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.

 

Ahmadinejad: US wants different opinions

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
You mean besides the men, money and arms they are sending into Iraq to kill the allied forces right?



Such action is justified since they have a foreign, imperialistic, military power conquering a country right next door.

Do you think that if Spain reconquered Mexico, we wouldn't send special forces in to wage irregular war? What makes it right when we do it, but wrong when someone else does?

Jon




posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Voxel
Such action is justified since they have a foreign, imperialistic, military power conquering a country right next door.

This statement from you shows where you have faulty logic.
The allied forces are NOT conquering Iraq. Nobody believes we are there to take over their country and make it part of the USA. Since the USA is such a great country we are doing what we normally do, which is helping the people rebuild their infrastructure and government and get back on their feet. We did the same thing in past wars. This is nothing new. Once we have finished helping the people, we leave and let them govern themselves.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
This statement from you shows where you have faulty logic.
The allied forces are NOT conquering Iraq. Nobody believes we are there to take over their country and make it part of the USA. Since the USA is such a great country we are doing what we normally do, which is helping the people rebuild their infrastructure and government and get back on their feet. We did the same thing in past wars. This is nothing new. Once we have finished helping the people, we leave and let them govern themselves.


I could only hope that one day another "great country" comes here, kills half the population of the United States, and destroys most of the vital civilian infrastructure. Then the benevolent invader would give out contracts to their own corporations to rebuild our infrastructure and "get us back on our feet."

Wouldn't that be great? Your entire genetic line destroyed. What a wonderful world it would be then.

Jon



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:52 PM
link   
He had better watch what he says. Chavez was lucky to get out of the country alive after he disrespected us Americans in NY last year. Allot of people were very angry about that. Not that they like Bush but they didn't like the lack of respect to insult our president after we let you in the country. The Iranian President is a Terrorist himself so he can be tossed in Jail if we feel like it.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by Sky watcher]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Voxel
I could only hope that one day another "great country" comes here, kills half the population of the United States, and destroys most of the vital civilian infrastructure. Then the benevolent invader would give out contracts to their own corporations to rebuild our infrastructure and "get us back on our feet."


Way to compare apples and a carrot.

You did not mention your faulty logic.

So do you think we are in Iraq permanently to take over their country and make it part of the U.S.?



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan

So do you think we are in Iraq permanently to take over their country and make it part of the U.S.?


Do you think that the US is going to just tear down all those bases in Iraq?

Do you think there won't be a US military presence in Iraq for many years to come?

Do you think that all those companies that are in Iraq that are funded by US backed contracts to rebuild the infrastructure will be leaving any time soon?

To answer the first part of your question, yes, the US is in Iraq for the long haul. As to the second part, no. Why would they want to make it part of the US when they can just occupy it.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789
Do you think that the US is going to just tear down all those bases in Iraq?

Probably all but one just like we have done in Germany and Japan.


Do you think there won't be a US military presence in Iraq for many years to come?

Of course! These things take time fix. Hell, we still have a presence in Germany and Japan.


Do you think that all those companies that are in Iraq that are funded by US backed contracts to rebuild the infrastructure will be leaving any time soon?

I don't know how long it will take. Once they are on their own feet, they will leave. Again, just like we did in Germany and Japan.


To answer the first part of your question, yes, the US is in Iraq for the long haul. As to the second part, no. Why would they want to make it part of the US when they can just occupy it.

Actually you are being disingenuous because you know that the U.S. is not their to take over their nation or occupy their country permanantly.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Voxel
Such action is justified since they have a foreign, imperialistic, military power conquering a country right next door.


Silly man, don't you know "conquer" is an antiquated word? The new lingo is "stabilize". Get acquainted with the newspeak.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by Beachcoma]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 



Probably all but one just like we have done in Germany and Japan.


So bases set up in countries that were fought and defeated in a war 62 years ago and are still staffed today isn't a permanent presence? It sounds like it to me. They aren't occupying forces any more but the military forces are still there.


Actually you are being disingenuous because you know that the U.S. is not their to take over their nation or occupy their country permanantly.


I would say I'm being anything but disingenuous. I answered your question to whether I thought the US military would be in Iraq permanently. I think they will. I don't see the US letting anyone else guard the Iraqi oil fields on there behalf. But I don't see them trying to annex Iraq into the US. That would be a bureaucratic nightmare. If you took my post to be deceitful, you misinterpeted it.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:46 PM
link   
delete

[edit on 23-9-2007 by C0le]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789
So bases set up in countries that were fought and defeated in a war 62 years ago and are still staffed today isn't a permanent presence? It sounds like it to me. They aren't occupying forces any more but the military forces are still there.

You are missing the most important fact. I guess its in a vain attempt to prop up your faulty logic. Yes of course we still have bases there but we are not there in an attempt to control and conquor them. In fact, most want us there to provide stabilization and peace. If they really wanted us out we would leave just like in Hong Kong I think. Not sure if it was Hong Kong but it happened recently and I cannot remember where at the moment.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan

Originally posted by Voxel
Such action is justified since they have a foreign, imperialistic, military power conquering a country right next door.

This statement from you shows where you have faulty logic.
The allied forces are NOT conquering Iraq. Nobody believes we are there to take over their country and make it part of the USA. Since the USA is such a great country we are doing what we normally do, which is helping the people rebuild their infrastructure and government and get back on their feet. We did the same thing in past wars. This is nothing new. Once we have finished helping the people, we leave and let them govern themselves.


That is a complete and utter lie. This government could give two 2 #s about Iraq and their people. The only reason we are there is because of oil, and it's big brother, money. That is the ONLY thing this administration cares about, whatever gives them another dollar in their pocket they will do.

You don't think that if Russia or China invaded this country we would not retaliate by our own means? Every man in this country would not just lie down and surrender while an invading force seized everything they knew and began oppression. They would not lie down while their land was being destroyed, women raped, and children killed like dogs.

You need to stop being so close minded and realize the reality of the situation. You think Iran is the enemy when that is far from the truth. You are a perfect product of American propaganda.

Next time, try quoting the rest of Voxel's message. There was an important issue to address there.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by Mindzi]



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Sheer propaganda, there's a LOT of people that don't want Ajama(whateverhis nameis) words to get out there. I questioned 2 parts of the linked source.

1- The Iraqi/Irani war was started by US supported Iraq. Yet this article brings up "casualty reports". That's worth noting imo. It doesn't mention involvement and who did what. Sure points a finger at Iran though


2- And I LOVE this one, "The parade also featured the Ghadr missile, which has a range of 1,120 miles, capable of reaching Israel."

Oh, that's going to send EVERY Israeli supporter into a fervor, whether it's true or not.

This is a propaganda piece to make sure the fewest people hear what, I can't pronounce his name(sorry, I can't), will hear it.



1. The U.S. didn't begin supporting Iraq in the war until 5 years after it had begun, in 1985.

2. That is the correct range of the missle, and I'd be willing to bet it was with the explicit purpose of poking a finger in Israels eye.

3. No propaganda is really nescessary to get people to ignore him. He's a nut.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 



In fact, most want us there to provide stabilization and peace


Are you saying that the US presence in Japan and Germany are there today to provide stability and peace? I glean from this that you believe that these two countries couldn't do these things themselves. If I'm wrong my apologies.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mindzi
That is a complete and utter lie.

You forgot to add, IYO.



This government could give two 2 #s about Iraq and their people. The only reason we are there is because of oil, and it's big brother, money. That is the ONLY thing this administration cares about, whatever gives them another dollar in their pocket they will do.

Again, thats your opinion. Regardess of why you think we are there now, history shows us what we will do. We are not there to take over their country and we will leave when the job is done except for a base of course to keep the peace just like in past wars.


You need to stop being so close minded and realize the reality of the situation. You think Iran is the enemy when that is far from the truth. You are a perfect product of American propaganda.

And you need to stop being swayed by the liberal propaganda and think for yourself once and a while and stop believing the enemies propaganda over the good guys which of course is the U.S.



Next time, try quoting the rest of Voxel's message. There was an important issue to address there.

Thanks for trying to tell me what to do but I will quote what I think is relevant. Thank you very much.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan



Again, thats your opinion. Regardess of why you think we are there now, history shows us what we will do. We are not there to take over their country and we will leave when the job is done except for a base of course to keep the peace just like in past wars.


So, you give the money makers the benefit of the doubt, that's your first problem.


And you need to stop being swayed by the liberal propaganda and think for yourself once and a while and stop believing the enemies propaganda over the good guys which of course is the U.S.


The good guys huh. Liberal propaganda? If you were smart, you would realize conservatives and liberals are two sides to the same coin. At the core of their being they do not oppose each other, for they belong to the same establishment. The only reason for the existence of political parties is to separate the people and turn them against each other. You are the one who does not think for himself. Here, let me ask a simple question for you, who do you think is more easily controllable, a separated populace, or a united populace? Hopefully your intelligence comes to the correct answer. The enemy is right here in the United States, and they occupy every branch of government.


Thanks for trying to tell me what to do but I will quote what I think is relevant. Thank you very much.


How is Voxel's post of "Do you think that if Spain reconquered Mexico, we wouldn't send special forces in to wage irregular war? What makes it right when we do it, but wrong when someone else does?" not relevant to the situation? So you give in blindly to what this government tells you without thinking logically? You need to address this issue, I would like to see your "enlightened" viewpoint of it. What makes it right for the United States and Israel to have nuclear weapons when we ban, shun, and impose sanctions on other countries who wish for the same capabilities?

That's what I thought.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
We are not there to take over their country and we will leave when the job is done except for a base of course to keep the peace just like in past wars.


By that he means once there's not much more return on investment. It's all about stability anyway, isn't it? Once it's no longer of American interests then the job is done.

*Bolded terms may require translation from here



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
By that he means once there's not much more return on investment. It's all about stability anyway, isn't it? Once it's no longer of American interests then the job is done.


Thats not what I mean and please don't attempt to speak for me.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Voxel
[Such action is justified since they have a foreign, imperialistic, military power conquering a country right next door.

Do you think that if Spain reconquered Mexico, we wouldn't send special forces in to wage irregular war? What makes it right when we do it, but wrong when someone else does?

Jon


I guess your definition of the word “conquering” is a little different than mine for I get the impression that you meant it to mean we want to own that country. Here is the interesting part, if Iran didn’t get involved and the Iraqi people were able to come together and actually form a central government of their choosing we would be long gone. That doesn’t sound like an imperialistic power conquering. Ask the Iraqi people right now if they want us out…

Iran’s purpose is to keep the chaos going in the hopes we leave the country ill-equipped and unprepared for them to do their own little conquering. Their other purpose is to conquer Israel with the hopes the US stays out of it. Please don’t paint your own country as an evil power and then defend a country like Iran. I guess it is too bad we are not like them otherwise we most likely be over 100 states right now if we were.



posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789

Are you saying that the US presence in Japan and Germany are there today to provide stability and peace? I glean from this that you believe that these two countries couldn't do these things themselves. If I'm wrong my apologies.


Well if I remember right those two countries tried to take over the world and lost the war to us. Now most other countries would just kill half the population and set up their own controlling government much like what they wanted to do, but no we only (at their approval) put some bases there to continue the war on communism. Do you really think we have any influence to how they run their countries? I really do not get your point you are trying to prove.

[edit on 23-9-2007 by Xtrozero]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join