It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Afghanistan... Iraq... Haiti... is there a pattern?

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 03:37 AM
Jeez, man, is it me or are we just sending our troops everywhere? Everywhere, that is, that doesn't have a stockpile of nukes or an impressively consolidated air-land-sea military? ok, duh, ive realized this for a while... but I mean come on... this is getting sickening.

how did we do it this time? did we sell weapons to a bunch of civilians to get a president out of haiti that didn't play ball? how funny would that be if russia did the same to us 40 years ago? yeah, exactly... not that's it's all the plausible, but the basic cause still would produce the same effect.

we came close to a little scoff with Russia when we got arrogant and took NATO into Bosnia in 1999 for the final swoop. If it werent for NATO's leverage and diplomacy... well I dont even want to think about that right now, to tell you the truth.

but really, don't any of you think this pattern has to stop? try to use a bit of empathy; put yourself into a house in one of the countries we have invaded with the same method... pick a card, any card... guatemala, nicaragua, colombia, iraq, cuba, korea, etc.

posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 05:01 AM

Originally posted by AlnilamOmega

but really, don't any of you think this pattern has to stop? try to use a bit of empathy; put yourself into a house in one of the countries we have invaded with the same method... pick a card, any card... guatemala, nicaragua, colombia, iraq, cuba, korea, etc.

vietnam is one of those big ones you should add in there.

posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 05:29 AM
Haiti doesn't compare with Iraq or Afghanistan. The struggle there started without US influence. In fact, the US actually tried to keep Aristide in power and helped him back in the 90s during a coup.
Bush wanted to keep Aristide in power for as long as he could but when it was clear that a bloodbath was coming he joined the rest of the world and called for him to step down.
If you take a look at the weapons that the rebels were using you will see that they are all non-US. Most were carrying AK47s.
There is no way Bush wanted to send troops to Haiti but once other countries had said that they were going to deploy, Bush had no choice. Haiti is on the US doorstep. To let the French run around and try to influence the whole region could be politically disastrous.

Aristide was deeply unpopular with the people of Haiti. He had rigged an election and used the old methods of the Du Valiers. The US didn't need to interfere to get him out and their intervention was absolutely minimal.

For once, the US is on a purely humanitarian mission. And you can guarantee that Bush would rather have avoided this one if he could have done.

posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 05:52 AM
Interesting that you immediately assume the U.S. is at fault and is behind all evil around the globe. You have written nothing but assumptions and baseless insinuations.

You try a bit of empathy. Put your arse in a plane headed for a building. Imagine being the wife of a firefighter who ran into the building and was never seen again. Try and feel the pain of the children whose parents weren't coming home for dinner that night.

Keep on feeling pain, if you want to mention other places. Feel the pain of the people when FARC lobs an artillery round into a church on Sunday morning. Or the pain of disappearing into a camp for dare speaking aginst the leader in North Korea.

You fat, lazy western liberal, trying to make yourself feeeeeeel better by calling the last hope for others evil, you don't have a clue about empathy or pain or you'd see it in a little different light. Am I saying the U.S. is always right? What dolt would say that? I'm a moron, but not that moronic, let me tell you. But I have enough sense to tell the difference between oppressive governments and the one superpower that has consistently used its strength, not for taking over the world but for helping. And don't forget, rebuilding after we war with someone, even if it is with a nation in the most dire need of a butt-stomping.

Point is, don't take whatever the comrads are telling you at the party meetings so seriously. Take a look around. Think about how things would be were we not here. Much, much worse.

posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 05:53 AM
yes, there is a 'pattern'

take your current nations you listed

if humanity follows the present trend, then nations
with N, L, T, O... will enter into the 'pattern'

Eventually spelling out: ANNIHLATION !!

posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 02:51 PM
TC, thanks for the swift kick in the butt. You are right on many different points. I should try a bit more empathy for my own country. I have all the respect in the world for those brave firefighters on 911, but you cannot ask me to be a husband on flight 11 in that horrible wednesday morning of 9/11. That event in itself could have been prevented had it not been instigated by Bush's carlyle and NWO cronies who wanted to sell more weapons and more security services as well as get their hands on Afghani and Iraqi oil pipelines.

I feel nothing but remorse and regret for the families who were severed on that day, and I take comfort in the fact that they will not forget what happened and not all of them are taking that governmental bribe to not sue the gov't or the airplane companies. God knows, if I was victimized by the attack, I would sue the hell out of the all of the above (except airport agencies) and have a great case against them.

I admit, my statement on Haiti was mostly based on assumptions, as you guessed, but to tell you the truth, I haven't read much into the situation because I am sick of this pattern. My own weakness, yes, but realizing that there may be a humanitarian goal behind this will make me look into the issue further.

So the weps are AK47s? leftovers from the soviet union, I assume? isn't that odd...

riffraff... your acronym theory is interesting. Obviously, not all countries that we have invaded will fit... but it's worth consideration, I think.

Oh and instead of "scoff" I meant "skirmish" in my initial post. I suppose I was tired and not thinking very clearly when I wrote that segment as a scoff is more like a verbal response than it is a skirmish, a battle.

[Edited on 3/3/2004 by AlnilamOmega]

posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 03:33 PM
Sounds to my like its turning out to be a nwo. President Bush senior talked about it in his speaches a couple times. I just hope it doesn't lead to World war III

posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 03:53 PM
The oil pipeline is also an assumption, and one that is unfounded. As a matter of fact, we are benefitting in no way, other than if a stable government is established in Iraq.

As far as the NWO/OWO scene, that is not a product of the U.S. The U.S., as with most other industrialized western and advanced Asian governments, is controlled by these organizations. In otehr words, a horse behind the cart type things.

posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 03:55 PM

Originally posted by truegimp2000
I just hope it doesn't lead to World war III

We in world war 4.....

posted on Mar, 3 2004 @ 03:56 PM
Yes, our troops are being scattered to the four corners. Our Guard troops are being mobilized all the time. When a catastrophic situation occurs (manufactured, of course!) there'll be other troops from other nations that will fill the void here in the states. Troops who'll not be troubled if they have to drill a hole in a U.S. Patriot's skull.

top topics


log in