US fears defeat in Iran war

page: 10
1
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 05:16 PM
link   
First, why did I receive a warning for calling Ahmadenijad an idiot? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck IT'S a DUCK! Second, how can you say that a person who preaches to wipe out a whole country because of paranoia isn't genocidal? What if Bush said "Iraq deserves to be wiped off the map"? Wouldn't you call that genocidal? Third, Ahmadenijad is hateful, he cares squat about Iran, just his Islamofascist dreams. Read that wretched speech he gave in the world without Zionism conference. Would make Adolf Hitler proud. How can you praise a person who thinks of his country as cannon fodder first, citizens with rights second? He is intolerant, he recently just banned a fireworks festival for being "unislamic", I fear for those of other religions in Iran if you can't even pop a few fireworks without the Mullah police cracking down on you, God knows what they do to Christians, Jews, and also the Zoroastrian minorities. No, sorry, I have complete contempt for him, I always give a world leader a chance, I never condemn anyone because "the man" on CNN says I'm supposed to do it. He has earned by contempt.




posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
First, why did I receive a warning for calling Ahmadenijad an idiot? If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck IT'S a DUCK! Second, how can you say that a person who preaches to wipe out a whole country because of paranoia isn't genocidal? What if Bush said "Iraq deserves to be wiped off the map"? Wouldn't you call that genocidal? Third, Ahmadenijad is hateful, he cares squat about Iran, just his Islamofascist dreams. Read that wretched speech he gave in the world without Zionism conference. Would make Adolf Hitler proud. How can you praise a person who thinks of his country as cannon fodder first, citizens with rights second? He is intolerant, he recently just banned a fireworks festival for being "unislamic", I fear for those of other religions in Iran if you can't even pop a few fireworks without the Mullah police cracking down on you, God knows what they do to Christians, Jews, and also the Zoroastrian minorities. No, sorry, I have complete contempt for him, I always give a world leader a chance, I never condemn anyone because "the man" on CNN says I'm supposed to do it. He has earned by contempt.

Right.

And how do you feel about Sharon, the great peacemaker? The US supports Sharon?

Bush has wiped Iraq off the map. Iraq will need at least 20 years to recover. Thousands and thousands and thousands of Iraqi's have perished.

Now, here you are saying such things about the president of Iran?

Iran did not create this Human Rights catastrophe that you call "Operation Iraqi Freedom" .

Iran does not have a head so large as Cheney, as to say "they will greet us as liberators", demonstrating delusional thinking and ridiculous arrogance and an embarassing inability to know how others feel.

Did you think Iraqi's would not react when your market colonialism plans became public?

You thought Iraqi's would throw roses at your feet?

YOU, who has slowly choked Iraq to death with 15 years of sanctions?

YOU, who's Secretary of State Albright says the death of 500,000 children in Iraq under the age of 5 is "worth it"?



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Alright, stay on topic here. M'kay?



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Proph,

first- I never understand why those outside of Israel consider Ariel Sharon to be an evil warmonger. A corrupt Likud Mob member who takes bribes perhaps, but he gave Gaza to the Palestinians for free. Sounds like he was serious on the peace issue. Just left Gaza except for the most basic security measures neccesary so he could have a legacy. Commendable, even though it was a bad strategic choice for Israel and I know already it won't do anything for them (except have more Muslim brotherhood members generating fake Ariel Sharon quotes on propaganda websites).


Second- Bush didn't wipe Iraq off the map. Iraq was pristine and untouched after Baghdad fell (except for the crippling economic sanctions of course which I am completely against, COMPLETELY, and some looting). America did not destroy Iraq no matter how much the Iranian Mullahs or Syria spins it. The Jihadis did. Of the 30,000 dead in Iraq, I can safely say the gross majority of the slaughter came from Jihadi car bombs, Jihadi revenge plots, Jihadis blowing up infrastructure to make the country unstable, and so forth. America did not destroy or wipe Iraq off the map.

I confess that some of the initial bombing the U.S. goverment undertook was callous and cruel (shock and awe in Baghdad for instance). Yet you need to take two things into account:

-America has taken more measures to ensure low civilian casualties than any other power in human history. Would Iran do the same if it was America? I think not- if Iran occupied America a third of the population would be killed, another third would be forced to convert to Islam, and the last third would be enslaved or placed as second class Dhimmis. You know that's the truth, don't spin.

-Much of the initial bombing was a lose-lose choice. If we didn't take out those palaces which were in Baghdad or near it, Saddam would get away with using whatever was stored in them against U.S. troops. Remember that this was when everyone was concerned with the WMDs (and Saddam was the wrong person to have WMDs, he used them before, why risk having them used on U.S. troops?)

third, Iran may not believe in the "will greet us as liberators" BS, but the Mullahs have their own delusions- ie: Islam will free the world, we will save the West, the world will submit to Islam, Iran is going to sail black flags on Iraq one day,etc. which are just as dangerous. It doesn't matter if the cat is black or white as long as it kills mice.

Lastly, I'm again telling you I'm against sanctions, sanctions hurt the common people and do nothing to remove tyrants. That being said you will have to confess that bankrupting your enemy before invading is an efficient (though unethical) strategy. Iran has used the oil issue several times, even though high oil prices will hurt the third world and the poor hardest. So both our nations are equally selfish. Let's get better



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 07:47 PM
link   
You are a reasonable person Nakash.

But do not even try, do not EVEN TRY, to tell me the US came to Iraq for the sake of great principles and high ideals.

The US has returned the oil sales from petroeuros back to petrodollars, which is illegal;

The US has imposed upon Iraq the most EXTREME corporate globalization policies, also illegal.

And you had better BELIEVE Iraq has been destroyed.

The Iraqi National Resistance is fighting for freedom and liberty, not the US.

Your talk of "Jihadis"(mujahids) reflects a very fundamental misunderstanding of the different elements fighting the occupation, and your denial of US criminality is absurd.

It is the OCCUPATION who is killing Iraqi's.

Any idea how many?



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 07:50 PM
link   
And Sharon? You are unsure of something?

Sabra and Shatila.

Or do you believe Sharon just stepped out for a smoke as the Christian Phalangists entered the camps?



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 08:19 PM
link   

It is the OCCUPATION who is killing Iraqi's.


Funny, I don't think John Smith from Oklahoma is the one setting up car bombs near restaurant lines.



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

It is the OCCUPATION who is killing Iraqi's.


Funny, I don't think John Smith from Oklahoma is the one setting up car bombs near restaurant lines.




What is CAUS?

Who is the author of the cease-fire initiative promoted by CAUS?

Why is it that the CAUS initiative does not appear ANYWHERE in the Western press?

The "insurgents", the USAns say. The "insurgency".

How can USAns be so unaware of the Resistance? They never even say the term "Resistance".

the "insurgents".



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 09:47 PM
link   
That's giving them some sort of glory. Call them insurgents, or better- murderers. A rebel or resistance fighter doesn't stoop to the things these people do. IRA never did that, ETA never did that, Mandela never did that. There was always a "limit" and that was taking a minimum amount of care with civilians. The Jihadis kill more Iraqis than U.S. troops, and often stoop to things like hiding bombs on the corpses of dead children so when troops approach to see what's wrong or bury the child, the corpse blows up (ie:Afghanistan), the Jihadis resort to beheading people, AID WORKERS (!) they are crazy, they deserve contempt. They aren't rebels. They are insurgents. Iraq isn't a struggle to free the country, it is a struggle to ruthlessly subdue the population with extremist sharia law and other tyranny. A rebel fights for principle, they have no principle other than the sick twisted Islamic fascism their Mullah's brainwashed them with.


[edit on 23-3-2006 by Nakash]



posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 11:24 PM
link   
So wait a second... was Iraq better off with Saddam in power? Letting his sons run rampant with terror all over the country, raping women in front of their husbands, torturing the husbands in front of their wives and kids, sticking people into meat grinders, cutting off body parts and exterminating well over 100,000+ people. Or, is Iraq better off without Saddam? Living in a free society where they can choose their own government, and make their own way in life.

Also, while you may not agree with all the sanctions... it wasn't JUST the U.S. alone imposing them. And if it wasn't for all the peace knicks over here and in the UN... the war would've occurred much earlier avoiding the long years of so called "diplomacy" where the Iraqi population was being starved of food, water, and medicines. Not to mention Saddam, like Kim Jong Ill of N. Korea, had a long history of taking the money he earned from his oil profits etc., and putting them into the military rather than feeding the general population and building businesses in Iraq so the people could work and sustain life.

Lastly, it was Saddam's fault this all happend in the first place. 13 resolutions in the UN... and the guy still had to be a hard a**. We owned him 12 years prior in the Gulf War... you would have thought he would have learned his lesson. You can keep crying about illegal war etc. But since when in history were there ever actual legalities in war, that people stuck too. Regardless, all of this is in the past... and hopefully very soon the U.S. will be able to start sending troops home, as the Iraqi Police/Defense forces are built up.



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by pRoPhEcY
OUR PLACE, scarecrow?(irony)

Ya mean pickin' cotton?



[edit on 23-3-2006 by pRoPhEcY]


:confused: Put the whole quote in not just the part that you think is wrong.



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 12:19 AM
link   



What is CAUS?

Who is the author of the cease-fire initiative promoted by CAUS?

Why is it that the CAUS initiative does not appear ANYWHERE in the Western press?

The "insurgents", the USAns say. The "insurgency".

How can USAns be so unaware of the Resistance? They never even say the term "Resistance".

the "insurgents".


Go ahead educate us on what CAUS is.
Now is this resistence you refer to the Iraqis who used to be in power, the minority Sunnis? Or do you refer to the AQ that have moved in with the foreign fighters whose only real reason to be there is kill anyone who does not adhere to their extremist views of Islam? I mean look at who they are killing. They have killed more Iraqis then the US has since the start of the war.

As for the Sunnis, who are they killing even now? Mostly Shia Iraqis. And they are doing it using terror tactics.

Do you recall why the sanctions against Iraq went in in the first place? Who started the Iran v Iraq war? Who invaded Kuwait? Who refused to adhere to UN sanctions for 13 years? Did the US act alone in Desert Storm?

While you are on your anti-american tirades, at least try to be factually and historically correct in your comments.



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by pRoPhEcY
And Sharon? You are unsure of something?

Sabra and Shatila.

Or do you believe Sharon just stepped out for a smoke as the Christian Phalangists entered the camps?


And while you demonize Sharon for whatever role he may have played there, you should give equal demonization to Arafat for his terror tactics and murder of innocents. At least Sharon made efforts towards peace. His removal of Israeli settlements and giving Gaza back was far more of an effort for peace then any ever given to Israel by the pals or the Arab nations surrounding Israel.

Remember it was Arafat that turned down statehood for Palestine when he would not accept Clintons deal. In many many ways the Pals have been their own worst enemies in this whole process. On top of that, Iran which has funded and trained Hezbollah have contributed to the whole process of war in the region. For Iran this is a twofer. They dislike Israel, well only since the mullahs gained power, and they dislike the Arabs as well. This way they get to see both sides get killed while all they have to do is supply some money to them.



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by MegaDittos
So wait a second... was Iraq better off with Saddam in power? Letting his sons run rampant with terror all over the country, raping women in front of their husbands, torturing the husbands in front of their wives and kids, sticking people into meat grinders, cutting off body parts and exterminating well over 100,000+ people. Or, is Iraq better off without Saddam? Living in a free society where they can choose their own government, and make their own way in life.

Also, while you may not agree with all the sanctions... it wasn't JUST the U.S. alone imposing them. And if it wasn't for all the peace knicks over here and in the UN... the war would've occurred much earlier avoiding the long years of so called "diplomacy" where the Iraqi population was being starved of food, water, and medicines. Not to mention Saddam, like Kim Jong Ill of N. Korea, had a long history of taking the money he earned from his oil profits etc., and putting them into the military rather than feeding the general population and building businesses in Iraq so the people could work and sustain life.

Lastly, it was Saddam's fault this all happend in the first place. 13 resolutions in the UN... and the guy still had to be a hard a**. We owned him 12 years prior in the Gulf War... you would have thought he would have learned his lesson. You can keep crying about illegal war etc. But since when in history were there ever actual legalities in war, that people stuck too. Regardless, all of this is in the past... and hopefully very soon the U.S. will be able to start sending troops home, as the Iraqi Police/Defense forces are built up.



But just tell me who had chosen U.S as the major fighter for freedom???We have NATO and other structures,and as i remember U.S. invade Iraq WHITOUT NATO premission!!Since that war is going i never see a important reason why should Iraq been invaded!!So under Sadams population was starving,and so???There was no americans starving!!Taking out terorism??What terorisms?I have only seen speculations and some goverment opinion that Sadam is suporting terorism!!!I have seen how is "taking out" terorism in Checnya by the russians!!It is a holokaust!!!And all the ''superpowers'' are the same!!!!

[edit on 24-3-2006 by swesais]



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 08:10 AM
link   
lemme jst despute a few things said on this last page:
1. What the Iranian President said about Israel is that Zionism was a racist movement like fasism or white-rule aphartied in Africa, a 'jewish state' is racist like if America was a 'white state' where everyone else is a 2nd class citizen, there fore this racist entity should be wiped off the map..It's not the same thing as saying Iraq should be wiped off the map because Iraq is not inherently racist like Israel is.

2. It is a fact that the US military has killed more Iraqis civilians than the insurgents..way more.

3. The only think Clinton/Barak ever offered the Palestinians was a recist aphartied sheme like the one they are currently imposing on the Palestinians, Barak/Clinton never offered to end the occupation, or anything close to it, they reported it in the US media that they did but that was a lie.



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 11:51 AM
link   
U guys have been discussing about American defeat without any tactical thinking. In case of IRAQ Allied forces entered IRAG and Stayed. Hence they are fighting and suffering Casualty.

Where as in case of IRAN that is not required, they have to just Bomb and fire missiles from iair/underwater and destroy IRAN's nuclear facilities. It is IRAN which will suffer heavily economically if US destroys all oil fields and does not enter IRAN and leaving it to anarchy.
I am for it. These fundamentalist terrorists should be detroyed



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by jajabinks
lemme jst despute a few things said on this last page:
1. What the Iranian President said about Israel is that Zionism was a racist movement like fasism or white-rule aphartied in Africa, a 'jewish state' is racist like if America was a 'white state' where everyone else is a 2nd class citizen, there fore this racist entity should be wiped off the map..It's not the same thing as saying Iraq should be wiped off the map because Iraq is not inherently racist like Israel is.

2. It is a fact that the US military has killed more Iraqis civilians than the insurgents..way more.

3. The only think Clinton/Barak ever offered the Palestinians was a recist aphartied sheme like the one they are currently imposing on the Palestinians, Barak/Clinton never offered to end the occupation, or anything close to it, they reported it in the US media that they did but that was a lie.


Now here is one who talks sense.




Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 3/24/2006 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by jajabinks
lemme jst despute a few things said on this last page:
1. What the Iranian President said about Israel is that Zionism was a racist movement like fasism or white-rule aphartied in Africa, a 'jewish state' is racist like if America was a 'white state' where everyone else is a 2nd class citizen, there fore this racist entity should be wiped off the map..It's not the same thing as saying Iraq should be wiped off the map because Iraq is not inherently racist like Israel is.

bs
1. The Iran president never stated his reason for saying that. Can you read his mind?
2. The countries in that area have been trying to get rid of the jews and Isreal since....since....biblical times?
Plus, if the palestinians get their own state...would that be "racist" since only Palestinians would be there? Do you honestly think they would treat Israelis as first class citizens?


Most of the countries in that area are arab states. Most are muslim states.
Are they racist too?



2. It is a fact that the US military has killed more Iraqis civilians than the insurgents..way more.

You have a link for that?
This has been discussed before on this theard. I'll do a search but if I'm not mistaken I think the insurgents surpassed the US early last year I believe.


3. The only think Clinton/Barak ever offered the Palestinians was a recist aphartied sheme like the one they are currently imposing on the Palestinians, Barak/Clinton never offered to end the occupation, or anything close to it, they reported it in the US media that they did but that was a lie.

Shhhh
What are you doing!? You're only supposed to bash Bush and his administration on this board!



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nakash
That's giving them some sort of glory. Call them insurgents, or better- murderers. A rebel or resistance fighter doesn't stoop to the things these people do. IRA never did that, ETA never did that, Mandela never did that. There was always a "limit" and that was taking a minimum amount of care with civilians. The Jihadis kill more Iraqis than U.S. troops, and often stoop to things like hiding bombs on the corpses of dead children so when troops approach to see what's wrong or bury the child, the corpse blows up (ie:Afghanistan), the Jihadis resort to beheading people, AID WORKERS (!) they are crazy, they deserve contempt. They aren't rebels. They are insurgents. Iraq isn't a struggle to free the country, it is a struggle to ruthlessly subdue the population with extremist sharia law and other tyranny. A rebel fights for principle, they have no principle other than the sick twisted Islamic fascism their Mullah's brainwashed them with.


[edit on 23-3-2006 by Nakash]


HA!!

Here he is, in the flesh!!!

And so tell me how you describe Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld?

Are they "stooping", or are these very upRIGHT people?

Like our cousins in Vietnam, who are called "Gooks" by your Marvelous And Heroic Stormtrooper Wire-Monsters, Iraqi's are known as "Haji's".

RACIST APPELLATION!

SLANDERER!!

MALICIOUS!!!


Oh, what GLORY the US heaps upon itself, as it decries "the insurgents" for their failure regarding "taking a minimun amount of care with civilians", like FALLUJAH, for example.


Go tell the all the doctors and nurses and ambulance drivers, who were shot down like dogs by the cross-worshipers!!!

What PRAISE they give THEMSELVES, despite their gross attempts to cannibalize Iraq's national economy, ripping it, and Iraq's resources, open to foreign interests.

As Rumsfeld asks for $100,000,000 a year for his P2OG Black-Ops Army.

For the purpose of ?????"stimulating reactions"????

As the Interior Ministry government employees show up, in full uniform, at the homes of innocent people, kidnap them, and murder them in the dark night.

Oh Glory! GLORY!!!



posted on Mar, 24 2006 @ 01:51 PM
link   
[font=Trebuchet MS]Ok first off let me explain this to you. America isn't going to bomb Iran. They are going to have Isreal launch thier MOB(mother of all bomb) missiles at 32 different targets in Iran.

I hate to say it so bluntly but, Isreal is going to destroy Iran by itself.[/font]





new topics
top topics
 
1
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join