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 used September 11 as 'pretext' for invasions

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


When my country is at war, and I am a soldier, my loyalty is to my leadership and country. We obviously have vastly different views that have no common ground where this is concerned. I stand by my remark that you'd have the same complaints about FDR and Churchill were this WWII. You'd be calling for war crimes trials because of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasake, etc...




posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


You have no idea what I would or would not be calling for.

Are you REALLY trying to equate the current illegal occupation and war of aggression with WW2?

Because the comparison is ludicrous.

Now would you be so kind as to answer my previous question?



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
I stand by my remark that you'd have the same complaints about FDR and Churchill were this WWII. You'd be calling for war crimes trials because of Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasake, etc...


In World War 2, the Axis powers attacked sovereign nations.
Poland, Czechoslovakia, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece, Norway, Great Britain, China and the USA (to name but a few) were attacked. Those countries responded to a genuine military threat from a powerful enemy that threatened their total destruction.

The USA and the "coalition of the willing" attacked Iraq, unprovoked, on the basis of "intelligence" that turned out to be false.

The two actions are not the same. You can't equate them.



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


You wake Up !!!!

I just said that he didn't say anything convincing....that is the point! I believe that somebody other than just the 'terrorists' were behind this.

Why did he not mention the stronger evidence, there is plenty of it.




He appeared to cast doubt on the official version of the attacks, saying the names of those killed had never been published and questioning how the planes had hit the towers of the World Trade Centre in New York.


So did the names get read out or not?

[edit on 10-4-2008 by muddyhoop]



posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


He's your enemy, not mine.

You're my enemy.

As are all those trying to subvert this Republic to build & maintain an Empire.

As for Ahmadinejad, he is a demagogue, a loudmouth, and a lousy president for Iran.

On the other hand he's not saying anything here that plenty of Americans don't say too.

Personally I fully supported the invasion of Afghanistan, we have a duty to respond when attacked. I'd like nothing better than to see OBL's head on a pike.

But 9/11 was used as a false pretext for the invasion of Iraq, even though we know that Saddam had nothing to do with it.

As for the 9/11 conspiracy theories, I regard myself as something of a skeptic. I do, however, suspect strongly that some in the .gov, looking for a "new Pearl Harbor", may have known what was going to happen, and taken steps to make sure the attacks went off unhindered.

I do not consider this by any means proven, however.



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 09:25 AM
link   
People...

(1) Ahmadinejad did not say (at least in the snippet posted) anything about the CIA or Mossad being involved in the 9/11 attacks... and I for one don't think they were but we have been over this before...

(2) What he says is true, like him or not, and I don't... that doesn't change the fact that if it weren't for 9/11 bush minor would have never been able to snowball the congress and the American people into invading Iraq, much less Afghanistan and he probably would have followed in his daddy's footsteps and been another one term wonder.



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by grover
 


As usual the voice of common sense speaks, I agree, no way in hell Bush Jr. would have been able to get his hand on the Cookie jar called Iraq and its vast oil reserves, without the conveniently 9/11, but hey who is to deny that collateral damage is nothing but a steeping stone and unavoidable in time of war, I mean energy wars


Look at Saudi Arabia and all those Arabs states doing peachy since Bush took over when it comes to oil revenues, 111 plus oil barrels? or people have forgotten how much was oil back in 2000.


I tell you Grover minds get cloudy after eight years.



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Christian Voice
Noone cares what that crazy Iranian fool has to say. To insinuate that the US was behind the attacks of it's own people is just plain ludicrous. There are alot of way out there theories on this site, but this one takes the cake.



I have two words for you.... WAKE UP!

[edit on 11-4-2008 by Ramb0]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join