Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

War On Terror is to Stop Another Great Depression

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Saying the the war on terror is to stop another great depression. This seems off to me. In World War II the US economy was turned to a war economy, which helped end the depression in the US. We are not in a war economy and are not on the verge of one.

The US used nuclear weapons on Japan to hasten the end of World War II. If you want to arm chair quarterback a military decision from over 50 years ago go ahead. You were not there weighing massive US casulites to the deaths of Japanese civilains that might end the war without those casulites. A decision was made. The US lost 418,000 people in the war that was brought to them. To think if Japan or Germany would not have used the nuclear weapons if available is stupidity. It is so easy to bash on that decision to drop the two bombs. It bums me out that those civilians had to die.

No it isn't widely known that September 11 was planned by the US and England.

I think it was a weasel named OBL who is still hiding not like a man. If he didn't want the US to have more involvement in the Middle East.....Ahhhhh don't kill so many Americans.

If you don't feel the US invasion of Afganistan is not justified after the loss of 3000 lives then you have a serious warped reality.

I would actully like to see you back up some of your claims of the impending global depression you are talking about. Maybe some figures and facts that I can look over. This would be appreciated. I really mean it. Please some credible facts. Or are you trying to just put down America?




posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Hi sbob,

First of all the War on terror - why would the Middle East provoke the Single Greatest World Power in the Modern World?

United Kingdom is still in debt to America after WWII. America sat back to see who was winning and used the situation to their advantage. Why didn't they enter the war EARLIER? How many Nazi Scientists dd America Poach after WWII?

Nuclear Weapons were not used by other Countries because the RISK and the possible COST TO ENVIRONMENT was considered too high. They thought ALL Countries would see this, they thought wrong.

ANY PROOF Bin Laden did 9/11 fake tapes, otherwise Nope!!!

Finally sbob, why are all the EVIL
People in Oil Rich Countries? And Why provoke the USA???????????

Perhaps they have a death-wish. By the way I think Afghanistan is very goon for American Opium nowadays. GOOD WORK USA



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 07:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leif
They knew enough about the Bomb to risk dropping it: at the time there was a believed possibility of chain reaction to other Atoms, which could people believed destroy the World.


intitially yes it wwas believed this was a real possibility however further study and even a test in NEW MEXICO (which is in the US) proved that this wasnt going to happen.



Other Countries Had the Tech., even a Sci Fi writer of the time explained how it worked and got into trouble with the USA Heirarchy. But NOBODY ELSE risked it.

Just my opinion, neither of us is right or wrong.

Many thanks for reading my article.



other countried did have the tech, especially germany...could you imagine V2's raining down on london nuclear tipped? think about that....

japan was also researching it at the time...

and Germany was risking it, they had control of uranium mines in the belgian congo(also a fine example of "imperialism" from europe since so many like to criticise the US, most of europe would still have colonies if they didnt loose control of them) they also had the only existing heavy water plant in norway (d20) used as a moderater and to breed plutonium.

That was why leo szillard met with einstein to express his concerns over a nuclear armed nazi germany and asked einsteing to write roosevelt (einstein was more well known) because szillard believed the US was MORE dedicated to peace!!!

the SCI FI writer you are referencing is HG wells who wrote about nukes being the size of hand grenades in his book "the world set free".

now after I have tweaked your nose a bit



hope you appreciate it!!!

[edit on 15-6-2006 by XphilesPhan]



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 07:46 PM
link   
Nope not H G WELLES


Try again!

He wrote for the Sci Fi Pulp Magazines at the time. He described the intricate workings perfectly. A real Hard Science Fiction Writer.

He got into trouble with the authorities for his work.

All the best,

Leif.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 06:55 AM
link   
You still didn't answer about the start of your thrad about how the war on terrorism is to stop another great depression?

Please Answer with some economic data and not hate of America. Please....Please Please......Please

All I see is one sided hate.



From you
America did 9/11 to itself to take over the world....ha ha ha Good try

The US did not sit back in world war II and see who was winning world war II, as we were attacked by Japan.
The US didn't enter World war II earlier because we were isolationsts.

Saying there are not enought troops in South Korea is BS. We have 37,000 troops there serving as a tripwire from North Korean agression. You know the country that invaded south korea.


America is the only country that used nukes becuase of cost of the environment no other country would use them is a lame excuse. Any nation in WWII would have used them.
America is in the opium trade from afganistan. uh huh.....

I bet America made up the Easter Bunny too!

You said Africa is dying and the US should do more. Aren't you saying the US should stay out of peoples business? Which way do you want it? And oh by the way the US gives more foriegn aid to Africa than any other country. Why does not your country give more aid to Africa? Do you hate Africa?

America....oh and whoops you left out Russia took scientists after wolrd war II.

Please let me do some research on what country you are from so I can lob some jabs of hate too.

OR is your country perfect.

My country is not perfect, but millions of people cross our border every year illiegally and want to make there lives here. What does that mean....

----------------------------------------------------------------------
See this thread started out as the War on Terrorism is to stop a economic depression. Well we have all this junk in the thread that I will respond to as I am sick of America bashing. But please show economic data on how the war on terror is stopping a great depression. If you keep on answering other minor tit or tat attacks and not the core question, you will answer that you really don't know and this thread title has little meaning, execpt to advance your hate.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 07:56 AM
link   
1. if this was only about oil (it plays a large part but it ain't just about oil) how come the prices keep going up?


2. the point of the thread was a theory, it was discussed in the vein and the main thrust has bounced around. I think, if you were to go back and check out when the recession started you'd find it was 2000.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 09:04 AM
link   
I just saw "The War Lord", starring Nicolas Cage as Yuri Orlov...brilliant movie!

www.lordofwarthemovie.com...

It gives an interesting perspective on "wars".

I know the US just approved 9 (or 90) billion $ further for the war...does anyone know here this goes?

Is a war just a good excuse to channel people's funds to private and public companies that are linked to the people that create the wars?

At the ending of the movie, it listed the countries who sell the most weapons (not in order of any sort) on a global basis:

US, UK, China, Russia and France

And guess who are permanent members of the UN Security Council?

Yep, you guessed it


Cheers

JS



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by jumpspace

I know the US just approved 9 (or 90) billion $ further for the war...does anyone know here this goes?

Is a war just a good excuse to channel people's funds to private and public companies that are linked to the people that create the wars?

At the ending of the movie, it listed the countries who sell the most weapons (not in order of any sort) on a global basis:

US, UK, China, Russia and France

And guess who are permanent members of the UN Security Council?


This is it JS, you hit the nail on the head. Where does the money go? It's easy to think of this money as the governments money, but IT IS NOT! it belongs to the american people and it is being stolen from you all, that's it STOLEN. Why do you have homeless people in the US? Why do you have people working there asses off without any hope of owning their own house? Why do you have people that cannot afford medical treatment, why are some children going hungry, why is your childrens education in decline why, why, why? Why does your president smile and the media smile back. I watched his speech the other day... this guy is a dumbass, yet he is your president, he is the reflection of the American consensus and he is ROBBING YOU ALL BLIND.

Don't get me wrong, I love people from the united states, every single one of you that i have met in person I have found to be truely lovely people, but the trouble is that you are admiring "the presidents new clothes too much".

ok, finished with the rant - gosh this stuff make me soooooooo mad!!!!!!



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leif
The simple face is we all know that the US is going after Oil in Syria, Iran Iraq. They have lost controll of Russia for the moment, and are always talking about the "War On Terror".

This war on Terror is an excuse to get Oil to help the failing economy of the West, especially USA.


I have no intention of engaging you with regard to some of the unrefined vitriol that made up the second half of your post and at the same time have no compulsion to claim with any certainty that the 9/11 attacks were not staged, I must take issue with the motive you ascribe to this supposed conspiracy.

I take exception with the notion that the war on terror exists to forestall a new great depression because, quite simply it could not, and is not working.

First and foremost, though I realize this is not your contention, I point out that there is no "wartime economy", in case others may try to tie that in to this thread. These are comparitively small wars being fought with preexisting material, hence no significant production boom or wartime boost.

Second, and more to the point as you have raised it, the wars we have engaged in have cost us roughly 400 Billion to date, (1) (2) (3)*pg4* incidentally, that's 4 times more than Iraq lost in an 8 year war with Iran (4)!

At around $68/bbl as we've been paying lately, we'd need 5.8 BILLION barrels of FREE oil, Just to Break Even. In other words, every drop of oil we import from anywhere in the world would have to be free for 483 days. Of course, we can't get that, we only have Iraq. Iraq isn't producing very much though. Before the war they were producing 2.03 million barrels a day, by 2004 they were only up to 2.25 million (5), so it would take us 7 years of stealing every drop they get out of the ground without giving them a penny. But we haven't done that. We're paying.

Those in the know say we're shafting Iraq to the tune of $74-194 Billion (6) By the time this war is over, that will be somewhere between 20 and 40 percent of our expenses, if not less. Therefore, there is not a net gain to the American economy. There is merely a transfer of wealth that could have been accomplished through unfair tax policy. It doesn't take a war to hand my tax dollars straight to an oil company, that's just how they chose to do it.

At the same time, prices have been spiking, in part at least osstensibly due to "market jitters" when things go bad in Iraq (even though Iraq's supply contribution is neglegible), which if anything is hurting our economy.

In so many words, we're not stalling off any depressions with this war. In fact it is making me very depressed. What is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan consists of two parts: A business plot to grab money from the average American like it was going out of style, and A geopolitical play to hedge China out of key regions and do likewise to Russia, conveniently enough while taking up a position which may be some threat to Siberia if Russia's future goes too dim. The cold warriors are still playing chess, and this is the endgame, but they've got to render unto caesar (aka halliburton) if they want their war.

[edit on 16-6-2006 by The Vagabond]

[edit on 16-6-2006 by The Vagabond]



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 03:26 PM
link   
My opinion here is that the "War On Terror" allows a USA to attack another country not allied with them, to gain something. Using the excuse of Terrorism.

The World at the moment would be paying huge amounts of money for the Oil left in Iraq if they hadn't attacked. The War is VERY Costly, but most soldiers look after the Oil pipelines from "Terrorists" disrupting the Oil flow. Basically they need the troops there until either peaceful Americanization is achieved, or the oil runs out.

At the Moment Syria and Iran are not seen as EVIL
But soon they will fill the gap left by Iraq. Look around your house. see all the plastic? Going to work tomorrow in a car, on a bus, on a plane? Know how many new Airports are planned, how many more flights are planned for the future?

I don't pretend that we're seeing things BETTER than before 9/11, I'm saying HELL ON EARTH would have been just around the corner when Oil depletion made the West dependant on the Arab states.

Anybody doesn't believe me? then tell me WHY ELSE GO TO IRAQ LOSE SO MANY MEN, KILL SO MANY AFTER HUSSAIN IS GONE. WHY IRAN. WHY NOT KOREA< AFRICA, Why work so hard in IRAQ when Millions are dying in AFRICA???

Something is not right, I try and work out why, and it IS the Oil - the West runs almost everything from it and it's by-products. I'm not clever enought o quote statistics, just look at the map and the "Axis of Evil" is conveniently in the middle of the site of most of the worlds OIL.

I'm not American, I'm not Anti-American. I'm against countries' Leaders using force and Death for gain. Hittler did it, Bush is doing it. America is now the Bad Guy, but what do you do when no Country in the world can fight against it? Bring on "DESERT FART 3" subtitled "WAR ON EVIL IRAN< SYRIA AND ANY OTHER COUNTRY DEEMED BY THE GOOD USA TO BE EEEEEEEEEEVVVVVIIIILLLLLL.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leif
At the Moment Syria and Iran are not seen as EVIL



I'll have to disagree with you on this point. Iran not seen as evil? Let's see, the whole holocaust didn't happen thing was ridiculous. The holding a contest to depict the best holocaust cartoon thing was despicable. The nuclear issue is a major problem and they don't appear to be backing down anytime soon.

Iran is evil. Are they dangerous? Depends on how far along they are with the nukes they are supposedly not building. They're certainly more dangerous to countries closer to them. There have been a number of Iranian Embassy employees arrested, and subsequently deported, for taking pictures of landmarks in and around New York City.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Leif, you obviously haven't thought it out well and you don't know what you're talking about. Here's the official 7 reasons the United States invaded Iraq, presented to the U.N. If you notice, the world media conveniently forgot all this and only concentrated on the WMD, fooling people such as yourself.

1. Saddam Hussein has never abided by the terms of the Persian Gulf War cease-fire and has continued to violate 17 UN Security Council Resolutions (obviously confirmed by the United Nations).

(FYI in case you missed them):


UNSCR 1441 - November 8, 2002
• Called for the immediate and complete disarmament of Iraq and its prohibited weapons.
• Iraq must provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA full access to Iraqi facilities, individuals, means of transportation, and documents.
• States that the Security Council has repeatedly warned Iraq and that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations.

www.state.gov...

Please visit site for full listing of resolutions.


Mod Edit: No Quote – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 16/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]

2. Saddam Hussein is engaged in a systematic pattern of deception regarding his weapons capabilities (later confirmed by the Duelfer report and chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix) and continues to thumb his nose at the World Community.
3. Saddam Hussein possesses WMD (now apparently refuted by the Duelfer report ).
4. Saddam Hussein has ties to terrorists, including members of al-Qaida and Ansar al-Islam (confirmed by the 9/11 commission).
5. Saddam Hussein intends to develop additional WMD programs, making him a threat to all counties in the Middle East (again confirmed by Duelfer).
6. Saddam Hussein's removal would help in the war on terror by initiating the democratization of the Middle East.
7. Saddam Hussein is a ruthless dictator and war criminal, he and those members of his régime need to be brought to account for their crimes on humanity (confirmed by The UN Commission on Human Rights, the UN General Assembly, the International Red Cross and Amnesty International).

Here they are:

Refusal to Admit Human Rights Monitors
Violence Against Women
Torture
Executions and Repression of Political Opposition
Abuse of Children
Disappearances, including over 16,000 Kurds and Shiites
Denial of Basic Freedoms: Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, Freedom of Information
Withholding of Food
Crimes Against Muslim Religious leaders and their followers

[edit on 16-6-2006 by WheelsRCool]



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   
(There’s more, but to wrap it up, Powell concluded):
In Summary, the goals of the United States are simple
1) fight terrorism, to include those that support or harbor terrorists
2) uphold and enforce United Nations Security Council Resolutions
3) disarm a dangerous regime that possesses weapons of mass destruction; and,
4) remove a ruthless dictator (i.e., Saddam Hussein) and promote Democracy in the region

The above stated reasons were presented to the United Nations and were rejected. Because of this, Bush decided the United States would go in without the UN.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leif
The World at the moment would be paying huge amounts of money for the Oil left in Iraq if they hadn't attacked.


Leif you should really read my last post. The numbers don't add up at all. The amount that foreign contracts on oil are cheating the Iraqis out of is less than half the cost of the war. At the actual discount we are getting (as opposed to the "if we got it free" example I used earlier) it could take 50-100 years to break even, unless we can actually "win" the counter-insurgency war and effectively protect that infrastructure (in case you haven't noticed, that's not going well). The catch is, that Iraq doesn't have enough proven reserves to extend the deal long enough for us to break even. The current deal, which could last up to 40 years and is projected at most to net $194 Billion, covers as much as 64% of Iraq's proven reserves. (see reference 5 of my last)

Your theory just doesn't add up in terms of "the world" (more appropriately, the US) raping Iraq for oil. The fact of the matter is the real targets in this scheme are the American tax payers. The Iraqis are definately losing on the deal as well, but to those who actually planned and executed this raid on the US Treasury, Iraq would be considered collateral damage.



At the Moment Syria and Iran are not seen as EVIL
But soon they will fill the gap left by Iraq.


Syria and Iran are commonly seen as evil by many Americans. In a vacuum I suspect a majority would say so, although it is unlikely in my humble opinion that the majority would support a war with Syria, and Iran is quite unlikely as well.

Syria's oil reserves are not noteworthy. Syria is, at best, an Israeli/Lebanese problem. A war there is highly unlikely.

Iran is another story. Although it is possible that America will go for the whole enchilada, the smart play is really just to go for Khuzestan, unless we are trying to tie in Afghanistan's flank for a strategic wall against Russia and complete an overland supply line between Turkey and Hindu Kush (not a worthwhile objective in my mind, unless we plan on establishing a ridiculously large and blatantly belligerent military presence in Southern Asia to check Russia and China in the future, which I doubt even the cold warriors are seriously entertaining).

Actually Iran was in all ways the logical first target if your analysis were correct. Iran has more ports, strategically controls the gulf, has tons of oil and is better equipped to actually get it to market, is better positioned to support our efforts in Afghanistan without dependence on Pakistani cooperation, and contains large populations ethnically and linguistically suited to employment in the "war on terror", which would have made it an easier sell to strategic circles than Iraq.

The fact that we whacked Iraq before Iran indicates to me that our interests here were more populist in nature, dependent on using an old boogeyman that all Americans knew to hate for political gain while dipping into our pockets.


I don't pretend that we're seeing things BETTER than before 9/11, I'm saying HELL ON EARTH would have been just around the corner when Oil depletion made the West dependant on the Arab states.


The end of oil will not be Hell on Earth. The decision to remain on oil has been a conscious one. We no longer have to remain on it. The airforce is getting ready to start with a fusion drive on UAVs that will allow them to remain aloft for months on end. This same technology could be the end of fossil fuels in all large transports (I wouldn't recommend putting it in cars though since it could be used to make a very small neutron bomb, but things such as trains and commercial aircraft can be sufficiently tracked and controlled to make this practical.)

Long story short, if the powers that be in Western government and economics would adapt themselves to change and allow advancement, it would be patently impossible for oil to ever become more expensive per watt than nuclear power, since nuclear power can be used to generate power for battery storage or the production of hydrogen for fuel cells, etc.



Anybody doesn't believe me? then tell me WHY ELSE GO TO IRAQ LOSE SO MANY MEN, KILL SO MANY AFTER HUSSAIN IS GONE.

Because Americans percieved Iraq as being a "safe war" because we beat them so badly last time, Americans already hated Iraq, and therefore when a war was needed to smokescreen this raid on American tax revenues by Cheney's friends, Iraq was the most practical target. It actually could have been done to any country, in theory, since the target didn't actually have to have enough resources to make the balance sheets on the war add up.
Why not North Korea is obvious: 1. They have the bomb. 2. Americans have bad memories of war there. 3. The people gaining from this war are part of an economy that depends on decent relations with China.



it IS the Oil - the West runs almost everything from it and it's by-products. I'm not clever enought o quote statistics, just look at the map and the "Axis of Evil" is conveniently in the middle of the site of most of the worlds OIL.


All we've done is make our oil more expensive. It's not about oil. It's about money for the oil companies, or more specifically, for certain very powerful individuals who have a major stake in oil companies, among other things. The subtle difference here rests in the fact that it has nothing to do with "America" in the conventional sense. The people responsible for this are no more "America" than Saddam Hussein was "Iraq".



what do you do when no Country in the world can fight against it? Bring on "DESERT FART 3" subtitled "WAR ON EVIL IRAN< SYRIA AND ANY OTHER COUNTRY DEEMED BY THE GOOD USA TO BE EEEEEEEEEEVVVVVIIIILLLLLL.


drink less coffee.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Let's remember the USA didn't have permission from the UN to attack.

They got S. Hussain and all they're trying him on is something that happened years ago.

I am genuinly impressed by you guys, you know way more than I do about the facts. However they went into Iraq without permission no matter how many UN whatever details. They BROKE THE INTERNATIONAL LAW.

United Nations I don't have to tell you is important. This was put into place to stop Hittler types. Bush is this type.

Why is it possible that I an idiot, could predict Iraq, Iran, Syria would be the targets for US destruction?

I appreciate you guys posting I really do, but all I'm hearing from you is what I hear from Politicians: It simply doesn't make sense... Korea Has the Bomb? Iraq supposedly had the bomb

WMD fooled me ? and every Voting Person in the world knew this was trash when they spoon-fed it to us. Millions WORLD_WIDE protested that it was false. It WAS FALSE, but BUSH and BLAIR get away. At that moment it's no-longer about Iraq's threat to West, it's now about bringing Democracy to Iraq. As long as they are made to vote for the US Puppets, in rigged Elections.

If it's not about Oil, why are USA still in Iraq? Wy can't Iraq's Citizens vote for who they want without pressure? Why are some party's in Iraq given US funding and others not? Why are US people still giving their sons to War effort when Soldiers are leaking dissent from Iraq? Where are the Weapons Of Mass Destruction "PROVED" by USA to exist? Where is Iraq's money from the BILLIONS OF GALLONS OF OIL EVERY DAY GOING? WHERE IS THE OIL BEING EXPORTED TO? WHO IS THEN SOLD THE OIL?

USA is now the worst Country on EARTH for peace. Why are they not in AFRICA? do they have some "bad memories there?

Honestly I find it strange to UNBELIEVABLE that people can't see how OBVIOUS this is!!! Just stick a pin in a map on the Oil rich countries today, and you'l have USA Plan EXACTLY. EXPLAIN IT ANY WAY YOU WANT HOWEVER DETAILED YOU WANT, THE PLAN OF ATTACK COULD BE PREDICTED BY A CHIMPANZEE



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leif
USA is now the worst Country on EARTH for peace. Why are they not in AFRICA? do they have some "bad memories there?




Ever heard of Black Hawk Down?
How about a few years ago when Bush sent Marines into Liberia?



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 09:58 PM
link   

The simple face is we all know that the US is going after Oil in Syria, Iran Iraq. They have lost controll of Russia for the moment, and are always talking about the "War On Terror".


The USA never had control of Russia - in fact they have more control over Russia now than in the 60's, 70's and 80's.



This war on Terror is an excuse to get Oil to help the failing economy of the West, especially USA.


You clearly don't know how much it costs to fight a war.


The September 11th attacks were all done by people who resided in America and Great Britain. this is widely known. At the time the USA was in a slump, and heading for a possible repeat of the 1929 Depression if something wasn't done. 9/11 happened the USA looked like a victim, blamed Afghanistan, and later used this blame to incriminate Iraq - Weapons of Mass Destruction, which the WHOLE WORLD PROTESTED DIDN'T EXIST!


Evidence? I see no evidence that the USA was headed for a depression before 9/11. As for "blaming" Afghanistan... why not? THEIR government WAS afterall harbouring the man behind the attacks and refused to hand him over.

As for Iraq - it wasn't the whole world that protested their existance. Mainly the nations that had investments in Iraq were the protesters.


Now the USA tell us that the next Oil Rich Country (IRAN) is also EVIL They tell Us they are using Nuclear methods to create Weapons Of Mass Destruction


The USA doesn't tell us this - Iran themselves do. They have openly admitted to building nuclear material, have blueprints for the bomb and have threatened the total destruction of Israel more than once.


We can't do a thing I'm afraid, but these Men: Blair and Bush, will have to live with being sent to Hell.


Don't bring religion into a political argurment. Especially when your argument is full of flaws.



It stands that the ONLY Country EVER to use Nuclear Weapons Of Mass Destruction is, wait for it... THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Funny that isn't it. I thought they were the good guys!


As pointed out before - they used WMD's on a country that was using WMD's. Funny that isn't it? And for the record - do some research. Casualties of the bombs were less than would have been dealt if USA had invaded Japan. And let's face it - the only way Japan or the USA were going to surrender was by a horrible amount of deaths by either invasion or WMD's.


First of all the War on terror - why would the Middle East provoke the Single Greatest World Power in the Modern World?


Don't you remember Russian/Afghan conflict? The taliban successfully pushed Russia out of Afghanistan! They wanted to destroy the 'infadel' and with a victory with Russia on their plate they came after the USA. They knew that the USA would come to them if they attacked them. This was all highly stated in a documentary called "Al Queda - WWIII" which aired on the history channel about 3 months ago.


United Kingdom is still in debt to America after WWII. America sat back to see who was winning and used the situation to their advantage. Why didn't they enter the war EARLIER? How many Nazi Scientists did America Poach after WWII?


Because they weren't attacked mate. The USA entered the war when they were attacked by Japan at Pearl Harbour. That is the stupidest thing I have read in quite a long time.


Nuclear Weapons were not used by other Countries because the RISK and the possible COST TO ENVIRONMENT was considered too high. They thought ALL Countries would see this, they thought wrong.


The USA is also part of the Atmospheric testing ban treaty. The USA has NOT detonated a nuclear weapon above ground for quite some time. North Korea was the last country to test a nuke above ground.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Finally sbob, why are all the EVIL People in Oil Rich Countries? And Why provoke the USA???????????


It's plain to see that Iran is provoking the USA. Why? Because their leader is a fanatical islamist nut. He thinks destroying Israel will bring the return of his god and that his god will destroy the infadel. As for Afghanistan/Al Queada/Taliban provoking the USA - read my previous post.


Perhaps they have a death-wish. By the way I think Afghanistan is very goon for American Opium nowadays. GOOD WORK USA


Perhaps they did have a death wish - that way they go to heaven with their 72 virgins right? As for your opium argument - show me some proof that Afghan opium is being sold in the USA.


Anybody doesn't believe me? then tell me WHY ELSE GO TO IRAQ LOSE SO MANY MEN, KILL SO MANY AFTER HUSSAIN IS GONE. WHY IRAN. WHY NOT KOREA< AFRICA, Why work so hard in IRAQ when Millions are dying in AFRICA???


Why not N. Korea? Because of CHINA. In the Korean war the only reason the USA pulled out of N. Korea was because China had 200,000 troops sitting on the boarder. The US would loose many, many casualites with korea alone - and even more with China.



Let's remember the USA didn't have permission from the UN to attack.


Did Al Queda haver permission from the UN to attack the USA? No. Did Iraq have permission from the UN to attack Kuwait or Iran? No.


They got S. Hussain and all they're trying him on is something that happened years ago.


Just because it happened years ago - DOES NOT mean he can get away with it. You're saying that they should just let it slide because it happened so long ago? Sorry mate but that's just wrong. This man used WMD's (much like Japan) on Iran and Kuwait. He must be put to justice.


I am genuinly impressed by you guys, you know way more than I do about the facts. However they went into Iraq without permission no matter how many UN whatever details. They BROKE THE INTERNATIONAL LAW.


The went into Iraq because Iraq was breaking INTERNATIONAL LAW and had done so many times in the past. The UN doesn't have the balls to take action against any country - if they did the UN would be in North Korea now. Someone has to police the world and one day you'll be glad it's the USA.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 10:17 PM
link   

United Nations I don't have to tell you is important. This was put into place to stop Hittler types. Bush is this type.


Bush is not a Hitler type mate. Bush is not performing ethnic cleansing because of race. Bush has not killed 6,000,000 muslims. The United Nations is in place to stop tyrants and evil do'ers. They DO NOT do their job - this means someone has to do it. Luckilly, this is the USA.



Why is it possible that I an idiot, could predict Iraq, Iran, Syria would be the targets for US destruction?


You clearly are an idiot - but you didn't predict anything. Iraq - yes that has happened. Iran and Syria HAVE NOT been attacked by the USA? Iran is the one starting fights with the USA at the moment and Syria has nothing to do with it. I think most people could have predicted Iraq - the place was run by a maniac.



I appreciate you guys posting I really do, but all I'm hearing from you is what I hear from Politicians: It simply doesn't make sense... Korea Has the Bomb? Iraq supposedly had the bomb


No one ever said Iraq HAD a nuke. They said they were trying to get one and there is evidence of this. North Korea has the bomb - but there is not way of stopping them at this point in time. Their army is too large and they have China right next door.



WMD fooled me ? and every Voting Person in the world knew this was trash when they spoon-fed it to us. Millions WORLD_WIDE protested that it was false. It WAS FALSE, but BUSH and BLAIR get away. At that moment it's no-longer about Iraq's threat to West, it's now about bringing Democracy to Iraq. As long as they are made to vote for the US Puppets, in rigged Elections.


At the moment it's about training up Iraqi forces to take control of the country and eliminate the insurgency. Democracy has already been brought to Iraq. I think the USA would have better intel than civillian protestors - neither side can PROVE their argument. Eg. No one can prove Iraq had WMD's - no one can prove they didn't.



If it's not about Oil, why are USA still in Iraq? Wy can't Iraq's Citizens vote for who they want without pressure? Why are some party's in Iraq given US funding and others not? Why are US people still giving their sons to War effort when Soldiers are leaking dissent from Iraq? Where are the Weapons Of Mass Destruction "PROVED" by USA to exist? Where is Iraq's money from the BILLIONS OF GALLONS OF OIL EVERY DAY GOING? WHERE IS THE OIL BEING EXPORTED TO? WHO IS THEN SOLD THE OIL?


Iraqi exports of oil to the USA have DECREASED since the liberation of Iraq. The oil is being used to provide economic boost to the nation of Iraq. People are not 'giving' their sons to the war effort - people are joining the army under their own consent. As for funding - the USA funded some parties over others for one reason. SOME of the parties SUPPORTED terrorism! The bulk of WMD's have not been found - however some Sarin was found in a truck back in 2005 not to mention the weapons labs found. What about the 14 trucks that were tracked by the USA going from a weapons lab in Iraq to Syria just days before US troops entered Iraq.


USA is now the worst Country on EARTH for peace. Why are they not in AFRICA? do they have some "bad memories there?


Yes, Somalia where they lost 19 men and had to kill 20,000,000 to save their own lives. In the end no one benefitted from it.


Honestly I find it strange to UNBELIEVABLE that people can't see how OBVIOUS this is!!! Just stick a pin in a map on the Oil rich countries today, and you'l have USA Plan EXACTLY. EXPLAIN IT ANY WAY YOU WANT HOWEVER DETAILED YOU WANT, THE PLAN OF ATTACK COULD BE PREDICTED BY A CHIMPANZE


Yes it could be predicted by a chimp - like you. But as I have shown you before, you have not predicted it correctly. Your argument is flawed something extreme and you're running off hatred/rage rather than facts.



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 06:55 AM
link   
Look we're going to have to disagree...

I haven't seen anything posted to convince me otherwise.

The War does cost incalculable amounts I know. I'm suggesting that Oil sales are allready indirectly funding this War.

Bush is not a Hitler type? Why's he only after people in the Middle East then?

When I say US lost control of RUSSIA I probably made myself unclear: I was meaning that since the breakup of the Soviet Union they have had two Puppet Presidents, but during the Iraq War this changed and Putin broke this agreement.

I would like to believe that the USA is the place it used to be. To my eyes I think it's people are still to be looked up to. But the people running the country use a mask of WORLD Police, to take-over the countries they want, by placing pro American leaders in power. They did this even in Ukraine, fundingthe Orange Revolution and Victor Yushenko's rise to power over the pro Russian candidate.

You people are more informed than me in the facts, and I thank you for your information. However, I honestly think you can't see the wood for the trees.

All the best,

Leif.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join