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.

 

John McCain: "There's going to be other wars, I am sorry to tell you"

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:20 AM
link   

John McCain: "There's going to be other wars, I am sorry to tell you"


rawstory.com

Video: On a CNN video, John McCain is talking about the situation at Walter Reed, and then makes this comment.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:20 AM
link   
So what is he talking about? Is he speaking in general or he is referring to the situation in Iran or Pakistan?

The fact that he is the ranking minority member of the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services doesn't help any here. What does he know that he is not telling us? How does he know there are going to be other wars? And what's this "I'm sorry to tell you...?"

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Would it not be nice if a candidate would say when I am elected my goal is to have world peace. Now I relize we live in the real world but would'nt it be wonderful to here that out of a politicians mouth. Rik Riley



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
So what is he talking about? Is he speaking in general or he is referring to the situation in Iran or Pakistan?

The fact that he is the ranking minority member of the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services doesn't help any here. What does he know that he is not telling us? How does he know there are going to be other wars? And what's this "I'm sorry to tell you...?"


Apparently, there are things more important than democracy to a president, like making war.
He 'knows' there will be wars and he 'knows' the american public will support them because the hawks control the press. This man is a dangerous fascist and illuminatus.




[edit on 28-1-2008 by ergoli]



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican


So what is he talking about? Is he speaking in general or he is referring to the situation in Iran or Pakistan?

The fact that he is the ranking minority member of the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services doesn't help any here. What does he know that he is not telling us? How does he know there are going to be other wars? And what's this "I'm sorry to tell you...?"

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


Man has been warring with man since the beginning of time...Its not going to change..



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:48 AM
link   
The truth of the matter is that "there are going to be other wars". It's as simple as that. One does not have to be a psychic to make this statement. It's just a bit of basic foresight. Even if the war in Iraq and Afghanistan were to come to an end...it's a safe, albeit regrettable, statement to make.

As far as McCain "knowing something we don't": I am certain that he does, but I don't think that he would be revealing any secrets just to grab a few votes. McCain is one politico who seems to shoot from the hip and he was simply stating what can only be described as a 'likely truth'. There will, indeed, be other wars.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:48 AM
link   
It's just the way says it that bothers me. It is just so "matter of fact," like he really knows something that he is not telling us. It wasn't stated in such a way that led me to believe he was speaking in general.

Lookout. The situation in the ME may erupt very soon. If Israel does launch tactical nukes into Iran, I personally believe it could escalate into a situation that is much much worse.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:50 AM
link   
It is kind of like predicting that the sun is going to come up tomorrow. There has never been world peace and realistically, there probably never will be. Especially with the way the world is heading, I don't see some drastic change that would suddenly stop it all.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:52 AM
link   


Man has been warring with man since the beginning of time...Its not going to change..


Ever since the advent of language, diplomacy and international law, warring is not a fatality. Wars occur not out of 'historical need', but of very precise reasons. WW2 occured because UK made Hitler the big guy, the Iraq war because american press dares not question belligerent rhetoric from the white house. There are also examples of countries having been peaceful for several centuries, like Iran.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   
This is what the Republican voters want - someone who kill off our troops in senseless wars so the fatasses can whoop with delight at the idea of "kicking ass" from the safety of their double-wides.

Watch his numbers swell after this comment, and tell me I'm wrong. Republicans LOVE war, so long as they're not the ones fighting 'em.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
It's just the way says it that bothers me. It is just so "matter of fact," like he really knows something that he is not telling us. It wasn't stated in such a way that led me to believe he was speaking in general.


John McCain does seem to be rather nonchalant in the way he says things. Perhaps it's part of his persona as a "straight-shooter" (sic)? But, to be honest, there will be other wars. It's as simple as that. It would be nice to think that there will never be any more conflicts.....someday.....but it sure doesn't look like this scenario will happen anytime soon.



Lookout. The situation in the ME may erupt very soon. If Israel does launch tactical nukes into Iran, I personally believe it could escalate into a situation that is much much worse.


Perhaps, McCain was thinking about the very same situation you just mentioned. Yep....if Israel or, for that matter, anyone launched tactical nukes into Iran or anywhere things would definitely get worse. If anything, this is an understatement.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
This is what the Republican voters want - someone who kill off our troops in senseless wars so the fatasses can whoop with delight at the idea of "kicking ass" from the safety of their double-wides.

Watch his numbers swell after this comment, and tell me I'm wrong. Republicans LOVE war, so long as they're not the ones fighting 'em.


Bushes current approval ratings on Iraq by republicans state the contrary.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
This is what the Republican voters want - someone who kill off our troops in senseless wars so the fatasses can whoop with delight at the idea of "kicking ass" from the safety of their double-wides.

Watch his numbers swell after this comment, and tell me I'm wrong. Republicans LOVE war, so long as they're not the ones fighting 'em.


They need in fact to be beaten and humiliated in boot camps to get their thinking straight.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


I don't think so, because its not unnecessarily so.
With no Nam it would be 1944 to 2001 without major warfare.

And who wanted Nam. They got it somehow.

How did the richest man alive, the Czar of Russia get killed and
wiped out by a ragamuffin mob. The muffins were paid more
than the Czars armies.

If the Czar spent wisely the WWI and WWII might never have happened.

So Mac Pain is wrong.
Tell him to learn from truth in the conspiracy theorists.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:58 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


There is a strong possibility that Israel will strike this year before the U.S. elections in fear that the democrates will be elected into office. This will be their last ditch effort to strike Iran regaurdless what the U.S. thinks at the time. Rik Riley



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by benevolent tyrant
 


No no, really bt, watch that video again. He says it with such certainty. I swear, it sounds imminent rather than general. I have to disagree that it was just his general demeanor in this case. But believe me, I'd love for you to be right. Like we really need another war. Jesus.



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
Republicans LOVE war, so long as they're not the ones fighting 'em.


Not ALL republicans love war. The original platform included a humble foreign policy. Unfortunately it seems the majority of republicans today are willing to throw away conservatism for supporting these mindless wars



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ergoli

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
So what is he talking about? Is he speaking in general or he is referring to the situation in Iran or Pakistan?

The fact that he is the ranking minority member of the United States Senate Committee on Armed Services doesn't help any here. What does he know that he is not telling us? How does he know there are going to be other wars? And what's this "I'm sorry to tell you...?"


Apparently, there are things more important than democracy to a president, like making war.
He 'knows' there will be wars and he 'knows' the american public will support them because the hawks control the press. This man is a dangerous fascist and illuminatus.




[edit on 28-1-2008 by ergoli]


Jeez I hear the liberals control the press by Republicans and Democrats say the opposite.

Could it be POSSIBLE the man is just stating the truth? That the grim reality is there have always been wars and there always will be? Could it be the guy if he was "illuminati" that he wouldn't be "hinting" at things like more war because statements like that might hurt his chances and that he was just speaking his mind. Could it be POSSIBLE that you could listen to things like this without jumping to conclusions that he must be this or that belonging to this secret society or that one.

Does it ever occur to you that maybe, just maybe someone just asked a question and he just answered it as honestly as he could?

- Con



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by ergoli


Man has been warring with man since the beginning of time...Its not going to change..


There are also examples of countries having been peaceful for several centuries, like Iran.



You would think that the Iraq / Iran war of 1980 would beg to differ. They may not have started it, but they have been far from the peaceful utopia that you are painting them as. It is also no secret that they are supporting the war in Iraq as well as supporting terrorism against Israel. I don't care to debate who is right or wrong, those acts alone should disqualify them from being labeled as "peaceful for several centuries".



posted on Jan, 28 2008 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Karlhungis

Originally posted by ergoli


Man has been warring with man since the beginning of time...Its not going to change..


There are also examples of countries having been peaceful for several centuries, like Iran.



You would think that the Iraq / Iran war of 1980 would beg to differ. They may not have started it, but they have been far from the peaceful utopia that you are painting them as. It is also no secret that they are supporting the war in Iraq as well as supporting terrorism against Israel. I don't care to debate who is right or wrong, those acts alone should disqualify them from being labeled as "peaceful for several centuries".



Iraq attacked Iran, not the other way around. Also there are no reports on Iran supporting terrorism. This is just plain Bush administration bogus. In reality, Iran is one the most civilized and peaceful countries in the world.



[edit on 28-1-2008 by ergoli]



new topics

top topics



 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join