Thread too long, commencing termination. Reinitialize commentary in a new thread at your convenience.

Dunno what those are, but see if you can guess where I found THIS:

1. The military uses it’s Satelites when going to war to watch certian important things, they would have watched/recorded those WMD’s going into Syria if that was true (which it’s not)

We supposedly had images of WMD-related stuff going on that turned out to not be all that reliable, it’s not out of the question to think that something like that could have been covered using denial and deception techniques. Not saying that this is what happened, but it is possible.

And who knows, maybe that’s really what Israel blew up…

In Oct 2001 U.S. said that if any nation helped “terrorists” in anyway they will be held accountable,

Saudi Arabia and Pakistan haven’t been held accountable, for example, why should Syria? If we were going to take that seriously, we’d have started in Afghanistan, continued into Pakistan, went from there to Iran, and THEN gone into Iraq. I think Bush saw an easy opportunity to rid us of the thorn in our side of Saddam, and whoops, it kinda went haywire, because of really retarded goals and plans if you ask me.

now if the “Official” reason for this war were true (which it’s not) then U.S.A. would have attacked Syria for “helping” Iraq because Iraq moved thier WMD’s into it, ( and had a connection to O.B.L.) Now take a guess why that didn’t happen, use your smart and figure it out.

Why didn’t it happen? If it was true, then probably because we barely have enough to cover what we’re doing right now.

2. The U.S. Military put that “canister” there inorder to justify “evidence” Iraq had WMD’s

That’s asinine, I already told you that a single canister is not necessarily indicative of an entire cache somewhere; if we wanted to fake it we’d find a hangar full of the things and tell the world off!

1 canister would not have been found but thousands, if Iraq had WMD’s, oh but wait, you’ll have to stay there another 10 years to find the rest right;)

You do realize that a lot of former Iraqi military personnel are insurgents, right? They might have been able to find one of these things with ease. Then we bomb an insurgent position a day or so later and end up not knowing that we just offed the guy who knew where he got that shell, and we’re still in the dark!

Well if you KNOW this then you should be researching about the LIES that are starting these (IRAQ/ AFGHANISTAN) WARS

Blowing holes in the Afghanistan/9-11 conspiracy theories has become very easy. Someone sent people over here and had them do something sinister. Enter Afghanistan campaign; I had no problems going over there to eliminate the people behind it. Me personally, I would’ve left the Taliban alone and perhaps offered them economic aid to assist in their development and make them less likely to invite the next bunch of morons inside Tora Bora, but that’s another story. Iraq, military action was justified as Saddam was violating numerous UNSC resolutions, but regime change and occupation was not. As for the reasons behind Iraq, they may be suspect, but in the military we have taken the WMD threat in the region from Iraq seriously for over a decade. It is possible that the entire thing was based on flawed perceptions and incorrect information, but Saddam wasn’t helping himself by not letting inspectors inspect and verify the destruction of everything. And where are the rest of his SSM launchers, anyway?

I think your perception of my viewpoints might be off a little bit, so let me clarify a few things:
1. Afghanistan was the right thing to do, but it needn’t have involved “spreading democracy”, that’s just a stupid concept.
2. Iraq was fine with me personally, I was getting tired of going over there for SOUTHERN WATCH all the time anyway, but neither regime change nor occupation was justified in my opinion.
3. As far as I am aware yes Iraq did have, if not active development programs as Colin Powell’s famous photos proved to probably be massive misinterpretations, then some unaccounted for WMDs and delivery systems. But somebody tried to make a grand political thing out of it, thinking it’d be an “easy win” in my opinion to get people’s minds off of the fact that one man in some caves was still being elusive. The plan was retarded, however, and now you get the mess we’re in now.
4. Yes, we should get out of Iraq, but I think we do have a responsibility, as I explained to PLA earlier, to clean up the mess we made before we leave them to their own devices.

PLA-MKII sent me an interesting PM. I figured I’d answer it here in case anyone else has similar questions of me, and because I was getting wordy to the point that the stupid thing wouldn’t send as it had too many characters :rolleyes:

Hey SOC, off the record and I am not trying to argue with you.

Debating is not arguing, just because we don’t see eye to eye doesn’t mean we can’t coexist! I bet even flex297 and GarryB think I’m an OK guy 😀

1. Do you think that the media is being controlled?
2. Do you think Iraq is justified and staying there is justified?
3. Do you think Islam and Muslims are the problem?
4. Do you think Israel has undue influence on your government?
5. Who are you going to vote for?
6. What would you do about the Middle East if you were President?
7. And Last but not the least, who in your opinion killed JFK?

1. Maybe by liberal interests, what with all of the anti-Bush and anti-Iraq sentiment. I kid, I really do not see how the American media can be controlled by anyone at this point, although a poll a while back did show that the media does vote overwhelmingly liberal and Democratic, for what it’s worth. Really, if they were being controlled by the Republicans, then how do you explain being “allowed” to break the Abu Ghraib story? Or Dan Rather making up stuff in an attempt to influence the ’04 election? If they were being controlled by the Democrats, then Ann Coulter, Bill O’Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and the likes would never get on the air. And anyone with a good working knowledge of our government knows that there is no way in hell that both parties can cooperate on something that massive for that long anwyay :diablo: The divisivness that blew up after the ’00 election would have put an end to any of that with an abrupt quickness!

2. War was justified, regime change and occupation was not. I’ve said that a lot of times. Staying there is justified to the extent that we should do the right thing and clean up the mess we created, at the very least restoring the infrastructure and whatnot. Negotiate a cease-fire, pull major combat troops back and only employ them when requested by the Iraqi government or in direct response to a direct threat, and go about doing what we should have concentrated on in the first place: fixing the infrastructure, rebuilding schools and hospitals, and the like. Then get the hell out and let them govern their own lives.

3. They are part of the problem, yes, for continuing to harbor and foster extremism. Anyone who thinks that they are the sole problem, however, is fooling themselves, and I do not think in any way that the religion of Islam as a whole is either the problem or a bad thing. If you ask me, they’re going about things in entirely the wrong fashion. If a major sticking point is US/Western presence in the Middle East and whatnot, then if I were the extremists, I’d be covertly threatening to attack Muslim governments unless they told the US to go home or the price of oil would skyrocket. Those people could have a lot of power if they sat down and thought about it, but they just don’t get that blowing us up only makes us irate and is pretty much guaranteed, in the current climate, to make us more likely to be over there in larger numbers and for a longer duration. All we really need over there, after Iraq is revitalized of course, is a USN SAG to protect our shipping interests. We have every right to be in international waters protecting our direct interests, after all.

4. Yes, maybe not directly but Israeli interests are given way too much attention by our government, and they cost American lives. They also help make people with an “explosive mindset” less likely to be friendly. I don’t think there is some massive Jewish/Israeli conspiracy controlling the US government, but their lobbyists consistently make sure that Israeli interests and American interests are entangled, to our detriment. Check this out, I had an amusing thought. Continuing to aid Israel proves our government, irregardless of the individual or the party, two-faced. We support Israel militarily. Israel militarily supports China. We are making a huge (and completely irrational if you ask me) issue over a potential threat posed by China. Israel, therefore, is aiding someone singled out as a potential threat nation. And we support Israel. How in the world does that make any sense at all?

5. No clue at this juncture, although not Clinton. Too much socialism there that will result in more taxes coming out of my paycheck. I am watching every debate, though. Alan Keyes sounds like a windbag but he is totally hilarious to watch, if you can catch a GOP debate.

6. Cut ties with Israel, cut Iraq into three secular states in a loose federation, and embrace Iran. Now, if someone such as Saudi Arabia or the UAE chooses to sign some sort of mutual defense treaty to deter potential future aggression a-la Saddam in 1991, then that is their and our prerogative. I’d also stop caring about the internal matters in each nation. They choose their belief systems and whatnot, so they are theirs to live by. If their people want something different, they’ll eventually get irate enough to change it, like we did in the 1700s. Regarding Iran, I’d open full diplomatic relations. I’ll even help them developing nuclear power plants, and a nuclear deterrent sized to deter the potential Israeli threat. To that end though, I’d insist that we have access to their production sites to ensure that we know their uranium signatures. That way they know that if they decide to slip a bomb to terrorists and it goes off in the USA, we’ll know where to retaliate in kind. Ignoring Israel, no longer meddling in internal affairs, and making our footprint over there significantly smaller should do a lot to stem extremism towards the USA, which should be our primary concern insofar as extremism is concerned. Plus, if we’re nowhere to be found and not bothering anyone, the people will realize that a lot of their problems stem from social and economic issues in their home nations, and they’ll begin to realize who is really keeping them down in some instances.

7. I really do not care in the least; the issue has been so commercialized and overblown that if there is any truth out there, it’s being presented in a fashion that nobody will ever believe at this point. From what I do know, Oswald was proven to be the only shooter, but apart from that I have no clue as I have no interest in what I think are probably really creative conspiracy theories.

Now, be a sport and answer the questions I asked in my response to you earlier!

You can believe what you like SOC, CNN, Fox News, your information channels with your “competent journalists and analysts”.

From John Swinton: (considered “the Dean of his Profession” by his peers), one time Chief of Staff, at the New York Times. when asked to give a toast at the New York Press Club in 1953…

“There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print.

I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.

The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?

We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.”

That is hilarious. Swinton died in 1901.

http://www.rense.com/general20/yes.htm
http://www.constitution.org/pub/swinton_press.htm

At any rate, what does the American media in the 1800s have to do with the 21st Century?

Oh, still feeling patriotic working for USAF intelligence?

Who said anything about feeling patriotic? And what does the alleged activity by US marines have to do with what I am doing in New Jersey at the moment, apart from nothing? If another Marine rapes a Japanese girl in Okinawa, is that supposed to have some bearing on my choice of intelligence as a career path as well? I really see no point to that comment of yours, care to explain what your thought process was there?

Now there are all kinds of posters but I am saddened that someone as obviously intelligent and rational as you, SOC, has to be so blind. You’re fighting for the Empire not the Republic. However, I’ll never be able to convince you of anything. However, if you ever have any questions about Islam I’d be more than happy to answer them truthfully.

How am I being blind here? I said that the general idea of death squads or whatever did bear more investigation, but that it was that author’s reasoning he was using that did not stand up to a rational examination. His idea might be sound, but the reasons he used to come up with it are what I was taking issue with.

My assessment is the Golden Dome mosque was blown up by “western” or “Israeli” funding to create a civil war “divide and rule” environment. Iraqis I have spoken to have similar suspicions.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12802.htm

Wow. That guy (the article’s author) is really, really stretching things.

“What’s really taking place is that American armed and trained death squads are attacking Sunnis and Shiite alike to facilitate a break-up of Iraq which Pentagon planners and right wing ideologues have sought from the very beginning.”

Uh, it is blindingly obvious that had Iraq been split along ethnic lines in the beginning, things would have gone a lot easier. The original goal was most certainly not to split the country, that is one of the major errors in policy that was made regarding post-war activity. If we really had a mind to roll in there and take over Iraqi oil production, then stabilizing the nation as quickly as possible would have been the most logical course of action. As it turns out, we dropped the ball, and now we’re paying for it.

“The media, of course, is assisting in the disinformation campaign by dumping the Zarqawi fantasy and spinning an entirely new storyline centered on the destruction of the golden-domed mosque. Readers should be sensitive to the reiteration of this theme in nearly every article appearing in the New York Times and the Washington Post; the headwaters of the American propaganda system.”

The Times and the Post are notoriously anti-Bush and are among the very last journalistic organizations to be participating in any sort of campaign to aid the current administration. The mere suggestion that they would do so is absolutely ludicrous.

“The Iraqi resistance has never abandoned their original strategy to attack American troops, Iraqi security forces, and oil pipelines. Why would they… their strategy is succeeding? The idea that they suddenly shifted directions from guerilla warfare to sectarian violence following the demolition of the Golden-domed mosque is pure myth intended to persuade the American public that the uptick in violence is not created by the occupation but by deep-seated ethnic and religious divisions.”

Written by a man who clearly has no idea of how much the ethnic and religious divisions are a part of life over there. Besides, after a few years a change in tactics was warranted in some senses. What they were doing before clearly wasn’t working, as we were still there, so why is it hard to believe that they would change their tactics?

“There’s little doubt that the occupation is directly involved in the demolition of the mosque or that it is being used to craft a new narrative about sectarian violence.”

There is a lot of doubt, because this article is based on hearsay and circumstantial evidence at best!

Now, is the concept of covert attacks designed and orchestrated by America so outlandish as to be discarded? Of course not, it is a very interesting proposition that does merit further investigation. But the conclusions this guy is drawing and the reasoning he is giving do not hold up to an examination based on the reality of the situation. The site states that they give you news that you won’t find on CNN; methinks it might be because this guy at least is just not that competent of an analyst or a journalist to garner any attention from a major network!

Nice job 😀

On a related note, I believe I may have located an S-400 battery and a 96L6 radar set, and they’re not in Electrostal. I’ll be detailing this on my blog this weekend.