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.

 

BREAKING NEWS: Scuds found on North Korean ship

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 11:04 AM
link   

posted by Dakmarid
I'm probably more anti-UK than anti-US, if you'd like the truth, they're the ones who carved everything up into countries then let it go to hell


Damn right. British colonialism the last 500 years has sucked most of these troublesome countries dry. That's where this presnt situation can really be traced to.
Why does this always seem this fact always go unnoticed ?

[Edited on 12-12-2002 by mad scientist]




posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 11:09 AM
link   
time.
for example, British colonialism can be seen as a continuation of the work done by the romans.....so presumably they're responsible for the present troubles in the middle east.

I don't think that anyones going to argue that colonial britain was a particularly pleasant moment in our history though.



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 11:16 AM
link   
You are correct, sir. But that's an easy one. Let's see you take a stand on something difficult.

And oh, by the way, I never said your OPINION's needed validation. I said the things you present as FACT do. Again, there's an example of twisting other's words to suit your needs...bad idea...too easy to defend...



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 11:22 AM
link   
There are more Right Wingers online. Typically, you have more action oriented people in the Center and Left of Center - they're out there doing something as opposed to the angry-white-man-syndrome; just do a tally of the anti-war marchers versus the pro-war marchers. Many of their core issues revolve around subjects you don't bring up in polite company or the workplace - religion, affirmative action/race issues, jingoism - so the online forums are where they thrive. Just take a clinical eye to how the 'pack mentality' comes to fore, doing the 'digital high five' for talking points made by one that echo their core issues. While on the Center-left, you'll have folks agree, but hold each other accountable for accuracy or lack of credibility.
There is also an anger that flairs up from the 'all or nothing' mindset - you either must adopt the whole package or be labeled in the opposition because you don't. Apply that clinical eye again to see the frequency of how opposing view points are painted as the polar opposite ( Commie v Right Wing, Dem v Repub, Anti everything v Pro-USA).
Another variable to this debate is irrational fear - a fear that makes a boxed in street gang leader whose military is weaker than the last time we faced him into a clear & present danger that must be dispatched post haste. An irrational fear that allows suspension of personal rights in the name of security against terror - yet, it give no security and is inapplicable to terror interdiction.
I'm a NY'er, born & raised, it took out my business, some associates and completely disrupted my life. But, I don't see where that warranted the response we came with ( should have been quite & tactical - anyone can turn on CNN & see the Armada coming, but come in the night and decimate their clan and no one will function right anymore) and I do see ALL THAT IS BEING SHUFFLED IN UNDER THE RADAR in the name of security and war.
It served it's primary goal of distracting the voter in our mid term elections, and now it's a fable that must be brought to life to warrant the ramp up and secure the secondary benefit - usurping the resources of a sovereign nation for control by interests loyal to the West. That it takes the form of heated discussion here as it is being debated everywhere, serves the purpose of distraction needed to cover the action.



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 11:28 AM
link   
Sorry to hear about your business.

any way thanks, that post sort of sums up my feelings on this phenomenon, its refreshing to hear it coming from somone who was actually caught up in the attack but wasn't blinded to the policys and actions sweapt in under the blanket of patriotism and jingoistic rhetoric.



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 11:30 AM
link   
While everyone is talking about the interception of a ship that was tracked for,How long?And the US government releases a strategy document on how the Military may use Nuclear weapons maybe even pre-emptively(sabre rattling).Yet another report is released basically stating that the attacks on 9/11 should have been avoidable and criticising the US administration.

Well Gentlemen,I think we all can be accused of taking our eye off the ball here.Myself included.



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795

NO ONE should have those weapons. Period.


I'll quote only this statement. It seems that you don't know it, but with those WMD, we didn't have ANy wars between West & East.

Those WMD helped us to have peace since more than 50 years. Why ? Because both parts ( NATO & Varsaw Pact ) weren't enough crazy to use them.

The problem is comming only when some rogues states have those WMD.

On the other hand, you didn't tell us why you think that it's better for them to buy those weapon ? Me, I think they should buy foods an other wealth for their starving peoples. What's wrong with this ?



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by John bull 1
While everyone is talking about the interception of a ship that was tracked for,How long?And the US government releases a strategy document on how the Military may use Nuclear weapons maybe even pre-emptively(sabre rattling).Yet another report is released basically stating that the attacks on 9/11 should have been avoidable and criticising the US administration.

Well Gentlemen,I think we all can be accused of taking our eye off the ball here.Myself included.


I'm on it! I just haven't written up a post yet. Every Terror warning in the US has been issued to act as 'cover' for something else, every piece of 'news' that seems to not have legs or you wonder why if it happened how many days ago , why do we hear of it now? It's for cover.
Remeber that thread on the fella being blown up by the drone? Our mid term elections were 11/5......check the dates on when that news 'broke'.........



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bout Time


I'm on it! I just haven't written up a post yet. Every Terror warning in the US has been issued to act as 'cover' for something else, every piece of 'news' that seems to not have legs or you wonder why if it happened how many days ago , why do we hear of it now? It's for cover.
Remeber that thread on the fella being blown up by the drone? Our mid term elections were 11/5......check the dates on when that news 'broke'.........


Yeah, BT, EVERYTHING is a cover up. EVERYTHING is a conspiracy by the government to cover something up. Nothing ever just happesn...yeah...right...hey...didn't they make a movie about you?



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 12:10 PM
link   
"I'll quote only this statement. It seems that you don't know it, but with those WMD, we didn't have ANy wars between West & East."

Without those WMD we can also have no wars. Peace means, you DON'T have weapons of any sort aimed at each other.

"Those WMD helped us to have peace since more than 50 years. Why ? Because both parts ( NATO & Varsaw Pact ) weren't enough crazy to use them."

That is not real peace. Real peace is this:

4 a : a state or period of mutual concord between governments b : a pact or agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity (Merriam-Webster)

Did this apply to the U.S. and Russia??? No. The hostility between them was alive and well during the cold war. So no peace.


"The problem is comming only when some rogues states have those WMD."

The problem is when anyone has WMD. As you can see by what they're called they're DESIGNED for mass destruction, which is not a good intention.

"On the other hand, you didn't tell us why you think that it's better for them to buy those weapon ? Me, I think they should buy foods an other wealth for their starving peoples. What's wrong with this ?"


Do you mean what I said here???

"And you're right about the ballistic missiles. They should've spent their money much better. Just like the U.S. should"

Apparently you didn't understand it well. I mean exactly what you think. They should've used that money on food, clothing and medical supplies. And that's EXACTLY what the U.S. should do, as they still have poverty and homeless people etc...



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795


Without those WMD we can also have no wars. Peace means, you DON'T have weapons of any sort aimed at each other.




If you think for one second that getting rid of all WmD's will result in some sort of utopian peace, you are sadly mistaken...



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Stop assuming what I think. I said we can ALSO have peace without WMD, don't think that I said that we will automatically have peace without WMD.


[Edited on 12-12-2002 by TheBandit795]



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Affirmative Reaction

Originally posted by Bout Time


I'm on it! I just haven't written up a post yet. Every Terror warning in the US has been issued to act as 'cover' for something else, every piece of 'news' that seems to not have legs or you wonder why if it happened how many days ago , why do we hear of it now? It's for cover.
Remeber that thread on the fella being blown up by the drone? Our mid term elections were 11/5......check the dates on when that news 'broke'.........


Yeah, BT, EVERYTHING is a cover up. EVERYTHING is a conspiracy by the government to cover something up. Nothing ever just happesn...yeah...right...hey...didn't they make a movie about you?


Gladiator? Or American Gigilo?


No A-R, those weren't even cover ups, but well timed releases of 'news' to serve the purpose of the US peoples magnificently small attention span - distaction from something else.

"He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism."

"His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere."

"This guy is a joke."

"Sleazy and contemptible."

- US Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Butler

www.sacbee.com...



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bout Time
Gladiator? Or American Gigilo?


No A-R, those weren't even cover ups, but well timed releases of 'news' to serve the purpose of the US peoples magnificently small attention span - distaction from something else.

"He did nothing to warn the American people because he needed this war on terrorism."

"His daddy had Saddam and he needed Osama. His presidency was going nowhere."

"This guy is a joke."

"Sleazy and contemptible."

- US Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Butler

www.sacbee.com...




Actually, I was refering to the movie"Conspiracy Theory" with Mel Gibson.

Yes, just remember, GWB has the power to manipulate ALL news agencies in the world to release whatever he wants whenever he wants. Yup...believe it, BT says it's true.

Oh, BTW, your link goes nowhere...imagine that...



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 12:58 PM
link   
I think what scares most people about GWB is that he's a man of action. We can sit here and judge him all we want, but history will be the ultimate decider. I for believe history will look favourably on GWB.
Anyway, he's got smart people whispering in his ear.



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
I think what scares most people about GWB is that he's a man of action. We can sit here and judge him all we want, but history will be the ultimate decider. I for believe history will look favourably on GWB.
Anyway, he's got smart people whispering in his ear.


I agree whole heartedly. If Al Bore had been in office on September 11th, NOTHING would have been done...he'd be too busy hugging trees and saving minnows to care about a measly 3000 dead Americans...



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 01:26 PM
link   
I seem to remeber terrorist attacks before Bush was in office,were they cover ups to?And I will be willing to bet that there will be more after Bush.I don't think people pay attention to the warning's anymore,we just assume there is a threat now.



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 01:33 PM
link   
What HAS been done?
First, It would not have happened since Gore would have followed Hart/Rudman's strongly suggested Airline Security measures, whereas Bush, scrapped them completely saying Cheney would head a special task force....that didn't meet until AFTER 9/11.

We liberated Afgannistan? Oh really. Besides the captol city, the rest of the country is controlled by war lords, they have Taliban & Al Qeda sneeking back into the country because we didn't pursue them into the Pakistan mountains ( needed that Islamic dictator for the pipeline ,you know, can't piss off the fundamentalists) and when we did, it wasn't our best-of-breed Special Ops or other forces...it was some rag tag Northern Alliance group on horseback...freakin' horseback!
They got their VP capped and the president is only alive because OUR Forces are protecting him.

Yeah, resounding victory in Afganistan we got there, must be why we wrapped up & moved it to Iraq, no?

Gore never would have called off all investigations into ANYTHING Saudi, which Bush did, as soon as he 'took' office. Nor would he have ignored memo's from agents saying that Arabs are taking flight lesson - not wanting to learn how to land, just fly, since there was already record of planes-as-weapons posted by security reports far pre-dating 9/11. Gore would have kept all FISA warrants being allowed, while Ashcroft didn't allow a one. You know FISA? The warrant type that got Mohammed Atta's laptop and found mention of planes as weapons plans? Gore would have kept flying the drone with OBL's name on it, he would have kept the groups already deployed there and, I believe, he would never had allowed the stand down of fighter jet interception which is standard operating procedure that for SOME REASON was not followed on 9/11. When did the first jet scramble...45 minutes later!?!

The 'talent' that he has whispering in his ear are retreads from the Nixon/Ford/Reagan/Bush presidencies....no original thinkers and no one under 60...all cold war era thinkers and strategists hopelessly outflanked in the modern era. The one decent advisor he has, Powell, is treated like a red head stepchild ( means he's ignored for the non-Yanks
)
Bush is a man of polls, then action. The only time it's action first is when it serves his agenda.
This coward also ran all over the freaking country on 9/11, did not get on the air to speak to the American people anywhere near soon enough and when he did, STILL could not draw up decent sincerity to speak from anything but a script.
He's illegitamate, un qualified and dangerous to my country.
Yes I'm American, a vet, a business owner and NOT a Democrat!

And A-F, I know it's a default to go Repub when you're in the military, for the perceived largasse from their military spending. But truth be told, look at the outsourcing that's going rampant.....your moneyis going to Kellog Brown & Root.



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
I think what scares most people about GWB is that he's a man of action. We can sit here and judge him all we want, but history will be the ultimate decider. I for believe history will look favourably on GWB.
Anyway, he's got smart people whispering in his ear.


I agree 100% also. The 'Bush Doctrine' will be written about in history books. Al Gore wouldn't have done anything after 9/11. He had 8 years to do something about terrorists - and chose to do nothing after several terror attacks such as the USS Cole, the 1st trade center attacks, and Khobar towers bombing. Plus there's ample evidence that suggests that administration passed up a chance to get UBL from the Sudanese. Then, Gore has the audacity to criticize how President Bush is conducting the war on terror. How dare he! Terrorism flourished under Gores watch.


[Edited on 12-12-2002 by Bob88]



posted on Dec, 12 2002 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Yes, the Bush Doctrine, or we'll-attack -you-first-without-proof-if-we-want-to, will go down in history as completely stupid if not insane.
Gore was VP for 8 years, but please start that forum "What did Clinton do to fight Terrorism", I'll welcome it. Gore's 'audacity' is the same as yours, it's called free speech, and while I know the neo-fascists in control of my government would prefer it not to be the case, it still exists!
Plus I think his Intel is a hell of allot better than yours, no?

For the last time ( you throw this canard out there whenever you think no one is watching ) It was a three team deal : US - Sudan_ Saudi Arabia....Saudi Arabia put the kabash on it, no one refused the scumbags capture.

Side note: Estagon et al - what is the American version of francophile?




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join