![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Ricardo wrote: Darn Good Intelligence wrote: Ricardo wrote: Darn Good Intelligence wrote: William Black wrote: "Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message legroups.com... So you think that Russia and China would intervene on the behalf of the Iranian lunatics? I don't think they'd dare. Would you bet your life? Yes. The Russians and Chinese would kick up a big fuss if the U.S attacks Iran but they wouldn't use military means to stop the U.S. That would be WW3. So what would the US attacking Iran be? Not WW3. How would it be WW3? All it would be is the U.S removing another despotic government, just as they did in Iraq and Afghanistan - what's the fuss? There has to be a time when the bullying has to be stopped. First tell Iran to stop threatening Israel, stop funding terrorism, and stop nuke program. If the US are so desperate to remove "despotic governments" why don't they do something about China? Because China isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism, and isn't threatening to destroy Israel. Gosh this is simple stuff. And as for removing such governments in Afghanistan and Iraq, what utter nonsense. Things are even worse in both places than they've ever been - particularly in Afghanistan which, I seem to recall, was an area where the US was particularly active in funding and training insurgents (or terrorists), who were then fighting the Soviet Union! The Taleban gave Al-Qaeda free reign to plot terror vs the U.S - it's good they're gone. In Iraq the problem is the ethnic groups determined to kill each other. You can't blame Bush if a Sunni militant sets off a car bomb. How about relieving Israel of its nuclear weapons - that would be a step towards peace for the world, or even Pakistan, or North Korea? What happens, after yet another nation is invaded and thousands of innocents killed, if someone decides to do the world a favour and invade the US to depose its "despotic government" with its well known record of funding terrorism - or turning a blind eye to the actions of its citizens in doing so, whilst entertaining the terrorist leaders at the highest possible level. No-one would dare invade the U.S - God there's been a record number of stupid comments made in this thread. Think about how America was made the laughing stock of the world with its invasion of Grenada - with a population of 100,000 people and deemed to be a "threat to America", after which illegal invasion the CIA secretly spent $650,000 to aid a pro-American candidate in that country's 1984 election. Are you sad people that insecure? You're going to run out of countries to invade - or you'll invade one that'll give you an even bigger shock than Iraq did (or Grenada, come to that!) Nothing about the prospect of the Iran war should frighten America - it will be no more difficult than getting rid of Saddam and winning the Iraq war. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message oups.com... If the US are so desperate to remove "despotic governments" why don't they do something about China? Because China isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism, and isn't threatening to destroy Israel. Gosh this is simple stuff. Pakistan is probably the former. Why not them? -- William Black I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach Time for tea. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() William Black wrote: "Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message oups.com... If the US are so desperate to remove "despotic governments" why don't they do something about China? Because China isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism, and isn't threatening to destroy Israel. Gosh this is simple stuff. Pakistan is probably the former. I already debunked this - Pakistan is not helping terrorists who will attack the U.S or Israel. There were only very tentative links between the men who did 7/7 and the groups you mentioned earlier. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Darn Good Intelligence wrote:
William Black wrote: "Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message groups.com... If the US are so desperate to remove "despotic governments" why don't they do something about China? Because China isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism, and isn't threatening to destroy Israel. Gosh this is simple stuff. Pakistan is probably the former. I already debunked this - Pakistan is not helping terrorists who will attack the U.S or Israel. There were only very tentative links between the men who did 7/7 and the groups you mentioned earlier. So, just because China "isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism" it doesn't have a despotic government, despite the US sending a 43 ship force, including an aircraft carrier just to "warn" the Chinese just a month or so back? Also, why should anyone support Israel and its genocidal activities towards its neighbours - particularly the Palestinians who were forcibly ejected from their land (much like the "Native Americans") to make room for immigrants from elsewhere, and then, for the survivors of this incursion to be rounded up and put in camps (or reservations - much like the "Native Americans"). Is it any surprise, when hope is nearly gone, that the downtrodden have nothing left but to hit back? In terms of the "world's biggest sponsor of terrorism" however, the US must rate pretty highly on the list - along with Pakistan, but they buy US arms, don't they, and it wouldn't do to upset a good customer - much like with Israel. Gosh, this is simple stuff. Ricardo -- "Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand Ignorance and prejudice, and fear, walk hand in hand ..." |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Ricardo wrote: Darn Good Intelligence wrote: William Black wrote: "Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message groups.com... If the US are so desperate to remove "despotic governments" why don't they do something about China? Because China isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism, and isn't threatening to destroy Israel. Gosh this is simple stuff. Pakistan is probably the former. I already debunked this - Pakistan is not helping terrorists who will attack the U.S or Israel. There were only very tentative links between the men who did 7/7 and the groups you mentioned earlier. So, just because China "isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism" it doesn't have a despotic government, despite the US sending a 43 ship force, including an aircraft carrier just to "warn" the Chinese just a month or so back? This is just an absurd argument. We have to analyze these things in terms of several factors including: the degree of threat a nation poses to the U.S, the extent to which the regime is "despotic" or undemocratic, and the viability of removing that regime from power. Clearly Iran meets ALL of these criteria; China doesn't. Iran is a severe threat and should and will be removed within the next 2 years. Look, the U.S simply cannot remove every "bad" regime from power to just to satisy a whining leftist like yourself who doesn't seem to realise that it's not possible for a superpower to be entirely consistent in its foreign policies in every different scenario. Also, why should anyone support Israel and its genocidal activities towards its neighbours - particularly the Palestinians who were forcibly ejected from their land (much like the "Native Americans") to make room for immigrants from elsewhere, and then, for the survivors of this incursion to be rounded up and put in camps (or reservations - much like the "Native Americans"). Is it any surprise, when hope is nearly gone, that the downtrodden have nothing left but to hit back? I'm not getting into the old Palestinian question, but I wouldn't exactly care if Israel just expelled them all to Jordan. That's the solution to the problem. In terms of the "world's biggest sponsor of terrorism" however, the US must rate pretty highly on the list - along with Pakistan, but they buy US arms, don't they, and it wouldn't do to upset a good customer - much like with Israel. You sound like another Ahmadinejad sympathiser. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Darn Good Intelligence wrote:
Ricardo wrote: Darn Good Intelligence wrote: William Black wrote: "Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message legroups.com... If the US are so desperate to remove "despotic governments" why don't they do something about China? Because China isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism, and isn't threatening to destroy Israel. Gosh this is simple stuff. Pakistan is probably the former. I already debunked this - Pakistan is not helping terrorists who will attack the U.S or Israel. There were only very tentative links between the men who did 7/7 and the groups you mentioned earlier. So, just because China "isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism" it doesn't have a despotic government, despite the US sending a 43 ship force, including an aircraft carrier just to "warn" the Chinese just a month or so back? This is just an absurd argument. We have to analyze these things in terms of several factors including: the degree of threat a nation poses to the U.S, the extent to which the regime is "despotic" or undemocratic, and the viability of removing that regime from power. Clearly Iran meets ALL of these criteria; China doesn't. Iran is a severe threat and should and will be removed within the next 2 years. Look, the U.S simply cannot remove every "bad" regime from power to just to satisy a whining leftist like yourself who doesn't seem to realise that it's not possible for a superpower to be entirely consistent in its foreign policies in every different scenario. Also, why should anyone support Israel and its genocidal activities towards its neighbours - particularly the Palestinians who were forcibly ejected from their land (much like the "Native Americans") to make room for immigrants from elsewhere, and then, for the survivors of this incursion to be rounded up and put in camps (or reservations - much like the "Native Americans"). Is it any surprise, when hope is nearly gone, that the downtrodden have nothing left but to hit back? I'm not getting into the old Palestinian question, but I wouldn't exactly care if Israel just expelled them all to Jordan. That's the solution to the problem. In terms of the "world's biggest sponsor of terrorism" however, the US must rate pretty highly on the list - along with Pakistan, but they buy US arms, don't they, and it wouldn't do to upset a good customer - much like with Israel. You sound like another Ahmadinejad sympathiser. Thank you for sounding like a typical moronic American: anyone with a view counter to your own is a "whining leftist", and then sticking your fingers in your ears when confronted with some of the sources of today's problems - not least America's involvement in other countries affairs and supporting and sponsoring terrorism. Your country doesn't have the "right" to remove ANY regime from power! Hitler went down that road some years ago with his 1939 European Tour - it's just lucky that Britain and France were the only ones prepared to stop him. Ricardo -- "Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand Ignorance and prejudice, and fear, walk hand in hand ..." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ricardo" wrote in message .uk... Darn Good Intelligence wrote: Ricardo wrote: Darn Good Intelligence wrote: William Black wrote: "Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message glegroups.com... If the US are so desperate to remove "despotic governments" why don't they do something about China? Because China isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism, and isn't threatening to destroy Israel. Gosh this is simple stuff. Pakistan is probably the former. I already debunked this - Pakistan is not helping terrorists who will attack the U.S or Israel. There were only very tentative links between the men who did 7/7 and the groups you mentioned earlier. So, just because China "isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism" it doesn't have a despotic government, despite the US sending a 43 ship force, including an aircraft carrier just to "warn" the Chinese just a month or so back? This is just an absurd argument. We have to analyze these things in terms of several factors including: the degree of threat a nation poses to the U.S, the extent to which the regime is "despotic" or undemocratic, and the viability of removing that regime from power. Clearly Iran meets ALL of these criteria; China doesn't. Iran is a severe threat and should and will be removed within the next 2 years. Look, the U.S simply cannot remove every "bad" regime from power to just to satisy a whining leftist like yourself who doesn't seem to realise that it's not possible for a superpower to be entirely consistent in its foreign policies in every different scenario. Also, why should anyone support Israel and its genocidal activities towards its neighbours - particularly the Palestinians who were forcibly ejected from their land (much like the "Native Americans") to make room for immigrants from elsewhere, and then, for the survivors of this incursion to be rounded up and put in camps (or reservations - much like the "Native Americans"). Is it any surprise, when hope is nearly gone, that the downtrodden have nothing left but to hit back? I'm not getting into the old Palestinian question, but I wouldn't exactly care if Israel just expelled them all to Jordan. That's the solution to the problem. In terms of the "world's biggest sponsor of terrorism" however, the US must rate pretty highly on the list - along with Pakistan, but they buy US arms, don't they, and it wouldn't do to upset a good customer - much like with Israel. You sound like another Ahmadinejad sympathiser. Thank you for sounding like a typical moronic American: anyone with a view counter to your own is a "whining leftist", and then sticking your fingers in your ears when confronted with some of the sources of today's problems - not least America's involvement in other countries affairs and supporting and sponsoring terrorism. Your country doesn't have the "right" to remove ANY regime from power! Hitler went down that road some years ago with his 1939 European Tour - it's just lucky that Britain and France were the only ones prepared to stop him. Ricardo -- "Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand Ignorance and prejudice, and fear, walk hand in hand ..." Well if you are going to be the worlds only superpower, you have to act like it. As far as Britain and France being prepared for Hitler, I didn't know that. I thought the French waited until after the Blitzkreg started befor they printed all the menus in German, but I guess they must have started before that as there wasn't enought time to do it before the Germans were in Paris. Britain being prepared? For what? A stupid decision and caution because they couldn't believe their own sucess stopped the Germans for enough time for the British by heroic effort to evacuate and save their Army. Without the core of their army to use for expansion, the massive aid from the US, and the incredable stupid decision by Hitler to attack Russia, it would have been over for them. The US gave a lot of aid to the Russian, but if they had given them aid on the same scale as they gave the British then most of Europe would have had to learn to speak Russian |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Ricardo wrote: Thank you for sounding like a typical moronic American: anyone with a view counter to your own is a "whining leftist", This is not true - I am generally tolerant of the views of others, even if they are Ahmadinejad sympathisers like you seem to be. I only label people a "whining leftist" when they make stupid remarks like "well if despotic regmies are so bad, why don't you overthrow every single despotic regime in the world!?!??!". People you state these things without taking into account the fact that some nations i.e. Iran, pose more of a threat than other nations i.e. China. Get it? and then sticking your fingers in your ears when confronted with some of the sources of today's problems - not least America's involvement in other countries affairs and supporting and sponsoring terrorism. Look, I never claimed that the U.S was perfect, but it is far more a force for good than for evil - and your sixth-grade Michael Moore logic isn't going to change my views. Your country doesn't have the "right" to remove ANY regime from power! We do if it poses a threat to the U.S, as Iran clearly doesn. Iran must be removed and will be shortly. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
William Black wrote:
"Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message oups.com... If the US are so desperate to remove "despotic governments" why don't they do something about China? Because China isn't the world's biggest sponsor of terrorism, and isn't threatening to destroy Israel. Gosh this is simple stuff. Pakistan is probably the former. Why not them? Pakistan's President understands that the US Constitution grants freedom of speech but not to foreign heads of state. Correct use of that information is defending his country against one of the world's most powerful countries. Andrew Swallow |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Nations sending Iran to Security Council (for Israel via the US, of course!): | NOMOREWARFORISRAEL | Naval Aviation | 1 | July 13th 06 05:05 AM |
Bush administration finalizes military attack on Iran | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 11 | January 5th 06 09:38 AM |
American nazi pond scum, version two | bushite kills bushite | Naval Aviation | 0 | December 21st 04 10:46 PM |
Hey! What fun!! Let's let them kill ourselves!!! | [email protected] | Naval Aviation | 2 | December 17th 04 09:45 PM |
millionaire on the Internet... in weeks! | Malcolm Austin | Soaring | 0 | November 5th 04 11:14 PM |