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.

 

Wanna win?

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 08:49 PM
link   
I have seen the error of my ways, i have seen the truth, i am now at one with myself, The truth shall set you free.




posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
I know many older Americans Vets and nonVets that support this war. They see it for what it is, we were attacked and now we are on the offensive as the pantyfart tulipwalker methods have failed once again.


That's my point...YOU KNOW older Americans, but your not older yourself. You have much to learn and the ability to see both sides of a coin seems to be something that comes with maturity and the knowledge that everything is not a "Right Now" thing.

You are speaking with the wild blood of youth running through your veins. Just have to have it now, just have to do it now, no restraint, no forethought and definitely no thought of the future.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
That's my point...YOU KNOW older Americans, but your not older yourself.

You are speaking with the wild blood of youth running through your veins.


I am in my late 30's so I am not so young.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 08:56 PM
link   
My apologies...you should know better then. The lessons of past mistakes should be clearer in your memory.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by C0le
I have seen the error of my ways, i have seen the truth, i am now at one with myself, The truth shall set you free.

You freakin' hippie! Did you get hit in the head or something? I'm glad you're one with yourself and all that but I kinda miss the gruff old dude...
But, hey, I'm glad to have you on 'our side' now.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
I would like to see a poll conducted on the people answering this and a few other threads regarding the war.


Your poll would provide only speculative data for you to speculate about. You have this notion that a senior citizen will have the right answer compared to say a young man of 20? Very odd.

Right now there is below 50% who see victory, when victory is already achieved. It's not about who's old or young, you still have speculation regardless of age. It's about who knows what's going on. I can tell you how to properly camoflauge equipment, and you can read up on it as well. However, what I won't tell you is the location of the camo'd equipment, and you'll never find it in the papers. Those who are in the system know what's going on, those outside only speculate. When I say in the system I don't mean troops. Here is omething to live by:

"Enough research will tend to support whatever theory."

"If you have to ask, you're not entitled to know. If you don't like the answer, you shouldn't have asked the question."

Here is what's current:

In the poll:

For the first time, a majority of Americans, 51%, say the Bush administration deliberately misled the public about whether Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction — the reason Bush emphasized in making the case for invading. The administration's credibility on the issue has been steadily eroding since 2003.

By 58%-37%, a majority say the United States won't be able to establish a stable, democratic government in Iraq.

About one-third, 32%, say the United States can't win the war in Iraq. Another 21% say the United States could win the war, but they don't think it will. Just 43% predict a victory.

Still, on the question that tests fundamental attitudes toward the war — was it a mistake to send U.S. troops? — the public's view has rebounded. By 53%-46%, those surveyed say it wasn't a mistake, the strongest support for the war since just after the Iraqi elections in January.

www.usatoday.com...



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Vegabond - but Bush completely disregarded the same rule? At some point you will start to think for yourself and you'll see how all this was used merely to manufacture enough consent for unspeakable acts. Saddam and Bin Ladien were in no way in cahoots. Everyone knows this, it was only after that catching phrase where every speach Bush gave had Bin Laiden, Terror and Saddam 0 which worked very well on the majority of Americans to such a degree that one poll I saw had the majority of Americans thinking Saddam was responsible for 911.

"He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice."
- Albert Einstein



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by MayetMy apologies...you should know better then. The lessons of past mistakes should be clearer in your memory.




I ahve served my country and I fully understand what I believe in. I do not believe in asking these scum to pretty please leave us alone.


Fight me must and Fight we will, even if the Tulipwalkers just don't get it.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:15 PM
link   
If I ask I am not entitled to know?

Thats poop... so every question I have ever asked, because I had to ask it, I am not entitled to know?

Yeah right..

and i was asking about the people in this thread not asking to have figures sprouted at me from outside sources.

What interests me, interests ME.. One only gains knowledge by asking questions



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Nothing wrong with questions, just make sure the answers received are not rubbish.

[edit on 14-8-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ludo182
The Saoud family made a pact with the religious people decades ago, the Saoud family would have the power and the religious people would see the Chaaria as the sole source of law. If the Saoud family has a too aggresive stance towards the religious people then the pact is broken and they lose power.


Ah, I finally got around to reading this...so what your telling me here is the Saud family is caught between a rock and a hard place.

That little "pact" is gonna have to change...its a poison thats spread all over the world and if one of these little cells get lucky...the Saud's will have to get off the fence and make a choice. They can't play both sides of the field anymore.

Maximu§



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:21 PM
link   
Edslinger, so you have already been brainwashed into thinking might makes right? You have served your country, and I am aware you are very proud - so let me ask you..

Assuming "you sides" rationalitions for the war being correct, then wasn't, isn't, North Korea a much more dangerous enemy for the states? Aren't they the ones with the real weapons of mass destruction? Haven't they also actually off handed threatened the States? a few times?

But you pick the country that had no WMD's, wasn't a threat to anyone, and never said boo to you.

You know there is a word for people that won't fight someone who will fight back, but instead picks on those unable to defend themself's.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:27 PM
link   
*Cynical Voice.... geez are you calling the USA a Bully at all....



cos they really seem to be going down that line..

I'm bigger than you so you must do what i say or think.....



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Passer By Assuming "you sides" rationalitions for the war being correct, then wasn't, isn't, North Korea a much more dangerous enemy for the states? Aren't they the ones with the real weapons of mass destruction? Haven't they also actually off handed threatened the States? a few times?



North Korea is a different ballgame but they are a threat which China, Japan, and South Korea should be able to handle.

There was no one to handle the tinderbox of the Middle East and the WORLD depends on it, it has to be taken care of and the US was the only one to fit the bill.

As for the WMD, has North Korea ever used them? Saddam?

Oh yeah and North Korea has a South Korea on its border and the whole of Japan and South Korea are under the Nuclear umbrella of the United States.

The Middle East?



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Passer By
Vegabond -


*flashing red lights and blaring sirens*
*PA system crackles to life*
"This is a pet peeve alert, this is a pet peeve alert. Proceed to your bunkers and take cover until the all clear is given"

vAgabond! vAgabond! vAgabond! *Spontaneously combusts but keeps talking*

I'm not bound to a star named Vega. In fact I'm not bound to much of anything- that's what makes me a VAGABOND. If I ever give up on eating meat you can call me Vegiebond, but other than that, it's VAGABOND! *spontaneously combusts*

(I'm not really mad, but that is a REALLY common mistake and I have no idea why in the world it would be.)



but Bush completely disregarded the same rule?


Once the rule has been embraced by two, it no longer applies to the third. Between any triad of mutual enemies, once two of them have ceased fighting one another or have cooperated against the third, the third party can no longer consider either of the other two entities as a potential ally.
Saddam was hosting terrorists and training camps. He was offering financial incentives to the families of suicide bombers. He had chosen his side, and it wasn't with us. The time to take Iraq under our wing under RealPolitik was in 1993 when we had just beaten the snot out of Saddam. We could have tried to redefine our relationship with Saddam, offering him incentives to work with us- afterall, Saddam has always proven willing to cooperate with the highest bidder, even during the cold war. Bush 41 and Clinton blew the chance to make Iraq a defacto ally, not Bush 43.
There's a ton of bad things that Bush HAS done, this just isn't one of them.



At some point you will start to think for yourself and you'll see how all this was used merely to manufacture enough consent for unspeakable acts.


So who exactly is thinking for me, oh enlightened one? I'm not a neo-con (well, in the doctrine of Alcoholics Annonymous I suppose I'll always be a Neocon, just a "recovering" one. 1 year clean and sober! Maybe I should refer to myself as an "ex-con".) But back to the point- I hate both parties. I write my own philosophy thank you very much. I'm a realist. I don't see imperialism as a dirty word, I just see it as a second best strategy in some cases. I believe in the use of force, but not as the only option. I believe in the war in Iraq, but not in the tactics or strategy, and not solely for the reasons we were given.
The problem isn't that I don't think for myself. My problem is that as a matter of human nature you group things. You have difficulty seeing things for what they individually are- you just lump it in with whatever it might have remote similiarity to. Everything with 4 wheels is a car to you. Look closer.



Saddam and Bin Ladien were in no way in cahoots. Everyone knows this,

"everyone knows it". That's what you say when you can't or don't want to actually prove your claims. I'm very good with language and not bad with people- I notice things like that. You'll have to go outside the box to slip one by me.
As I've already mentioned, even if Saddam was not actively giving Bin Laden everything he needed or wanted, Saddam was supporting terrorism. What yo must understand about terrorism is that it does not confrom the the strict boundries of nation states. Just because you don't fly the same flag and aren't necessarily one in the same does not mean that your actions are not interrelated. Supporting Islamic terrorism in any form through any organization is in effect supporting Al Qaida.
If group 1 is fighting group 2, and group 3 helps group 4 attack group 2, groups 3 and 4 are in fact aiding group 1, not matter how much they may hate eachother or what degree of destinction may exist between them.


it was only after that catching phrase where every speach Bush gave had Bin Laiden, Terror and Saddam 0 which worked very well on the majority of Americans to such a degree that one poll I saw had the majority of Americans thinking Saddam was responsible for 911.


4 out of 5 statistics are meaningless.

On a more serious note, Bush's garbage is peripheral. Are we discussing words and politics or are we discussing events? The words are convoluted and full of deception on all sides because like all politicians, including his rivals on the left, Bush is a crook and a liar.
The events are simple as can be though. Iraq was an enemy to Ameriaca. Al Qaida was an enemy to America. Iraq aided terrorist activity which was more to Al Qaida's advantage than to Americas. America attacked Iraq. Al Qaida terrorists are defending Iraq.


"He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice."
- Albert Einstein


You stand in the rank and file of the left and assume that all fire directed at you must be coming from directly across the field, from the rank and file of the right. The problem is with your perception, which is flawed because you are failing to apply the large brain which Einstein says you were given by mistake.

The fire you are taking from me is not coming from the right. I'm hiding in the middle sniping at both sides because I hate you all.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   
You guys know why we haven't heard about the death or capture of Bin Laden. That is because Bush is PAYING the Pakistani Government to keep him hid so that we can "capture" him later on. Get it through your small minds you EGOTISTICAL conservatives, Bin Laden isn't going to be caught YOUR OWN government is keeping him hidden!



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 10:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Are you a neoconservative? You think that you are, but don't know for sure? Take this quiz to find out.

Neocon Quiz



Phewf....took the quiz and found out I'm a Liberal. What a relief!



Liberals…

* Are wary of American arrogance and hypocrisy
* Trace much of today's anti-American hatred to previous US foreign policies.
* Believe political solutions are inherently superior to military solutions
* Believe the US is morally bound to intervene in humanitarian crises
* Oppose American imperialism
* Support international law, alliances, and agreements
* Encourage US participation in the UN
* Believe US economic policies must help lift up the world's poor

Historical liberal: President Woodrow Wilson
Modern liberal: President Jimmy Carter

Thanks, Souljah!

Another interesting video to watch: The Secret Government w/Bill Moyers



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mayet
What interests me, interests ME.. One only gains knowledge by asking questions


Not tue Mayet. If I shoot bullets at you and you survive, by ducking perhaps, you have become knowledgeable. You're still alive, you know what the bullets sound like when they're close, and you didn't have to ask any questions.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 11:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by C0le
I have seen the error of my ways, i have seen the truth, i am now at one with myself, The truth shall set you free.


Oh MY , the HORROR!

Did you take a Tulipwalker pill or what?



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Item 6) Any large gathering of radical Muslims becomes a prime target. Ive lost count of how many times Ive seen a Muslim cleric leading large groups of radical Muslims screaming "Death-to-America" and burning our flag and I sit there thinking...."Well, there they are! the terrorists are right in front of us and they all happen to be standing all together"

When someone screams "Ill Kill you" to my home country and we're able to do something about it....maybe we should. Drop some FAE's right in the middle of that crowd and you just killed almost every radical Muslim in that area.....all at once!

Maximu§



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join