the USS Eisenhower Carrier Battle Group doesn't make for a 'massive' build-up for war with Iran

On a sunny day (Fri, 20 Oct 2006 09:37:30 GMT) it happened "Diamond Jim"
wrote in :


"Ricardo" wrote in message
o.uk...
Darn Good Intelligence wrote:
Ricardo wrote:

Darn Good Intelligence wrote:

William Black wrote:


"Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message
oglegroups.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.

I have seen some documentaties where the German airforce was defeated
by the English.
The English had radar (an English invention, although the Germans had
something like that on ships), and in particular the magenetron tube
generatiing very high power microwaves (maybe you cook with one), made
better radar possible later in the war, this helped the US spot German
submarines! And without that, many more US ships would have gone down.
So it is not all that simple as you may think.
With the German airforce defeated Hitler called of the UK invasion.
But not the V1 V2 or whatever...
For that massive bombing of the German resouces and infrastructure
was done.
The German rocket technology is what makes our ara of satellites and
spacetravel and internet possible.
The English did not even belive at first a V1 or V32 could be build.
So, the good side of wars is massive invention because of a _need_.
Quite different from advertising agencies trying to convince you
you need something.... Better reality check, higher pressure, only
results count...
So, who knows what WW3 will bring us.... new weapons.. that Bush thinks he
can sell.... if he survives that is, if he wins... if anyone wins.

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.

On a sunny day (20 Oct 2006 05:47:23 -0700) it happened "Darn Good
Intelligence" wrote in
. com:


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.

How does Iran pose a thread? No country poses a thread.
US could nuke and glassify any attacker, enough to make them think twice or even
trice.
But Iran is a danger to Israel....
Draw you own conclusions, and Iran is a much bigger danger to Saudi Arabia,
as its missiles can reach there.
And Saudi Arabia employs Bush to make US jump.
Make _you_ jump.
Now jump, jump to the gas station and pay...
US is no longer US, it is a toy for the Saudis who bought your presidency,
you land, you weapon facturies, and almost your ports.
Facing Mecca is not far in the future for the US..
Bush is Islam.

Jan Panteltje wrote:

How does Iran pose a thread? No country poses a thread.

Iran developing nukes.

US could nuke and glassify any attacker, enough to make them think twice or even
trice.

Maybe they will to Iran.

But Iran is a danger to Israel....

Another reason to nuke Iran.

On a sunny day (20 Oct 2006 06:55:36 -0700) it happened "Darn Good
Intelligence" wrote in
.com:


Jan Panteltje wrote:

How does Iran pose a thread? No country poses a thread.

Iran developing nukes.

US could nuke and glassify any attacker, enough to make them think twice or even
trice.

Maybe they will to Iran.

But Iran is a danger to Israel....

Another reason to nuke Iran.

What about Saudi Arabia? Don't you want cheap oil, Islam stopped, a sane
president, not a Bush Saudi mole, place to move if winter gets earlier and
earlier in NY due to climate change, holiday house there, and so easy to occupy,
Saddam could do it in a day?

Diamond Jim wrote:
"Ricardo" wrote in message
.uk...

Darn Good Intelligence wrote:

Ricardo wrote:


Darn Good Intelligence wrote:


William Black wrote:



"Darn Good Intelligence" wrote in message
oglegroups.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


I think you may find that Britain and France declared war on Germany,
following Germany's invasion of Poland, at the same time - prepared or not!

The US "gave" Britain nothing - we are still paying for it - the debt is
due to be finally redeemed this December, furthermore, despite Britain's
parlous state, despite the Nazi/USSR pact, Britain was providing aid to
the Soviet Union, once they were attacked, long before the USA.

I accept that probably both America and Russia followed the correct
course in sitting it out on the sidelines to see just how far Hitler
would get - and both suffered the same fate of being drawn in by
unexpected attacks.

I was in Poland this week, and it is interesting to note that despite
post-war events with Poland being sold down the river along with most of
Eastern Europe to Stalin and his henchmen by the USA, following the
sidelining of Churchill, thus forcing a great part of Europe to speak
Russian anyway, there is still considerable warmth of feeling towards
Britain. After all, it was only Britain at that time that armed their
people in exile and allowed them to fight on - alongside the French, the
Dutch, the Greeks, the Norwegians, the Czechs, the Belgians and the
Yugoslavs.

In the Cracow airport snack bar there are some superb oil paintings of
WW2 aircraft - all in RAF colours, and all bearing the Polish insignia.
Poles and Czechs and others were fighting in their own RAF squadrons in
Britain well before America was involved in WW2.

Ricardo
--
"Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand
Ignorance and prejudice, and fear, walk hand in hand ..."

Darn Good Intelligence wrote:
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.

How do they pose a threat? In the same way that Iraq did, Panama did,
Grenada did, to name but a few? Come on, please.

Ricardo

--
"Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand
Ignorance and prejudice, and fear, walk hand in hand ..."

Ricardo wrote:
Darn Good Intelligence wrote:
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.

How do they pose a threat? In the same way that Iraq did, Panama did,
Grenada did, to name but a few? Come on, please.


The zioNists like DCI here only care about IsReeL. American boiz are
cannon-fodder for his precious jooz.

Ricardo

Ricardo wrote:
Darn Good Intelligence wrote:
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.

How do they pose a threat?

Iran wants to destroy Israel, is developing nukes, supports terrorism
and has an anti-U.S government. What don't you understand?

In the same way that Iraq did, Panama did,
Grenada did, to name but a few? Come on, please.

It was a shame that WMD were never found, but I think, quite frankly,
that most of the world has now moved on from this issue. Basically, we
couldn't leave Saddam in power in the post 9/11 world - everyone
thought he had WMD, he'd invaded his neighbours in the past and he'd
used WMD against them too.

In the post 9/11 world Saddam's government was an intolerable security
threat and it's good that he's gone, regardless of no WMD being found.
Military involvement in Grenada and Panama occured for complex reasons
but don't be fooled into thinking that, because those wars might not
have been absolutely essential, that the Iran war is not essential
either. The Iran war is necessary as long as they continue developing
nukes.

On a sunny day (20 Oct 2006 13:44:08 -0700) it happened "Darn Good
Intelligence" wrote in
.com:


Basically, we
couldn't leave Saddam in power in the post 9/11 world - everyone
thought he had WMD,


Your definiton of 'everyone' must be really funny :-)
Not even the CIA! And that is why the White House reveiled
a CIA operative's name, no yellow cake from South Africa.
White house bloody well knew their were no WMDs.
As did everybody else, even the international atomic agency.

But _as I pointed out before_ Bushists will believe anything without proof.
Photos of fish and chips stands passing as 'mobile labs' ;-)
Anyway nothing photoshop and after effects will not create.
Next they will convince you the aliens are coming, read his lips.

Did you ever notice it was the oil producing countries who jumped on the
bandwagon?
UK (North Sea oil) Russia (own oil) Netherlands (natural gas coupled to
oil price), Saudi Arabia (own oil), and the one that had nuke power for 70%
or more did NOT (France).
And Germany was not very willing either.

It is all about killing Iraq oil export to get the price up, so the Saudi
masters of Islam converted mole Bush get richer.
All they want is $$$ (and Iraq wanted Euro, that would be the end for the US).

DRM Certified tamper free.