Warmonger Thread

reply to post by casenately


There is no doubt that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons yet people here still deny it. This is NOT IRAQ where the information was questionable. Iran has been caught red-handed trying to acquire the tools of the trade. Iran has increased its production and capabilities significantly.

Heritage’s James Phillips writes that Iran’s uranium enrichment program has increased by 84 percent since 2009, according to a new study by the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, and author Greg Jones projects that Iran could produce enough weapons-grade uranium to fuel a nuclear weapon in about 62 days if it chose to do so.

If it’s a “peaceful” energy program then why the need for weapons grade uranium? Why the need to locate its facilities underground. Why all the secrecy? Why the rush to acquire missile technology if not as a means to deliver a nuclear warhead?

According to unconfirmed reports, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has acquired two missile warheads capable of being armed with a nuclear weapon. And a recently leaked U.N. report described suspected ballistic missile technology exchanges between North Korea and Iran, with the technology transiting through an unnamed neighboring country, which several U.N. diplomats, under the condition of anonymity, have identified as China.

link

I’ve already shown the connection between Iran and Nazi Germany. Are we to wait until they wreak havoc on the world in devastating fashion, crippling fragile world economies, before we intervene?
Iran’s continued threats to close the Strait of Hormuz are provocative and insane on their part. I consider that an act of war because they will not only be threatening the lives of many people who use that international waterway (including our military and many civilians) but it will also have devastating effects on the already weak US economy. !/3 of the world’s oil travels through that area and Iran knows this.

If Iran succeeded in fully blockading the strait for up to one week, Americans would see a massive spike in oil prices, a one-quarter drop in GDP of $161 billion, the loss of one million jobs, and a drop of real disposable personal income costing more than $260 billion.

link

I think people should stop being so damned conspiracy minded and look at the evidence yourself. This is not drummed up garbage from the warmongering American government or the military industrial complex. History repeats itself, and we saw what happened while everyone ignored Nazi Germany. People sat by and said we’d be overreacting. Imagine if the Nazi’s could have been peacefully disarmed before they had a chance to act???? Imagine if world pressure could have peacefully taken away the Nazi’s destructive weapons???? Do you think Germany would have been invaded by Belgium or the US if they didn’t have those weapons??

reply to post by aorAki

Have you heard of Prescott Bush? Oh my, what a lot of catching up you've got ahead of you!

Be easy on the poor guy, he does have a lot to learn though.

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power

George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.

The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.

His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.

It is rumored by many that he was in attendance at the pro Nazi rally in NYC back in 1934. There are many other Nazi connections, but it's an undeniable fact he was penalized under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The rabbit hole goes way deeper than that but I don't want to derail OP's thread.

reply to post by seabag

Originally posted by casenately
reply to post by seabag

 

The Nazi connection can also link to bush and most bad leadership. The same leadership that destabilized Iran and now wants to sweep it under the global carpet of rewritten history. The thing is they have to erase it before it can be rewritten.

Anything military is classified when possible. All high tech is military controlled or regulated. The dawn of all high tech was WW2 Germany. The Nazi scientific community was recruited by both emerging super powers(USA, USSR).
The military research that followed by both powers and eventually the world, was a continuation of the Nazi design. Our leadership is run by the same theology of W.A.R.

The debate over Prescott Bush's behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power.

damages by two Holocaust survivors against the Bush family, and the imminent publication of three books on the subject are threatening to make Prescott Bush's business history an uncomfortable issue for his grandson, George W

Tantalising


Bush was also on the board of at least one of the companies that formed part of a multinational network of front companies to allow Thyssen to move assets around the world.

Thyssen owned the largest steel and coal company in Germany and grew rich from Hitler's efforts to re-arm between the two world wars. One of the pillars in Thyssen's international corporate web, UBC, worked exclusively for, and was owned by, a Thyssen-controlled bank in the Netherlands. More tantalising are Bush's links to the Consolidated Silesian Steel Company (CSSC), based in mineral rich Silesia on the German-Polish border. During the war, the company made use of Nazi slave labour from the concentration camps, including Auschwitz. The ownership of CSSC changed hands several times in the 1930s, but documents from the US National Archive declassified last year link Bush to CSSC, although it is not clear if he and UBC were still involved in the company when Thyssen's American assets were seized in 1942.

Three sets of archives spell out Prescott Bush's involvement. All three are readily available, thanks to the efficient US archive system and a helpful and dedicated staff at both the Library of Congress in Washington and the National Archives at the University of Maryland.

Ben Aris in Berlin and Duncan Campbell in Washington

The Guardian, Saturday 25 September 2004 23.59 BST

www.guardian.co.uk...

reformed-theology.org...

Originally posted by aorAki

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by casenately
reply to post by seabag

 

The Nazi connection can also link to bush and most bad leadership.

Bush connected to the Nazi's?

Source?

Have you heard of Prescott Bush? Oh my, what a lot of catching up you've got ahead of you!

Prescott Bush wasn’t the president or even a powerful figure in politics (he didn't become a Senator until long after the war).

While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade. The Guardian has seen evidence that shows Bush was the director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation (UBC) that represented Thyssen's US interests and he continued to work for the bank after America entered the war.

link

What does that prove? Is that the same as the leader of Iran renaming the country after Nazi's. Or how about helping the Nazis kill jews around the world. Did Prescott Bush do that? NOPE!!

Replace 'Jews' with 'Indians' and you have your multigenerational megalomanical genocide. It's institutional in the U.S.A., along with torture and human rights abuses.

Originally posted by seabag

There is no doubt that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons yet people here still deny it. This is NOT IRAQ where the information was questionable.

Puh-leese
We are to believe you NOW, because the MSM says so again ?????????

LIES LIES LIES LIES , and now Iran , LIES LIES LIES LIES

I didn't say he killed Jews, just that he shares ties to the leadership and eventually he and others formed government policy. They followed a continuation of the very same orientation of Nazi leadership´s policy and agenda.

Not all Nazi leadership even cared about the Jews really. There were some that bought into all that fanatical rhetoric from our worst mad tyrants, but most of those "world string pullers" were really on a different playing field. They didn't care what the "leader" was all about. They wanted control of the coin. The power of the world lies in the math of its summation and the worth of it in fair trade of coin.

The Nazis wanted this, not to become the wrath of some "super Arian space atlantian race", Hitler was an occultist mad man, they humored him. The power was in the banks dream before, and the realization of it after.

A consolidating control over world government by the measured ascertain of coin and its value was the "reason". The wars then and then after are all an expression of a check mate move over global trade.

The empire is not a physical empire like the Romans with an empire and its one ruler.
The world was established as a global network like that of the Mongol empire. A strongly defended network of trade and influence that was in its very nature tributary to the top leadership of the global reins.

Originally posted by aorAki
Replace 'Jews' with 'Indians' and you have your multigenerational megalomanical genocide. It's institutional in the U.S.A., along with torture and human rights abuses.

More deflection and America bashing. Predictable...

So because America is tyrannical in your opinion then it's ok for crazy SOB's who commit suicide bombing to have nuclear weapons? Great logic

reply to post by seabag

More deflection and America bashing. Predictable...

So because America is tyrannical in your opinion then it's ok for crazy SOB's who commit suicide bombing to have nuclear weapons? Great logic

The deflection isn't his, you are deflecting. The United States should not have nuclear weapons. Deal with that problem first, and then let's worry about the rest of the world. Get our house in order.

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux


No, the deflection is his. The debate is about whether or not Iran should have nukes. If you'd like to discuss whether or not America should them start thread and I'll join in the debate. 

reply to post by seabag

James Phillips is the Senior Research Fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation. He has written extensively on Middle Eastern issues and international terrorism since 1978.

Phillips is a member of the Committee on the Present Danger, a prestigious bipartisan group dedicated to winning the war on terrorism. He also is a member of the Board of Editors of Middle East Quarterly , the leading conservative journal of Middle Eastern policy studies.

Yes his view is not partial or anything. His whole life is not dedicated to the eminent threat of the middle east. It is his specialty to promote the war/threat based interventionism that gains directly.

Influence, and wealth are two sides to the same fair coin. This guy can't be honest. He is this war. Other side to the story, perhaps someone who dedicated at least as many years as this guy to ME peace. What is it like 41 years he has been saying this. Wow, he is psychic or some sort of soothsayer., perhaps he would be someone involved in "cheerleading" for the war.

I’ve already shown the connection between Iran and Nazi Germany. Are we to wait until they wreak havoc on the world in devastating fashion, crippling fragile world economies, before we intervene?

You are right, The Nazi influence on world affairs has continued into present day. When the CIA backed royal family was ousted and an independent baking system was installed, Policy makers chose to follow the "Nazi design ". The policy was to weaken world economies by a system of debt. Instead of worth determining the value of coin, debt based economies emerged under the conglomerate power of international global corporatism in world governments. Achieved by control of the central banking apparatus that regulates this worth. Interventionism is a policy of exacting that influence on that debt based economy with tools such as wars.
Even a war won is one that cost something more than what can be gained.

-

If Iran succeeded in fully blockading the strait for up to one week, Americans would see a massive spike in oil prices, a one-quarter drop in GDP of $161 billion, the loss of one million jobs, and a drop of real disposable personal income costing more than $260 billion

Again, you are right. Its good both our countries decided to be NEXT to each other while one was just having war games. When the other side said it would fire on the other if such and such, and the other did the same. Its good Iran has not done anything to merit preemptively installing an extension of our banking system after we "free them". In the end its about the almighty dollar. It´s not pie we can have.

Watch out or Ill free you to death.

Imagine if the Nazi’s could have been peacefully disarmed before they had a chance to act???? Imagine if world pressure could have peacefully taken away the Nazi’s destructive weapons???? Do you think Germany would have been invaded by Belgium or the US if they didn’t have those weapons??

Yes,
weapons business is a good business. It would have been great if Germany wasn't armed up the yinyang by the same leadership of global banking. Almost the same way the USA is arming itself up by global banking profit. Weapons are made to be used. The real enemy is the guy making them and selling them. Not the person who decides to take them as well as the reason offered to use them.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

No, the deflection is his. The debate is about whether or not Iran should have nukes. If you'd like to discuss whether or not America should them start thread and I'll join in the debate. 

There you go again, deflecting. The debate is not about whether or not Iran should have nuclear power, you clearly created a thread inviting debate on what the United States should do about Iran's nuclear ambitions. Now, after countless pages, you wish to modify the debate to simply just a question of whether Iran should have them.

No nation should have nuclear weapons. So, no Iran should not have them, nor should the United States, or any other nation. Logically speaking, if we are to consider invading another nation and using a nuclear arms build up as the excuse, we are are relying upon a logical fallacy. It is illogical to fear the idea of a nuclear armed Iran and just shrug ones shoulder and dismiss any fear of a nuclear armed United States.

About 80% of which the OP posted against Iran could be said the same against China and Russia. so why have we not wiped out either one? The answer is all in the US history of our dealing with small nations. Go back to the 50's-60's small nations in central and south america, what did we do? We got them to hold free elections and when they elected a communist what did we do? We went in and kill their duly elected president and put in our puppet government. This model has been used over and over by the US. So my question is this why should any small country that has not fell for the carrot stick of US aid trust the USA? why do we need all the bases in other countries and they will tell us to protect our intrest well if that is the case then the USA has a world dominate intrest. Which scares the crap out of me.

Originally posted by aorAki

We all realize that the Islamists hate immigrants.

Immigration is a one way deal with them.

Originally posted by Aeons

Originally posted by aorAki

We all realize that the Islamists hate immigrants.

Immigration is a one way deal with them.

They hate pizza with double cheese too.

Whats your point?

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

No, the deflection is his. The debate is about whether or not Iran should have nukes. If you'd like to discuss whether or not America should them start thread and I'll join in the debate. 

I thought it was about warmongers and anti-Americanism. Two labels made to divide the people. A tool of mind slavery that weakens us.

It is not the strength over us, but our being weakened that has ensured the survival of a select few.

The hunters and their dogs, after the bleeding, running meal.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by SplitInfinity

 

This is because you have no real life experience in the field and have relied on what you read and have been told to formulate your opinions.

Real life experience in what field? The "field" of war is it? Perhaps you could clarify this mysterious field you so ambiguously refer to so maybe I can join you in laughing at my uneducated ways.

My Job is to Prevent misunderstandings that cause WARS. I am nor Military but I am "Civilian" and work with the Military in areas where a PROBLEM MUST BE RESOLVED TO SAVE LIVES. Some of these areas are in ancient tribal regions where our enemies have paid off Villigers who cannot afford to refuse the money and have a Ancient Religious Code of Ethics that forces them to protect any GUEST of the Tribe.

Never in a Million Years do they expect to run into U.S. Soldiers as these areas deep in the mountains on both sides of the Pakistan/Afghanistan boarder are villages that are paid off with money they can not refuse to Make guests of Taliban as well as al-Qaeda personel. When they do run into American Special Forces...they watch as their GUESTS that these Villagers...whom whould defend to the death by an ancient code of Honor...cowardly run away and leave the village unprotected.

They have only am understanding of Americans from what our enemies have told them and when we bring in Food, Medical Supplies and talk to them making them understand that we realize that their ancient code that forces them to protect guests is not something that we hold them responsible for but rather understand the Honor of it...but we also say...these people who you would fight to the death to protect....are COWARDS as they have abandoned you....then we bring in food, Medical supplies. Doctors, Immunize the children and do this without fear. Honor and Bravery is a HUGE motivator in this part of the world and they are very well aware that we are there helping as their one time Guests have fled.

I am not a Warmonger but a problem solver. My job is to prevent war and get the people of a region to stand up to a few cowards with a few guns. This has worked very well as anyone can understand there is a difference between words and actions. Split Infinity

reply to post by guitarplayer


It's not the USA. It's your government too. All of them. What has been allowed to happen.

It's about what´s in your pocket, or the lack of it. It is not about the emptiness of a belly, but the filling of a wallet. It has changed from a life in tribute to the betterment of community into a tributary system designed to place worth upon me and wealth/ power upon the needs of few.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by aorAki
Replace 'Jews' with 'Indians' and you have your multigenerational megalomanical genocide. It's institutional in the U.S.A., along with torture and human rights abuses.

More deflection and America bashing. Predictable...

So because America is tyrannical in your opinion then it's ok for crazy SOB's who commit suicide bombing to have nuclear weapons? Great logic

No, I've never said that. ...and since when is telling the truth, bashing?

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

No, the deflection is his. The debate is about whether or not Iran should have nukes. If you'd like to discuss whether or not America should them start thread and I'll join in the debate. 

I don't think anyone should have nukes, and by the standards you are suggesting, the U.S.A. should definitely not have them. This debate can't take place in a vacuum.