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.

 

Powell deals Syria new warning

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Syria must not become a safe haven to Iraqi officials fleeing Baghdad, US Secretary General Colin Powell has told the BBC.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Why are they trying to hunt the Baath officials down ? The only plausible reason would be to decimate any opposition to the victors view of history ?!?




posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Syria is on the list, but likely after Iran. Both of them support changing the oil standard currency to the Euro, which is what started the war in the first place.



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Changing the oil currency to Euro would mean the US couldnt export it's inflation to the rest of the world anymore.. it would mean the breakdown of the US economy...

and it will happen soon



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Dragon,

I'm betting Syria is next. Considering they don't even know for sure if the people they're after is really there, but they'll make damned sure they go in and check. That'll piss Syria off big time.

Look at how many time's we've 'killed' Saddam, and we STILL don't know if he's dead. Or how we 'have' proof of WMD's in Iraq, but we're looking for it? I think out intelligence service is shot to hell ... Seem's like they don't know anything for sure, just all speculation.



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Hey, our troops are already there, send em into Syria.. Do the world another favor!



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 01:03 PM
link   
noooo ... we should stop after we're fully done with Iraq. We're internationally screwed as it is. Let's not make it worse! WW3



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 01:14 PM
link   
The bush administrations official communications strategy has reached the stage of degenerescence where its getting openly ridiculous :

1. "We have 100% evidence Iraq has WMD"
2. Nothing
3. "For example we believe Syria has chemical weapons"

How the hell is security linked to _belief_ ??!!??

LOL

Am i crazy or is it Bush ?!? LOL! is this a farce ?? LOL!



[Edited on 13-4-2003 by Mokuhadzushi]



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by e-nonymous
noooo ... we should stop after we're fully done with Iraq. We're internationally screwed as it is. Let's not make it worse! WW3


Lookit, we aren't screwed internationally because we drove Hussein out of power. The international community would have this opinion of us regardless. If we are kissing their collective arses they think we're weak and disgusting, if we act on behalf of our own need they think we are arrogant and insensitive to the rest of the world's desires. No matter what, they are jealous and resentful of us. Therefore we need to do what we need to do.

Anyone who has kept abreast of the information available the last couple decades knows who the targets have to be if there is a war on terror. These targets made themselves such long before the Euro was even an idea.

The comments about the U.S. attacking those who favor the Euro is an example of hatred for us. Although it has been FACT that Syria and Iran are huge terrorist supporters, financers, and haven-givers and would have to be targeted, the claim is made that it is because of the Euro.



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 01:40 PM
link   
I wonder, if we did go into Syria how many unmarked graves, torture chambers as well as Syrians prepared to herald our arrival would there be? This because they have lived under a government which kills its citizens. When they do not conform to the perceived right of the leadership to do whatever it wants??

Seems clear at this point that the UN has done nothing to stop this behavior. Realistically speaking funding does not seem an issue as all it takes is sending an agent or two in to a country to blend in.

He or she doesnt need to even do anything but spend a year there and report back.

This is very strange



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Thomas,

you are trying to picture an image of the bush regime in which bush and his crowneys are earnestly working for justice and truth. But that isnt a fact. How often did Bush lie to you and me ? How often did Gen. Franks try to stage the finding of "chemical weapons" that were proven later as a hoax ?

The people you are defending are criminals, nothing more. So it is VERY probably that this war is fought on PURELY economical grounds by a megalomaniac governing clique.


[Edited on 13-4-2003 by Mokuhadzushi]



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Actually ... our rep is getting ruined cuz of Bush. Sure, everyone hated us before. Now they hate us even more.



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 02:20 PM
link   
only when it is all said in done, will we know what has actually been done against us. right now, we need merely to leave all alone. if we attavk syria then we get iran on us, if we attack iran, we get syria on us. either way the middle east is like a fat guy with cheese. he's going to blow.

here is what should be done. syria must be dealt with second, syria doesn't have a nuclear plant thingy like iran does. that plant must be dealt with, and if iran follows in north koreas footsteps, then we go in. we should get out of iraq asap or they WILL hit us. they being islamic radicals like hezbollah al qaeda, iraqi militants and general suicidal loyalists. if we don't go in there though, we'll get screwed anyway. america should stay out of the worlds ass. if we keep on ourself and reduce dependance on foriegn resources, we can become mighty again. and that requires not letting political differences get in the way. instead arguing over the way something should be done, how about just do it? i can argue all day about how to put up a basketball goal, but if i just do it it will save everyone some trouble. if someone else deals with something a different way, let it go, you'll probably learn something from it.



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Again, Maku, we have an administration, not a regime.

Secondly, your word usage changes the intent of what has occured, thereby placing bias. That is to say, the "hoaxes" were decent mistakes, and they were released by the reporters, not Franks, who always downplayed the reports of chemical finds. It's too early in the game to rewrite history.

How many times have we been lied to? Tell me. How many? How many lies and false allegations do I see thrown around here about the president that is acting on our behalf instead of putting his legacy first and our security last? Many, many more than the his lies.

Our reputation wasn't ruined by Bush.
You know, the same statements were made in reference to Reagan. Had Reagan actually taken their council, the Soviet Union would still be on the world scene, as a matter of fact, they might have won the day had another Democrat of the ideological type of Carter, Mondale or Clinton. I remember the fevered outrage displayed by the liberals and their lapdog media (back then that was all you had to pick from was the liberal lapdog media. Now that there are other sources, many seem to think you have to be allowed entrance into a club to have the 1st Amendment right) whenever Reagan displayed an American backbone.

Those people were obviously on the wrong side of history, and those who are nay-saying thios cowboy is going to find themselves again on the wrong side of history.

Moku, do I think our administration is perfect? No. Do I think everything they do is right on the money as it should be? Of course not. Do I think that the vocal ones like France, Germany, Russia and China have their own interests at heart, and those interests are purely financial? You damned skippy that's what I believe. Our opponents would rather have my country run the risk of smuggled NBC items killing thousands in Dallas, Manhattan or San Diego and the horrors of the child prisons and torture chambers continue than their under the table boat with Iraq be rocked.

Our opponents wanted the past 12 years to continue for what, another 12 years? In effect, they've sided against us, a nation you guys attach possible ideas of potential evil through unprovable conspiracies, and side through deed and action with one that anybody can clearly see is evil personified.

Don't throw up my administration as the evil of the world when you can't even recognize true evil, or it you do, chose to side with it over this administration who didn't ask for this mission but was forced to take it Sept. 11, 2001.

Think about it. Before then, it was clear that Bush had no desire to make international policy the primary focus. He was more interested in domestic policy, deftly maneuvering the democrats (the same ones who said he is stupid) into political corners in a manner that was truly amazing. At the end of 4 years, he would have been seen as probably an average prez, nothing spectacular except his creativity with the English language (strategery, for example). The attacks we sustained were due to the atrophy of our military and intelligence and the weakness displayed throughout the world. The world had no respect for us, we were just weak and disgusting. But the previous president was more liked because the world would rather us be weak and disgusting as we are easier to take advantage of that way. But that weak, disgusting position got us hurt. The weak is attacked, not the strong. The resolved aren't attacked because they'll go the extra mile to assure it is not repeated. Now that is what we have, a resolved administration, one that is going to do what is necessary (or else he'll be out at the end of 4), and all that can be said is he is arrogant and is telling lies.

I remember what started all of this. I've watched the stage be set so that it would eventually happen. Now we are doing what is necessary, and I've waited for the sad day to come. I ain't buying no Euro conspiracy or some "America is turning into an Empire" conspiracy or the "America is the NWO conspiracy" as I've been watching this build to this point for many years.

Don't tell me you haven't seen this coming? You know you have, you've just got caught up in the potential theories fun, right?



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 02:34 PM
link   
After September 11, 2001, and the retaliation in Afghanistan, the US designated seven other countries as states sponsoring terrorism: Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria. A year ago, the Administration declared, "Libya and Sudan seem closest to understanding what they must do to get out of the terrorism business" and acknowledged Iran had been co-operative in Afghanistan. Now Iraq has been dealt with. It leaves Cuba, North Korea and Syria.

Story Link



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 02:54 PM
link   
I'm not into conspiracies, except if you call the fact that the US isnt run by its people but by lobbies a conspiracy. I dont. It's a simple consequence of the capitalist regime, in which poverty and wealth are self-reproducing throught the backbone of the financial system, interest rates. This war is perfectly in the logical interest of the financial/industrial establishment of the united states, and other theories involve "god" or the "nwo". Why trade a perfectly logical explanation for something associated with religion or conspiracies ? The war is being fought out of strategic economic interest, for the sake of the petrodollar, and that is not a conspiracy but the logical agony of a dying dinosaur, the US financial robbery system. Without the petro- and narcodollar, how will the US export its inflation to third world countries ?

Luckily many miscalculations make that Bush's goal will not be achieved


You say centcom "downplayed" the hoaxes.. how did they get out of centcom in the first place then ?!? Another unlogical theory of youse, Thomas

[Edited on 13-4-2003 by Mokuhadzushi]



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 02:55 PM
link   
The London Telegraph reported Syria was among the topics discussed by President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair during their summit in Belfast yesterday.

Although left out of Bush's "axis-of-evil" illustration of countries harboring or sponsoring terrorists, Syria has gained increased scrutiny amid suspicions it allowed Saddam Hussein to transfer weapons of mass destruction across its border, allegations it supplied Iraq with illegal arms which are currently being used against coalition forces, and charges it and Iran have dispatched thousands of terrorists and suicide bombers into Iraq for attacks against coalition forces.

"There's got to be a change in Syria," Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press."

Story Link



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 03:39 PM
link   
The information didn't come from CentCom, the information came from the reporters who are with the troops who find out first hand and before verification. I am not sure at all that having reporters "embedded" is a very good thing.

The perfectly logical explanation, more logical than yours, and more ongoing, is the exact same reason we are at war. Yours is not one that has been ongoing nor has it been trackable as this one has. Again, it is a theory wrapped around historical fact, tailor-made after the fact to give it plausability. I don't buy it. You may be right and this may be found to be true in the long run, but I don't buy it as what most would tell you to be true fits better and did not have to be made after the fact. All you had to be doing is paying attention the last several years.

Now, back to your word, "hoax", in which you attempt to make one believe that it is a fact that the U.S. has tried to fool the world into believing something that is not true. Let's take for example the buried drums of insectacide. One can certainly understand why the reporter was pretty certain the buried chemicals was nerve agent. The agent detectors even went tested positive for nerve agent (which is what insectracide is. Look at the antidote: atropine) and some soldiers who came in contact got sick. If there was any hoax, I'd say it is the Iraqi regime who is at the bottom of it, attempting to make the U.S. look stupid. You ever had cause to bury drums of insectacide? Really? Me either. Maybe there is a logical reason for doing it, but obviously it wasn't understood by people from the West.

The "miscalculations", are those parts of your theory that don't wrap around the facts well?

In the end, neither of us may be right, or it might be that both are right, and I'm sure you can see how that may be the case.



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Mako,

Yes, it is the American petrodollar that started all of this. If you notice, I was the first one to post on that subject. However, you statements regarding the US "exporting its inflation to the third world" shows how little you know about economics.

The vast majority of third world countries have economies directly tied to Americas economy. If Americas economy goes belly up, it will take all of those third world countries that you seem to think the US has exploited so far down into the depths of depression it will be decades before any of them are on an economic even keel. And that will only be after a massive world war that will kill millions, if not hundreds of millions.

Of course, the core of the EU, France and Germany, and possibly Russia, would be the only ones to profit in such a scenario, and they have proven that they have no problem wasting lives in the name of their profits.



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 04:08 PM
link   
i still say bush should be killed, or impeached, and america should become isolated and make a self suffiecint economy. we have the ability to stand on our own feet. we have the resource to switch from oil to hydrocell. the only thing stopping us is the oil moguls who're afraid to give up their wealth. do something with them too. remove them and replace them with an individual who will refuse corruption and turn us on another path.



posted on Apr, 13 2003 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Alternative energy technologies do exist, and are very effective. However, for the most part they have been supressed.

We CANNOT form a stand alone economy. We NEED the oil standard to give a hard asset backing to the US dollar, or it becomes as valuable as the paper it is printed on. We USED to have the gold standard to back the dollar, but that was long ago bastardized.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join