Clinton Threatens Syria With a Catastrophic Assault, Claims Again that Syrian regime's 'days are n

LOL so now CNN is the leading source? My guess is that in the past you have probably trashed CNN and every other MSM source but in this case that one article helps you further your claim. HOW CONVENIENT.

EVERY other news source ive seen from google which lists hundreds of source throughout the world contradicts your post and CNN so you stickl with CNN okay buddy? LMAO!!!

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by princeofpeace

 

Clinton didnt threaten Syria with any assualt!!! LMAO!!!! She said an attack is coming by the rebels as they are becoming better organized and equipped.

Did you even read the article that i posted by CNN? Hilliary Clintion doesnt nor did she mention that an Catastrophic Assault by the rebels as they are becoming better organized and equipped.

I guess you were reading the JPost link that i added right?

or better are you defending Hillary by any chance?

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

But yeah, agreed, OP has a habit of wildly misunderstanding and therefore misrepresenting news

I have been following the so called arab spring since last year, and the current upraise in Syria and you know what? i have been seeing how these peaceful activists have also committed war crimes, but of coruse you and that other user seems to be supporting the rebels, which is obvious on your agenda.

Bold mine.

Agent, you keep making that claim over and over that the western media portrays these 'rebels' as 'peaceful. But you have never been able to provide any sources to substantiate that claim, despite repeated requests.

Furthermore, your nonsensical claim that anyone who points out the massive holes in your logic is somehow 'supporting the rebels' is a big, fat, stupid lie. This has also been pointed out repeatedly. I dont 'support the rebels'. I just know how to read.

reply to post by stanguilles7

i dont 'support the rebels'. I just know how to read.

Really you don't? from your own recent posts it just seem that way

reply to post by princeofpeace


I am not sure if your just trolling trying to get or gain to get attention by getting likes you should know if you did read my first two posts on thread, i also i had another source not just CNN

reply to post by princeofpeace


Most of those hundreds of 'sources' copy what Reuters and Associated Press write.

Originally posted by buster2010

If Russia wants War. Then Lets give it to them. Its inevtiable. I hope Russia deploys troops into Syria and sends all their fleets. Along with their submarines.

This "idiot", is starting to sound like a threat to world security ...

I think she should stop worrying about Assad, and start worrying about her self ... making a lot of proclaims where one wants a world war. The world doesn't need such idiots, and can well be without them and such desires.

reply to post by buster2010

It's not so much about winning the initial engagements but what to do once the fighting has stopped. Nobody wins a war remeber

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The 'catastrophic assault' language was unclear ...
She said an end to the violence would save Syria from a catastrophic assault.
Did she mean it would save the people from a catastrophic assault from their government?
Or did she mean it would save the country of Syria from a catastrophic assault from others?

I don't know which way she means it. From reading it .. it could go either way.

I read the story on Google News and I couldn't figure out what she meant by "Catastrophic Assault" either.

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

If Ron Paul doesn't win, i think the American spring has been long overdue.

A Western World spring is long overdue!

P.S.: Did our comments make us domestic terrorists now?

Originally posted by milkyway12
reply to post by Atzil321

 

Jpost.com - Click ' Read the Full Story ' . (Right below the introductory article)

You should see it.

------

If Russia wants War. Then Lets give it to them. Its inevtiable. I hope Russia deploys troops into Syria and sends all their fleets. Along with their submarines.

They will find out very quickly their submarines arent as quiet as they thought , their navies arent as powerful as they thought , and their ground troop will be slaughtered by air power.

We could defeat Russia with our Navy and Airpower alone. We dont need foot soldiers to break their back. They only need to do the clean up.

edit on 8-7-2012 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)

yeah, thats why north vietnam won and thats why your still in Iraq and Afghanistan hey, because your so good, and those guys were just peasants. well I tell you what, If the # does hit the fan over this and Russia and the U.S. does go at it, remember they have been waiting more than 30 years to hand your asses to you, and if the North Koreans did it and the NVA did it and the Taliban are still doing it, I just hope that everything you believe all comes true for all of our sakes.

reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter


good analyze but I do not think they attacks Iran. this is their propaganda. Israel is not in a good situation. moreover it even could not ruin the Hammas and Hezbullah. to shape their satanic order. now they are just struggling to survive.
and I would say to clinton that your radical allies and terrorists are best doing their job in Syria, be relax!

Click here for more information.

reply to post by repeatoffender


Here is a response from a friend of mine who posted on this topic a few years back. "The US would win all out. Being a combat veteran of two US wars serving on the Albania border to keep serb troops (former soviets) from killing thousands. They had all of the best soviet gear. t-80 tanks, mig 29's they were highly motivated. They lost. Also being in the Iraq war we are winning a long war of attrition. And I myself went days with out a meal. Who ever said that never served in an infantry unit. During regular training we go 3 or 4 days with nothing to eat or any sleep.
We are much better killers than anyone on earth. We are not the military of the Nam days. That old US military was laid to rest and from its ashes, arose the most deadly force the earth has ever seen. During the first gulf war the Iraqis used the latest soviet radar and the t-72 tank by the thousands. 11 tanks laid an entire armored brigade to waist. Soviet weaponry is well behind ours. Our troops are better motivated and better killers.
The reds have constantly attacked those they knew would loose. They never made a move on us. They know the results of a land war with us. We are faster, smarter, better, and more deadly than them. They don't even have half the jet powered bombers we do. They still use prop planes in the fleet. Our old f-15s have shot down over 130 Russian made top fighter planes and has never been shot down. Now we have the f-22 and joint strike fighter. One f-15 shot down two mig 29's by its self. In a third world war America and its allies would be victorious. We would be speaking english, and they too will still be speaking english.
The only reason Bush hasn't sent direct military aid is everyone thinks he is a war addict. I guess it would take a month to totally cripple the Russian military command. Now as for occupying the country, most of the people there want to be like us. They buy our clothes, music, and soda pop like its going to run out. It wouldn't be too hard to win over that crowd.
Russia is already collapsing with in itself. All of the old soviet countries are American puppet states now. They are just on the last throws before they too become another puppet.
Source(s):
Real life served in the 229 1/8 alpha company marines 4 years. Serving in the 7th meu 3years and just being one makes you know how much better we really are. Military history and data based on currant military spending."

Originally posted by mahon
reply to post by ALF88

 

Wow, thanks for your kind sentiment. However, cough cough. we do have a bigger military here in America. Cheers

Which I didn't question, but you are broke as well and the fact that some of you are running around yelling - we got the "biggest" - , doesn't help creating a positive picture of the USA in the world.

reply to post by ALF88


I highly doubt the word "broke" would be applied to the United States.

If other countries don't like us so much then why do all of their citizens move here? In my city alone my neighbors are Russians,Irish, Romanians, Germans, Israelis, Pakistanis, Indians, Chinese, Japanese, Italian,Polish, Aussies, Brits, Mexican, Korean ....ect ect. ect. ect. ect all living together, in peace. Imagine that?

reply to post by mahon


Serbs did not have T-80 and very few mig-29's and they shot down 56 planes and cruise missiles of USA.Take your propaganda elsewhere.

And iraqi t-72's were asad babil tanks ,had no ceramic armor nor heavy ERA.

reply to post by mahon


innovative people are leaving USA.The only ones coming are mexicans.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by mahon

 

innovative people are leaving USA.The only ones coming are mexicans.

Nonsense. Which is why you cant site any real stats to prove your nonsense claim. America, for all its problems, is still a destination for immigrants all over the world, and still offers enormous opportunity for innovation.

reply to post by repeatoffender


You might benefit from realizing that the US corporate power structure doesnt need or want 'wins' in those conflicts. They benefit financially and politically from long, drawn out conflicts, where they profit off of arming both sides. The US military is many times larger and better funded than Russia, or any of the US enemies, combined. Russia would not stand a chance in a conventional war. But no one fights conventional wars anymore It's all about arms dealers profits, and population control.

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

i dont 'support the rebels'. I just know how to read.

Really you don't? from your own recent posts it just seem that way

Then prove it, you liar.

I don't 'support the rebels', and absolutely nothing thing i have written here would bring a reasonable person to that conclusion. That's just a straw man you fall back on when someone eviscerates your ignorant misinterpretation of the facts.

It only 'seems' that way because you fall back on this weak-minded tendency to think that anyone taking exception with your asinine theories is supporting the rebels. Even if they say explicitly and repeatedly, as I have, that they dont.

You are a liar.