Unconfirmed: WWIII Has Indeed Begun:

page: 6
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by Power_Semi
 


Covert organizations, like the CIA for one example, are privately funded and basically have unlimited access to assets through black budgets. The "official" military is not in charge of these weapons, just as they aren't in charge of nukes. Don't be retarded now.
edit on 6-1-2012 by apodictic because: (no reason given)


What does this comment have to do with anything that I've posted?

The OP is claiming there is technology so secret that no-one knows about it - except him because of his part time job.

You'd have to be retarded to swallow that, and unfortunately for you, the CIA is not some super covert light-years ahead of everyone else because of back engineered ufo technology blahblah blahty blah organisation.

It's the typical conspiracy fantasists answer to everything - nudge nudge hush hush it's the CIA wink wink.

Bullcrap




posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Power_Semi

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by Power_Semi
 


Covert organizations, like the CIA for one example, are privately funded and basically have unlimited access to assets through black budgets. The "official" military is not in charge of these weapons, just as they aren't in charge of nukes. Don't be retarded now.
edit on 6-1-2012 by apodictic because: (no reason given)


What does this comment have to do with anything that I've posted?

The OP is claiming there is technology so secret that no-one knows about it - except him because of his part time job.

You'd have to be retarded to swallow that, and unfortunately for you, the CIA is not some super covert light-years ahead of everyone else because of back engineered ufo technology blahblah blahty blah organisation.

It's the typical conspiracy fantasists answer to everything - nudge nudge hush hush it's the CIA wink wink.

Bullcrap


It has everything to do with what you posted. You're claiming congress has to KNOW ALL. They only know what they're allowed to know. That's a fact. Cheney kept CIA torture from congress. The CIA has been involved in many covert operations and wars, some of which are public knowledge if you would stop being a retard and do a 2 second Google search.

You have no idea how this country works, do you? Do you really think everything is made publicly available with all the government corruption? They need some way to cover their tracks, hence a $50 billion+ black budget, and "missing" money from our defense budget that is never accounted for. They also need a way to keep an edge on any enemies.

You really have no idea what you're saying. lol. I suppose you've never heard of DEVGRU (hint ST6) either. You don't ever hear about what they're up to, do you?

You're an ignorant punk.
edit on 6-1-2012 by apodictic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


What you seem to forget is that history refutes the idea that the one with the most technology wins. The are numerous instances in which the underdog steps up and defeats the big world power. Shoot; America is one of those examples. The point is, we can have all the firepower we want, but in the end the winner is the one who is more hungry for it. History seems to side with the idea that those who are just in their reasons for war, win.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by jjf3rd77
 
The people running Iran want and need the 12th Iman to come and clenase the earth as there insane beleifs dictate and being human, as we all are, they do what it takes to forfill there needs and beleifs.
People can blame whom ever they want to make themselves feel better about what is comeing, this is not about Isiral or nukes, if it was it could all be stopped today with clear and sane heads prevailing, it is about human nature and our beleifs, it has been this way sinse the begenning, how hard is that to understand unless you just can't face realism and facts?



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   
reply to post by derst1988
 


That depends on what you count as a loss. In the sense of trying to stop the spread of communism during Vietnam, yes we lost. But only because politicians said # it and pulled us out, and no one at home agreed with the war. It was getting out of hand. There was no surrender. I look at a win as who screwed the enemy up more, and who had the upper hand.

We won a vaaaast majority of the battles and we had the ability to keep going indefinitely. ~58,000 US soldiers were killed, but with over 1 million of theirs killed, AND the fact they ended up paying the US reparations, I will always consider that a win. Communism would have lived on anyway. You can't kill an idea.

Another aspect that made Vietnam more difficult was the terrain. We don't really have to worry about that with Iran.

Other than that "loss," I don't really see any.
It is sad that all those US lives were lost only to not get the desired outcome, though.
edit on 6-1-2012 by apodictic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by murch
. The US is dependant on China's trade.
editby]edit on 5-1-2012 by murch because: (no reason given)


We are not dependent on thier trade if we had to make our own things we would America just uses them for the cheap labor cost so they can make a huge profit on the goods.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:26 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 



As far as what I have said about how far in advancement the U.S. Military is....that is a fact that even our enemies know...but not just how far ahead.


Yet, this “secret” weaponry doesn’t seem to stop the threat of war, does it?

Ever wondered why?

Ever wondered why the mighty Wehrmacht was brought to its knees, despite its superior technology, determination and sheer numbers?

Or why the Roman Legions were battered and torn apart, despite belonging to a civilization that had conquered most of the known world?

The fact is, if war is offered to any nation then that nation will fight, no matter what it faces. And history shows that it is often not superior military power that prevails.

Human nature is the most powerful weapon of all in the fight against oppressors.

Glorying in the destructive power of technology – current or assumed – will not guarantee military victory.


....I know a bit about this because of my sometimes job. The tech. gap is VAST. So vast that tech is even kept from the knowledge of Congress over fears of a leak.


I’m curious about this statement of yours; you say you are in possession of protected information, can state with apparent impunity that it does actually exist (and all this from knowledge gained by a part-time job), yet say Congress are kept in the dark about it.

Yet, here you are on a conspiracy website declaring for anyone to read that the USA really is in possession of exotic military technology the likes of which is only thought to exist in fiction?

Forgive me, but why do I smell BS?



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by derst1988
 


That depends on what you count as a loss. In the sense of trying to stop the spread of communism during Vietnam, yes we lost. But only because politicians said # it and pulled us out, and no one at home agreed with the war. It was getting out of hand. There was no surrender. I look at a win as who screwed the enemy up more, and who had the upper hand.

We won a vaaaast majority of the battles and we had the ability to keep going indefinitely. ~58,000 US soldiers were killed, but with over 1 million of theirs killed, AND the fact they ended up paying the US reparations, I will always consider that a win. Communism would have lived on anyway. You can't kill an idea.

Another aspect that made Vietnam more difficult was the terrain. We don't really have to worry about that with Iran.

Other than that "loss," I don't really see any.
It is sad that all those US lives were lost only to not get the desired outcome, though.
edit on 6-1-2012 by apodictic because: (no reason given)


Dude, Im going way further than Vietnam... Try the romans, Try the greeks under Alexander. Try the British when we defeated them twice (Revolution & the war of 1812). Try WW2 where Germany had the U Boats and the best automatic rifles. Try Russia when they were kicked out of Afghanistan and became bankrupt. Vietnam is nothing compared to the rest of history.
edit on 6-1-2012 by derst1988 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by derst1988
 


I was referring to your American reference



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
I cannot understand why they don't sit down and talk and demand Iran and the middle east to stop hating Israel and the jews and homosexuals and women or else.Yet we make up excuses and reasons to attack them like we did with Iraq.
Seems to me the whole middle east is down right dispicaple hatred of the jews and not giving women their rights and homosexuals and killing homosexuals is enough reason for me.Does ppear we are headed for war in the near future.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by derst1988

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by derst1988
 


That depends on what you count as a loss. In the sense of trying to stop the spread of communism during Vietnam, yes we lost. But only because politicians said # it and pulled us out, and no one at home agreed with the war. It was getting out of hand. There was no surrender. I look at a win as who screwed the enemy up more, and who had the upper hand.

We won a vaaaast majority of the battles and we had the ability to keep going indefinitely. ~58,000 US soldiers were killed, but with over 1 million of theirs killed, AND the fact they ended up paying the US reparations, I will always consider that a win. Communism would have lived on anyway. You can't kill an idea.

Another aspect that made Vietnam more difficult was the terrain. We don't really have to worry about that with Iran.

Other than that "loss," I don't really see any.
It is sad that all those US lives were lost only to not get the desired outcome, though.
edit on 6-1-2012 by apodictic because: (no reason given)


Dude, Im going way further than Vietnam... Try the romans, Try the greeks under Alexander. Try the British when we defeated them twice (Revolution & the war of 1812). Try WW2 where Germany had the U Boats and the best automatic rifles. Try Russia when they were kicked out of Afghanistan and became bankrupt. Vietnam is nothing compared to the rest of history.
edit on 6-1-2012 by derst1988 because: (no reason given)


Asymmetric warfare is a very old very valid concept that has been used, and will be again, many times throughout history.
The (supposed) "super weapons" are just so many pretty baubles if they don't have a target. There isn't much point having a "Free electron Laser that can penetrate 100ft of steel!!!" if your opponent refuses to present a suitable target and carries on using simple explosives in roadside bombs to kill your personnel."



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by derst1988

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by derst1988
 


That depends on what you count as a loss. In the sense of trying to stop the spread of communism during Vietnam, yes we lost. But only because politicians said # it and pulled us out, and no one at home agreed with the war. It was getting out of hand. There was no surrender. I look at a win as who screwed the enemy up more, and who had the upper hand.

We won a vaaaast majority of the battles and we had the ability to keep going indefinitely. ~58,000 US soldiers were killed, but with over 1 million of theirs killed, AND the fact they ended up paying the US reparations, I will always consider that a win. Communism would have lived on anyway. You can't kill an idea.

Another aspect that made Vietnam more difficult was the terrain. We don't really have to worry about that with Iran.

Other than that "loss," I don't really see any.
It is sad that all those US lives were lost only to not get the desired outcome, though.
edit on 6-1-2012 by apodictic because: (no reason given)


Dude, Im going way further than Vietnam... Try the romans, Try the greeks under Alexander. Try the British when we defeated them twice (Revolution & the war of 1812). Try WW2 where Germany had the U Boats and the best automatic rifles. Try Russia when they were kicked out of Afghanistan and became bankrupt. Vietnam is nothing compared to the rest of history.
edit on 6-1-2012 by derst1988 because: (no reason given)


In any case, none of those are really applicable. Rome and the US do share some striking similarities such as corruption, inflation, and unemployment. However they did not have better technology. In fact they couldn't keep up the technology with how much land they were acquiring. They were busy preserving the land that they had while everyone else was advancing. The US most certainly does not have this problem. Your other example is the Germans in WWII. They had superior technology for some of the war, but failed to produce enough of it. They preferred quality over quantity. Eventually their tanks were surpassed by Russian tanks and the US ships were way better than theirs. We were also able to produce tons of weapons for ground troops. The US today definitely doesn't have this flaw. We have quality AND quantity. Lots of it.

Russia and Afghanistan is basically the same as Vietnam. Greece also fell due to monetary problems.

It seems the biggest danger to the US is the government, and I suspect if there is ever a 'death' of America it will be due to inside influence, not an "underdog taking over" or whatever.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Not nearly enough help going on to stop terrorist in the muslim world as well.That also needs to be told to other nations to start participating in a effort to destroy these lunatics in the muslim world.Muslim nations who are against al-qeada and radical muslims also need to help.I guess after 9/11 the world has changed in a major way.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Noncompatible
 


It is very effective. I am sure Israel will end up wiping Iran off the map, if a war breaks out, though. I have a very strong hunch. They've been itching for a reason.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 


Wow you really are ignorant, but I'm not surprised.


List of nuclear weapons tests of the United States
en.wikipedia.org...

The nuclear powers have conducted more than 2,000 nuclear test explosions (numbers are approximated, as some test results have been disputed
en.wikipedia.org...

Is it any wonder more people today have cancer.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 


Ignorance is bliss and you still haven't learnt anything from 9/11.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 


Extremely unlikely, genocide would be the only way to "wipe" Iran off of the map. Not even the US could protect the state of Israel from the response to such action. Nor would it even try, pretty hard to appear as the "force for good" whilst condoning genocide.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Iran Threatens New Military Drills:
link is down.

Originally posted by jjf3rd77



Iran Threatens New Military Drills:


news.xinhuanet.com...




edit on 5-1-2012 by jjf3rd77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 


No need to brag about your immorality. The world is already fully aware of your barbarism when it comes to using chemical weapons and killing innocent people in cold blood, but what goes around, comes around.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by kindred
 


...Before you call me ignorant why don't you realize the implications of "1000 nukes" going off within the same relative amount of time instead of trying to compare that to the sum total of nuclear tests done over the past 60+ years?

Jesus...and I'm ignorant...
edit on 6-1-2012 by apodictic because: (no reason given)



  exclusive video


new topics
top topics
active topics
 
22
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join



atslive.com

hi-def

low-def