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.

 

Awesome - US Drones Taking Out Top Al-Qaeda Operatives!

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 





Look you dont see the Japanese running around causing problems anymore do you? It is because they received proper discipline.


That is probably the most ignorant and immature thing I have read so far on this board...well, apart from every other post of yours on this thread of course. You sound like a disgruntled twelve year old who has learnt little and is screaming and lashing out because mummy just grounded him. If you saw someone being shot or had to shoot someone and saw them screaming in agony and screaming for their mothers...I guarantee you would wet yourself on the spot...and then be mentally scarred for life.
The bombing of Hiroshima was the singular most barbaric and horrific event in human history...and you make silly quips about it?
The only people who enjoy killing are complete psycopaths or sociopaths...you are making me wonder.




posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


LMAO, so you didnt like the answer you gave yourself when you dug up answers to the questions I gave you. I just want to say it doesnt make the US better that we saved you from the USSR, but it would be nice if you showed a little gratitude from time to time.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


Where did you save us?

Show me the source that states that the USA, saved us from Russia.

If I remember correctly they had beef with you, not us friend.

Again, show me a source that states specifically that we asked, or needed you to save us from the USSR.

~Keeper



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Im not really that informed about this topic and all the middle east stuff, I dont know alot about it. But I dont think we should be going around killing people. Couldnt it be that these people are trying to protect there country just as we are trying to protect ours? Obviously they see us as some kind of a threat, so should they sit down and take it while we bomb their land? I know the USA wouldnt, so why should they?

Looking at the psychology of these people I think a big part of why they are the way they are is because of how they were brought up.

(And I thought you promised the Mods you were going to be good!!!:lol



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Jess_Undefined
 


LMAO, I am being good. As far as Afghanistan goes, we were not bombing their land until a group of them decided to kill 3000 or so of our people. As far as Iraq goes, if they wouldnt have violated the cease fire agreement 5000 times we wouldnt have had any reason to take them out.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


What a demented little creature you are. Your government creates and funds most of these mad dog terrorist groups in order to scare useful idiots like yourself into supporting muderous wars of conquest and aggression and the stripping of rights.

You seem to think its all good to commit genocide on innocent Iraqis, and if you had it your way Israel would get the green light to spark WW3, with unimaginable consequences for the world. All to kill a few brown people who arent even a threat to you unless your government orders them attack you again.

You just dont get it - youre the posterchild for brainwashing and conditioning. I dont know if you should be pitied or just put down like a rabid dog. Your views are below contempt; Nazi-esque would be an understatment. If you had a shred of humanity in you, youd hang your head in shame. But since youre clearly a sociopath at best, I doubt youre capable of such complex emotions.

Sad thing is you may just get your wish of total war. I wonder how gung ho youll be when it arrives at your door.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
You seem to think its all good to commit genocide on innocent Iraqis.....



You know, I've seen this comment many times on ATS, and I have yet to see any proof that the US is committing "genocide on innocent Iraqis".

If we were, I don't really think we'd be building schools, hospitals, supplying aid, etc, or trying to rebuild their military to operate on it's own.

Just saying.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jess_Undefined
Im not really that informed about this topic and all the middle east stuff, I dont know alot about it. But I dont think we should be going around killing people. Couldnt it be that these people are trying to protect there country just as we are trying to protect ours? Obviously they see us as some kind of a threat, so should they sit down and take it while we bomb their land? I know the USA wouldnt, so why should they?


Well, Bin Laden was allied with the Taliban. The Taliban didn't fork him over after 9/11, so NATO went into A-stan to get him. They aren't "sitting down while we bomb their lands"; they struck first. If they don't like the US and NATO in A-stan, the Taliban should have thought of that when they were being chummy with Bin Laden.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Including Desert Storm 1, sanctions, and the current war, at least 3 million Iraqis have been exterminated, and counting. Any rebuilding that has taken place has only fattened the bankrolls of Haliburton and KBR, while the situation on the ground is basically a human catasrophe, with unemployment almost half, much of the country only getting 2 hours of electricity a day if any, massive spikes in birth deformities likely due to the depleted uranium constantly raining down, ect ect ect...

Saddam may have been a bad guy (the USs guy until it was time for him to take the fall), but Iraq was basically a 1st world nation until 91'...nows it basically beyond thunderdome. Pretty heavy price for the innocents of that country to pay for some BS imperial war of aggression, eh!



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Neo_Serf
 


That is not genocide. Genocide is when you try to murder the whole group. If it were genocide we would be lining them up in the streets against a wall and murdering them and then dumping the bodies in pits.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


Semantical garbage. They *are* murdering a large portion of the group, and destroying their DNA through radiation. Pol Pot killed 3 million of his countrymen, I'm sure youd agree thats genocide.

We can call it massive hyperkill if you want. 3 million would fill many stadiums.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
Including Desert Storm 1....


When Iraq invaded Kuwait, so who's at fault?


Originally posted by Neo_Serf
....sanctions...


Because Saddam didn't have a clue when to shut up and color. Once again, who's at fault?


Originally posted by Neo_Serf
and the current war, at least 3 million Iraqis have been exterminated, and counting.


OK, you say, "exterminated". Last time I checked, US and Coalition forces weren't just rounding people up, sending them to camps and killing them.

Here are a few sources you might be interested in:

www.abcnews.go.com...

www.timesonline.co.uk...

hotair.com...

(I know the last is a blog, but it's where I found the other sources)

And how many of that "3 million" were killed up Coalition forces, and how many were wasted by some insurgent with a car bomb and a desire to meet Allah?


Originally posted by Neo_Serf
Any rebuilding that has taken place has only fattened the bankrolls of Haliburton and KBR, while the situation on the ground is basically a human catasrophe, with unemployment almost half, much of the country only getting 2 hours of electricity a day if any, massive spikes in birth deformities likely due to the depleted uranium constantly raining down, ect ect ect...


And you forgot the insurgents that are lighting off carbombs that are killing innocent women and children, citizens of their own country. Now tell me, how is that going to "drive the invader" from their lands?


Originally posted by Neo_Serf
Saddam may have been a bad guy (the USs guy until it was time for him to take the fall), but Iraq was basically a 1st world nation until 91'...nows it basically beyond thunderdome. Pretty heavy price for the innocents of that country to pay for some BS imperial war of aggression, eh!


Well, Saddam had a hate-on for Kurds. I guess you forgot about those people. Now, there was a genocide that people tend to forget.

And if this was truely an "imperial war of aggression", the US wouldn't be spending a single dime to do anything for the civilians or their government. They'd be under the boot until anything of value was taken. As I said, we wouldn't be rebuilding and re-arming them now, would we?



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Saddam was given the green light by the US to invade Kuwait - he was told the US would not get involved. He should have known better than to trust his old CIA handlers!

It is well known that sanctions only serve to bolster the power of any dictator because it forces the empovershed populace to rally behind him. Isnt collective punishment a war crime?

The destabalization that is responsible for most of the deaths is the direct fault of the the aggressors who caused said destabalization. Not to mention the countless times western forces have been caught dressing up in Arab garb and blowing stuff, and people up. It is more than a rumour amongst US forces that much of the insugent activity is being ocastrated by US intel. The goal is destabalization to justify permanent bases, which leads directly to much of the carnage going on.

The US set up Saddam, used him, and when his usefulness ran out they knocked him down and positioned themselves in the center of the middle east, right on top of some of the juiciest oil feilds in the world. The resulting death and suffering has been extreme - a literal disaster for both Iraq and US in terms of blood and treasure. Not sure why youre defending one of the greatest military blunders in history here, (if indeed the stated goals were the true aim, at a higher level Iraq may be going just as planned) but hey, youre entitled to your opinion.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neo_Serf
Saddam was given the green light by the US to invade Kuwait - he was told the US would not get involved. He should have known better than to trust his old CIA handlers!


Right.



Originally posted by Neo_Serf
It is well known that sanctions only serve to bolster the power of any dictator because it forces the empovershed populace to rally behind him. Isnt collective punishment a war crime?


Actually, sanctions really only hurt the middle class. The rich will still be rich and find ways around sanctions, the poor are always poor. And if you want to point the "war crime" finger, point it at the UN, since they were UN sanctions. And how many other countries signed on for that?


Originally posted by Neo_Serf
The destabalization that is responsible for most of the deaths is the direct fault of the the aggressors who caused said destabalization. Not to mention the countless times western forces have been caught dressing up in Arab garb and blowing stuff, and people up. It is more than a rumour amongst US forces that much of the insugent activity is being ocastrated by US intel. The goal is destabalization to justify permanent bases, which leads directly to much of the carnage going on.


Riiiggghhhttt. US forces dressing up as Arabs and blowing stuff up, just to keep up the fighting. Never, ever, would it be some pissed off Iraqi that was Saddam's buddy who now is out of power and on the skids. Or some one that thought to take advantage of the situation?

So what you're saying is that the insurgents that are killing women and children are absolutely innocent, and it's all the fault of the US?




Originally posted by Neo_Serf
The US set up Saddam, used him, and when his usefulness ran out they knocked him down and positioned themselves in the center of the middle east, right on top of some of the juiciest oil feilds in the world. The resulting death and suffering has been extreme - a literal disaster for both Iraq and US in terms of blood and treasure. Not sure why youre defending one of the greatest military blunders in history here, (if indeed the stated goals were the true aim, at a higher level Iraq may be going just as planned) but hey, youre entitled to your opinion.


Whatever. You're entitled to your opinion, and I have mine. Since I have been in Iraq, I have seen things first hand. How about you? You make some mightly claims, but what do you have to back it up?



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Excellent work Jerico. The thing that amazes me the most is how some of these people will blame all of this on anybody but Sadaam and a bunch of crazy Muslims. Now I dont mean all muslims when I say that. Just the ones that decided it was a good idea to mess with our interests.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 02:35 AM
link   
Green light given to Saddam by April Glaspie, US ambassador to Iraq, shortly before Iraq invades Kuwait.


"GLASPIE: I think I understand this. I have lived here for years. I admire your extraordinary efforts to rebuild your country. I know you need funds. We understand that and our opinion is that you should have the opportunity to rebuild your country. But we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait."

chss.montclair.edu...

British SAS officers stirring up trouble dressed as Arabs:

"According to the BBC’s Galpin, reporting for BBC Radio 4 (19/9/05, 18 hrs news script), Iraqi police sources in Basra “told the BBC the two British men were arrested after failing to stop at a checkpoint. There was an exchange of gunfire. The men were wearing traditional Arab clothing, and when the police eventually stopped them, they said they found explosives and weapons in their car… It’s widely believed the two British servicemen were operating undercover.”

usa.mediamonitors.net...

Obviously all insurgents arent agents but one has to wonder in whos interest a destabalized Iraq is.

So obviously the whole thing is a sham and continues to be so.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft

Originally posted by woodwardjnr

Your just another arm chair general, cracking open a beer and high fiving your buddies as you see Americas military might smash up the 3rd world on fox.
You seem to forget that all those being killed have families who will become the next generation of terrorists. For every Target they get remember the innocent ones caught up, having their towns and villages destroyed by a drone controlled by some geek behind a computer.


It doesnt create terrorists if you give them the proper butt kicking that they need. You beat the other side down until they know not to mess with you again. Just ask the Japanese how it works.

Doing it all half assed like we are, propably will create more terrorists, but if we blew the living hell out of them and took the chain off of Israel then I doubt anyone would have the will left to become a terrorist.



So I guess we nuke the whole middle east Pakistan and Somalia to deal with the terrorist threat then. What about home grown terrorists or those terrorists from Saudi Arabia responsible for 9/11. The terrorists from 7/7 were all born British citezens, you wanna nuke them too.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 


First of all, i am sick of people (i.e. you) trying to equate the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq with the Second World War.

It's truely pathetic. Please stop.

Second of all your pure ignorance of the Second World War is astounding, not to mention your total lack of respect for the Canadians.
Every Allied nation contributed in some way and i don't want to get into an argument like nation A lost more troops than nation B. So stop being so arrogant.

I have to believe that you are just making this thread, to get people mad or worked up. You are the sterotype of the American everyone loves to hate and mock.

I am relieved to know not all Americans are like you. If there were more people like you, making threads like this, i probably wouldn't be on this site anymore.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


I never said a word about nuking anyone. There is no need to start nuking people in the case of Iraq or Afghanistan. We are more than capable of taking care of that with conventional weapons.

[edit on 7/27/2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
Wow, what is the world coming to? There is nothing wrong with killing those that would kill you first if they had the chance to. It is known as defending yourself or defending your country.


Civilised nations know that pre-emptive strikes are, rightly, illegal under international law. But the US doesn't pay any attention to that, and obviously you're one of those citizens that feels the US shouldn't have to answer for its crimes.

Makes you look pretty rancid to the rest of the world.


Its just sad that people dont take pride in their country actually defending them.


It's just sad that people take pride in their country killing people in other countries without trial. It's a double standard. Innocent until proven guilty unless Uncle Sam calls you a terrorist. I don't know if you've looked at the thread about the hijackers on Flight 93, but all four appear, one way or another, to be a case of mistaken identity.

Doesn't give you a lot of confidence in Sam's ability to distinguishl the jihadis from the innocent, or tell the truth about whom he kills.


The Western World has become such a pussified bunch of whiny anti-war people that if it gets even a bit worse all our women will be wearing burquas and we will all have to grow a 2 foot long beard.


Yup, that's about the level here. It's just... moronic. There's no other word for it.




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join