Blair suspects Iran's hand in Iraq attacks - That was quick!

Originally posted by selfless
The shadow government does not own me

The shadow people have formed a government? Are they going to attack? I new those little guys were up to no good. I mean com on! Every time you turn to look at one they just disappear.

Originally posted by selfless
There shouldn't be any wars at all but it's clear what is really going on.

If a war comes to my door i will stand there and not contribute to it.

The shadow government does not own me, i do not exist to them and they don't exist to me.

They don't control me, they are nothingness.

With out the people they could not do anything, it's us who holds the power to not contribute to their goals.

Some would argue that if you have any form of debt that yes indeed they do "control" you. But that could be a whole other thread.

Originally posted by WOGIT

Some would argue that if you have any form of debt that yes indeed they do "control" you. But that could be a whole other thread.

No, i don't. and no, they really don't.

Originally posted by cavscout

Originally posted by selfless
The shadow government does not own me

The shadow people have formed a government? Are they going to attack? I new those little guys were up to no good. I mean com on! Every time you turn to look at one they just disappear.

Would you prefer the term, secret government?

This has me woundering what MR Blair's thought are on this seeing as how the OP was about him and he , last time I checked was in government. He always looked a bit shady to me.

lol, accept their good faith? because theyre such good guys, yea they let the "Hostages" go so now they can be our friends.
Interesting word, "hostages"
So all a rogue country has to do to get on your good side is kidnap some of your people, have the female captive write some letters telling her family how good the food is and then release them?

[edit on 6-4-2007 by Kr0n0s]

The only propaganda I have seen is coming from my country (USA) and the British.

Originally posted by ferretman2
Iran didn't release the brits on good faith..........Iran had kidnapped them and they were hostages. Since Iran is not 'at war' with Britian or the US (yet....) they did the only thing they could to get out of a bad situation. I like the way you buy into Iran's proproganda........

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

Originally posted by Steel Penguin
Agit8dchop, you make the British government out to be weak on one thread and say they are being aggressive on another, make your mind up?
[edit on 5-4-2007 by Steel Penguin]

No, they arent weak. They did the only thing they could.
It appears weak,but they have to follow the rules, which unfortunately are weak.

Agressive?
I dont call them accusing Iran aggresive, I call it stupid.

They showed good will by releasing the british, and immediately your on the offensive agian, when there's STILL no proof of Iranian involvment.

What do you mean by "have to follow the rules, which unfortunately are weak"?....who's rules?

Agit8dChop is in a world all his own.....Everything is fine and dandy in his world...except

Britian,Israel, United States are the bad guys in the world.

Iran,Syria,Iraq are great peaceful nations.
Only the NATO and Allied Nations have Nukes
Republicans are bad
Democrats/Liberals are good (I could of missed a post of his pig-crap)
United States is fighting Illegal Wars (Although is was oked by The House and Senate by both the Dems(which now moved against it) and Repubs
American Agenda are bad
Americans should be dead
Terrorist should live and rule


I believe this is most of Agit8dChop agenda....*snip*

Mod Note: Terms & Conditions Of Use – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: Please Review the Following Link: Courtesy Is Mandatory

Mod Note: WOT Posting Conduct – Please Review Link.










[edit on 9-4-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by Steel Penguin
What do you mean by "have to follow the rules, which unfortunately are weak"?....who's rules?

Rules of engagement.
If this was a real war, where the safety and prosperity of the west was in danger, we'd of just bombed the crap outta them.
The public can handle collateral damage and reports coming out of bombed out cities, so long as the threat to them is real, and there way of life is threatneed.
But the terrorist threat has always been around, and sept11 just becomes more suspicous by the day.

IE Germany & Japan.
That was a real fight for survival.
This war, is blown that far out of proportion.

Originally posted by KonigKaos
Agit8dChop is in a world all his own.....Everything is fine and dandy in his world...except

If everything was fine and dandy i wouldnt be on here complaining about the needless death of civilians.

Britian,Israel, United States are the bad guys in the world.

They were the great guys, and there citizens for the most part are great people.
Its unfortunate they are led by corporate-manipulated-greed induced psychopaths.

Iran,Syria,Iraq are great peaceful nations.

Far from it, but we made sure that Iraq never even has the chance of being a peaceful nation but.
And as for Syria and Iran, well they havent exactly invaded and occupied anyone have they... They deserve to be brought down a peg or two, but to think we should just go and bomb them is pretty deluded.

Only the NATO and Allied Nations have Nukes

could you explain that one? Im a little lost to what the heck your on about with that line.

Republicans are bad
Democrats/Liberals are good (I could of missed a post of his pig-crap)

politicans in general are scum.
I dont pretend to favour one over the other.
Unfortunately, It wasnt the DEMS who invaded Iraq, and it wasnt the dems whom lied to significantly over 911 and Iraq either. so that holds them in slighty higher esteem in my mind.
Especially when pelosi is in Syria trying to talk to the counterparts, instead of Geroge's tactic if refusing talks, and bombing.

United States is fighting Illegal Wars (Although is was oked by The House and Senate by both the Dems(which now moved against it) and Repubs

Just because the USA government and its aspects say the war is legal doesnt mean a thing.
Nazi Germany declared there wars LEGAL too, and look how that turned out.
If thats your only basis for saying ' the wars legal ' then you really have some reading to catch up on.

American Agenda are bad
Americans should be dead
Terrorist should live and rule

The American Agenda is bad,
I never said Americans should be dead, and terrorists are bad.
But I wouldnt class regular Iraqi's who have lost everything and want revenge terrorists. After all, they are fighting the occupier in their home land.
This makes the west the terrorist.

I believe this is most of Agit8dChop agenda....*snip*

Your thread was nothing but one long personal insult.
Stick to the topic or dont post.

[edit on 8-4-2007 by Agit8dChop]

[edit on 8-4-2007 by Agit8dChop]

[edit on 8-4-2007 by Agit8dChop]

[edit on 9-4-2007 by DontTreadOnMe]

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

Originally posted by Steel Penguin
What do you mean by "have to follow the rules, which unfortunately are weak"?....who's rules?

Rules of engagement.
If this was a real war, where the safety and prosperity of the west was in danger, we'd of just bombed the crap outta them.
The public can handle collateral damage and reports coming out of bombed out cities, so long as the threat to them is real, and there way of life is threatneed.
But the terrorist threat has always been around, and sept11 just becomes more suspicous by the day.

IE Germany & Japan.
That was a real fight for survival.
This war, is blown that far out of proportion.

I think you under-estimate peoples ability to look at the bigger picture and to realise that international politics is extremely complicated. Your right, terrorists have always been around, that's why most people realise the problems with Iran goes alot further back then 9/11 and it's ramifications.

Do you really think that people have to feel in imminent danger before agreeing to military force? Do you honestly believe that people can't see the benefits of military action to thwart a future problem?

So by Agits reasoning.......we see that there is a threat from gobal terrorism but we should wait until the terrorists kill enough inncocent people before reacting.

Kinda like the way German and Japan were handled in WWII.

Just how many 9/11's should America experience before reacting?

Ferretman...I agree with your comment....


Alot of people on this board want to see Americans,Israels,Europeans dead..I dont know why, but they just do. I really think this is just a propoganda machine for the Islamic Jihad and other Anti-Coalition bullcrap!

Honestly you can all bitch as to whos right but in all reality WE will never know..... none of us were there so how can we be certian. Idk but when i was little we would play the Telephone game...you all know how that ends up.

How many 9/11's does america need? well think what its like being a citizen in Iraq and all of a sudden the whole town lights up and explodes as we launched our cruise missles the opening strike. Think how many civillian deaths we have caused by accident? I mean come on people
Quit looking at just one side.

WE shouldnt be in Iraq any longer we got what we wanted done.

Reading some of the posts on this board how Iran wants to destroy Israel. Iran isnt stupid they just want to flex tehre power and be done with it. Why should we be the world cops. We need to keep our noses out of others business?

This thread doesnt even really make any sense.