. The UN doesn't want Iran to have nukes, meaning they'd be willing to support any attmept to disarm Iran. It would be completely unecessary at that point to use anything other than conventional weapons unless Iran uses any WMD first.

3. Pakistan and India have been at war with each other for decades now. Do you know the reasons why? And what about their neighbors in the north: Russia and China? Not to mention China's occupation of Tibet, destroying monastaries and killing monks which led the Dalei Lhama to flee his country.

What are you talking about?
Yeah they've been at war and they haven't used nukes. Why would they use them now?

Where do you get the confidence that makes you want to bet upon the future as if you were the one who is going to make all the decisions concerning world affairs?

Alot of it is common sense. It also helps to have an understanding of global politics.
It's fairly obvious some of you have no clue as to how the world operates.

Can you be a little more precise instead of making global statements? It would be more helpful by pointing out some of the background information you seem to have to help others understand the true nature of your own viewpoint?

Such as?

As for your bet, do you think betting on the lives of others is an appropriate way of dealing with the subject of war?

1. The smiley face () is usually an indication the person is not serious.

2. What the difference between me betting that WMDs WON'T be used and you or whatshisface predicting that they will be used?
Why would you predict something horrible like that especially when there's nothing to suggest that will happen. Is that your wish that something like that will happen? I'm sure you'll say no, so...where did that come from?

Thatjustweird, read on the subject because you clearly know nothing about the Iran's crisis.

And India and pakistan could nuke each others because that if US or Israel attack Iran, the dictator musharraf will be thrown out and some mollah will take his place.

And India will not accept that extremist mollah are in position to nuke India so they will nuke them and pakistan will do the same thing in response.

So before saying something, read on the subject.

Originally posted by UnExpecte
Somewhere I've read there will be some very dramatic occurences in the second half of 2006, the first half of 2007 and the second half of 2007. It was a pretty interesting read and something that really struck me. I am not sure I believe the 'another time-traveller' part. I remember it was said the Empire State Building would be the next target. When I can make more time I'll try to find the postings.

UnExpecte

Found it!

It's someone with the name 'Upharsin.' I believe there was someone else with similar information on that messageboard as well. Have to look that up as well. You have to know that I had some very weird dreams about this around 2 years ago I have forgotten about until I read this. Maybe I will share the content of my dreams later if anyone is interested. I hope that's okay with the moderators, but if not that's fine too.

www.paranormalnetwork.net...

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Thatjustweird, read on the subject because you clearly know nothing about the Iran's crisis.

And India and pakistan could nuke each others because that if US or Israel attack Iran, the dictator musharraf will be thrown out and some mollah will take his place.

And India will not accept that extremist mollah are in position to nuke India so they will nuke them and pakistan will do the same thing in response.

So before saying something, read on the subject.

What in the world are you talking about!?

What in the world does Musharraf have to do with anything!?
Why would he be thrown out if the UN decided to airstrike Iran's nuclear plant? In case you haven't noticed Iran and Pakistan are two different countries!!
And who would throw him out!? The UN? Why?

Again, why in the world would they use nukes!? They've been at war since forever and have had nukes for years now. Still no one has used them. You know why? Because, they're both finally gaining respect on the world stage, and their countries are becoming more and more modern. Why would they risk all that for no reason?

You're telling me to read on the subject but it's YOU who has no clue as to what he's talking about!
lol
You're just mumbling nonsense now. You have absolutely NO facts or anything to back up anything you just said. This is what you WANT to happen, but it's not based on reality.

"and then the ignorant man said 'why is everyone around me so ignorant and blind?!! why is everyone but me so misinformed?' never knowing is stupidity is endless because he will never even question his beliefs or ideas"
the world will keep turning, even for those who follow blind lies. they will believe in it to the death because they rather die then have their world come crashing down. their idea of perfect would fall on top of them and they wouldnt be able to adapt, and this goes for both sides of the arguement.
unless you are a person that is in direct control of india or pakistans government, or in control of their nukes, you have no idea whether they will or wont. you think you know everything going on then you are more blind then the other sheep on this planet that half no clue that we could have been on a 'end of the world' scenario 20 times in the past 30 years or so.
"the universe is always in danger, and the only way these people on this planet can live in peace is that they dont know about it.-tommy lee jones in MIB" and it couldnt be more true, just on our own world affairs level. we just argue about the stuff that is old news for them. stuff that they arent even concerned with. anything we know isnt important enough to cause a world war. only speculate. your never going to read in the paper that india is deciding the nuke pakistan, all youll get to read or see on the news is that how to protect yourself from the fall out of WW3.

your on a need to know basis, and as far as they are concerned, everything that happens next you dont need to know.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

What in the world are you talking about!?

What in the world does Musharraf have to do with anything!?
Why would he be thrown out if the UN decided to airstrike Iran's nuclear plant? In case you haven't noticed Iran and Pakistan are two different countries!!
And who would throw him out!? The UN? Why?
....
You're telling me to read on the subject but it's YOU who has no clue as to what he's talking about!
lol
You're just mumbling nonsense now. You have absolutely NO facts or anything to back up anything you just said. This is what you WANT to happen, but it's not based on reality.

First I would like to point out to you that the UN will defenetly NOT decide to nuke any country for that matter. The UN has ist's own Army but they are only a Peace Keeping Force and are not allowed to attack anyone. And they surely don't have any WMDs to even do that. So please keep that in mind for future statements based on your so called "commen sense".

Second I don't think that anyone on this string doesn't know where India and Pakistan are and that the war between the two of them is about an area also known as Kashmir. Maybe you just forgot that they just had a terrible earthquake there several weeks ago and that even many soldiers on both sides of the boarder were killed that were stationed in that area. So quit trying to suggest to others that we are without knowledge. Some of us just happen to read the news.

Third and not least it is nice to know that you have so much commen sense to judge things. So why don't you just run off and become an advisor for all those politicians in Power who are in charge of things like Energy, Money and Soldiers and tell them to use what you seem to have in endless abundancy. Maybe they'll all listen to you and stop threatening each other, throw their guns and arms and all other WMDs into one big hole in the ground and shake hands with each other.

Maybe you should stop mumbling to yourself and stop accusing others that they don't have any facts they would like to point out too. How many people have died due to assassinations, gun battles and of course the war in Iraq? Or does your commen sense tell you that's all just a video game and that you never heard of the War against Terror (and numerous other reasons) that is now going on in it's fifth year since 9/11? Noone here wants to get hurt or caught up in any kind of war. So don't try to suggest that anyone here is playing "wishful thinking".

What do you do all day? Read Batman comics and then come here to state that the rest of us are all out of our minds? When was the last time you ever talked to a real soldier and WAR VETERAN lately? You're commen sense sounds a little like the great void that seems to be situated between your very own ears and somewhere behind your very eyeballs.

If you want to be taken for serious then stop pushing others around as if they have nothing to say about things. Maybe you are someone who has the great possibilty to live by the words of your own sig and all the bad news going around are just silly rumors for you. If the words on this string trouble you then stop getting so worked up. For many others it already has become a very sad reality. Over 2000 dead dead US soldiers and more than 15.000 who will bear the scars of these "rumors" for the rest of their lives. Why don't you go and tell them more about the great common sense they fought for.

That's just a friendly reminder that some of them tend to drop by and read what you have to say. You seem to forget that this is a public board and that you have no idea who else might be reading it and where they come from.
Peter Paul

Originally posted by peterpaul
First I would like to point out to you that the UN will defenetly NOT decide to nuke any country for that matter. The UN has ist's own Army but they are only a Peace Keeping Force and are not allowed to attack anyone. And they surely don't have any WMDs to even do that. So please keep that in mind for future statements based on your so called "commen sense".

Did you read what I said? I said "AIRSTRIKE".
Not once did I ever mention anyone using WMDs.
And the UN is allowed to attack. The first Gulf War is a perfect example.
And action against Iran will be a UN action that would consists of airstrikes on their nuclear facilities.

Second I don't think that anyone on this string doesn't know where India and Pakistan are and that the war between the two of them is about an area also known as Kashmir. Maybe you just forgot that they just had a terrible earthquake there several weeks ago and that even many soldiers on both sides of the boarder were killed that were stationed in that area. So quit trying to suggest to others that we are without knowledge. Some of us just happen to read the news.

Again, did you not read my post!?
I have said they have been at war since forever. Yet they haven't used nukes against each other. Now that they're actually gaining power in the world, why would they lose that and use nukes on each other??

And you and dragon still haven't said what this has to do with Iran.


The rest of you post is a bunch of bull****
(sorry mods)
I'm not even going to respond to such utter nonsense. You haven't got a clue as to what you're talking about. And you obviously have some sort of reading comprehension problem (I refuse to believe someone is that willingly ignorant). I mentioned common sense in that India and Pakistan will not just go around nuking each other just out of the blue because of a UN action in Iran. That's common sense, and that's the only context I said "common sense" in.
You're going off on a rant that has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said.
You're silly antics are growing tiresome. Why don't you stick to posting your "visions" on your websites and leave the real debates to people who know what they're talking about. This (Titor -least we forget) thread would go a whole lot smoother.

Grim:

unless you are a person that is in direct control of india or pakistans government, or in control of their nukes, you have no idea whether they will or wont. you think you know everything going on then you are more blind then the other sheep on this planet that half no clue that we could have been on a 'end of the world' scenario 20 times in the past 30 years or so.

Ok grim. Let's hear it!
Let's hear the scenario, no let's hear ANY scenario in which India and Pakistan start a nuclear war with each other because the UN bombs any of Iran's nuke sites.
I can't wait to hear this!

[edit on 25-1-2006 by ThatsJustWeird]

that is just so ridiculous. u.n shuffles it's feet and talks peace. u.s.a attacks people,unfortunately.