Is Another War on the Way?
 

Apparently the Times is reporting that "Prepare to Deploy" orders were issued...

What Would War Look Like?

[ QUOTE ]
The first message was routine enough: a "Prepare to Deploy" order sent through naval communications channels to a submarine, an Aegis-class cruiser, two minesweepers and two mine hunters. The orders didn't actually command the ships out of port; they just said to be ready to move by Oct. 1. But inside the Navy those messages generated more buzz than usual last week when a second request, from the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), asked for fresh eyes on long-standing U.S. plans to blockade two Iranian oil ports on the Persian Gulf.

[/ QUOTE ]

thenation.com is reporting that a aircraft carrier and other ships have been ordered to go the Gulf...(I don't know much about how reliable thenation.com is as a source, though...)

War Signals?

[ QUOTE ]
As reports circulate of a sharp debate within the White House over possible US military action against Iran and its nuclear enrichment facilities, The Nation has learned that the Bush Administration and the Pentagon have issued orders for a major "strike group" of ships, including the nuclear aircraft carrier Eisenhower as well as a cruiser, destroyer, frigate, submarine escort and supply ship, to head for the Persian Gulf, just off Iran's western coast. This information follows a report in the current issue of Time magazine, both online and in print, that a group of ships capable of mining harbors has received orders to be ready to sail for the Persian Gulf by October 1.


[/ QUOTE ]

In addition, other sites are pointing toward the potential for conflict between Syria and Israel...(Again, reliable sources??)

Damascus official: Syria losing patience with Israel

[ QUOTE ]
Syrian Information Minister Mohsen Bilal said that his country is losing patience in the matter of the Golan Heights, and that the Syrians would not wait much longer before they act.


"Syria has made a strategic choice for peace, but it will not wait much longer before it recaptures the Golan Heights," Bilal told Egyptian newspaper al-Ahram al-Arabi.


"The Syrian people have waited 40 years for the implementation of the United Nations Security Council resolutions, but to no avail, and
they are losing their patience," he stated.

[/ QUOTE ]

While of this is going on, the Middle East appears to be literally foaming at the mouth, as the riots over the cartoons and the recent papal remarks demonstrate.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

Iran has refused the demands of the US and other nations regarding its nuclear program. So it's time to put up or shut up for us. And Israel's main target should be Syria and not Lebanon, as the supplying of Hezbollah is much more difficult without Syrian help. But we shouldn't be going there with some half-ass intention to "show them we're serious" or something in the form of just a few strikes and allowing them to regroup and form plans to retaliate, most likely through supplying terrorists who will do their bidding, including possibly with small nuclear devices. So if we go in, we need to pound them with everything we got and knock them down so they (Iran & Syria) can't get up.

The true military lesson (aside from any political ones) of the Vietnam War is that you don't go in and slowly escalate. All that does is allow the enemy to build up his forces and utilize a plan of long term asymmetrical resistance to wear down your will to fight. So any war with them needs to be fought with the objective of totally defeating the enemy and removing his/their ability to fight. If you are going to step on a snake you better cut its head off before it bites you.

All this means that all forms of weapons should be in the mix. Tactical nukes can be justified because if we fail and allow Iran to develop and use either itself or through its proxies, nukes on us, then the long term cost to us will be much higher. Iran has had plenty of chances, and still does, to back away from the precipice. If they won't and get pushed over it's on them.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

So I take it you think an actual conflict is coming?

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
But we shouldn't be going there with some half-ass intention to "show them we're serious" or something in the form of just a few strikes and allowing them to regroup and form plans to retaliate, most likely through supplying terrorists who will do their bidding, including possibly with small nuclear devices.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is there any evidence that Iran has either the desire or wherewithal to do this? If you think that crazy rhetoric by Ahmadinejad is hard evidence then I suppose we'll have to disagree on that one.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

The cowardly appeasing politicans of pre-WWII europe didn't take Hitler's "crazy rhetoric" seriously either. If someone says he's going to shoot me as soon as he gets a gun, and a 3rd party can't stop him from doing so, I'm not just going to wait for him to get it or go through life looking over my shoulder. Pre-emptive strikes in response to deadly threats are justified.


morph: Yes I think war with Iran is coming, and between Israel and Syria as well. We shouldn't change our position, and they won't. That means conflict.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

The real lesson of viet nam was that you cannot occupy a country that does not want to be occupied. This is also the lesson of Iraq, Korea, Afghanistan, among many other examples through history. You can destroy it (perhaps) by exterminating every man, woman and child but you cannot occupy it.

I take it you are for a cleansing of all human life in Syria and/or Iran? Specially with the comments of use of tactical nukes.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The real lesson of viet nam was that you cannot occupy a country that does not want to be occupied. This is also the lesson of Iraq, Korea, Afghanistan, among many other examples through history. You can destroy it (perhaps) by exterminating every man, woman and child but you cannot occupy it.

I take it you are for a cleansing of all human life in Syria and/or Iran? Specially with the comments of use of tactical nukes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did Imperial Japan want to be occupied in 1945? I think not, yet the U.S. had little trouble with resistance there after the surrender. The key is that the enemy is totally defeated, which does not necessarily require the extermination of every person. It may require killing large numbers of them, however (like the U.S. did to Japan), which is why tactical nukes are suggested, as they are efficient for that purpose.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

I have to say I'm neutral on this.

On one hand, I think Iran is a much bigger threat than Iraq was, although I believe they can still be deterred. They aren't under UN sanctions like Iraq was, they don't have weapon inspectors crawling up their butt, and they are much bigger on supporting terrorism than Saddam was. Throw on there that we're talking about a bombing campaign and blockade that is much easier than an invasion and an occupation and there are advantages.

On the other hand, we have the Bush Administration, whose spectacular incompetence in both intel gathering and execution has left me to doubt whether Iran actually has a serious nuclear weapons program and whether bombing them will do any good. A good opinion piece on this subject was written by Charles Krauthammer where he lays out the disadvantages and advantages. Plus, there is the whole "make love, not war" argument.

I don't know, I just don't know. But one thing I have learned from Iraq is, if we're not sure, we can't go.

One more thing about Krauthammer is that he is a pretty reliable indicator of what the neo-cons in the White House are thinking. He is speaking of a bombing campaign as though it was inevitable. The fact that he is willing to make arguments against a campaign that he favors proves this. Based on this, I would be willing to take 2-1 or 3-1 that the bombs will fall within Bush's term.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

Could this build-up just to enforce possible near-future sanctions?


"The Syrian people have waited 40 years for the implementation of the United Nations Security Council resolutions, but to no avail, and
they are losing their patience,"

This part cracked me up, 40 years!LOL More proof that the UN is a damned joke.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

Q: Is another war on the way?

A: Any way they can get it.*

(* provided it's somebody else's kid who actually does the fighting)


q/q

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have to say I'm neutral on this.

On one hand, I think Iran is a much bigger threat than Iraq was, although I believe they can still be deterred. They aren't under UN sanctions like Iraq was, they don't have weapon inspectors crawling up their butt, and they are much bigger on supporting terrorism than Saddam was. Throw on there that we're talking about a bombing campaign and blockade that is much easier than an invasion and an occupation and there are advantages.

On the other hand, we have the Bush Administration, whose spectacular incompetence in both intel gathering and execution has left me to doubt whether Iran actually has a serious nuclear weapons program and whether bombing them will do any good. A good opinion piece on this subject was written by Charles Krauthammer where he lays out the disadvantages and advantages. Plus, there is the whole "make love, not war" argument.

I don't know, I just don't know. But one thing I have learned from Iraq is, if we're not sure, we can't go.

One more thing about Krauthammer is that he is a pretty reliable indicator of what the neo-cons in the White House are thinking. He is speaking of a bombing campaign as though it was inevitable. The fact that he is willing to make arguments against a campaign that he favors proves this. Based on this, I would be willing to take 2-1 or 3-1 that the bombs will fall within Bush's term.

[/ QUOTE ]

If they are going to fall, they will before the election. A rescue issue is needed.

At least that's how I would play a wager.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The real lesson of viet nam was that you cannot occupy a country that does not want to be occupied. This is also the lesson of Iraq, Korea, Afghanistan, among many other examples through history. You can destroy it (perhaps) by exterminating every man, woman and child but you cannot occupy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is totally wrong. Where did you learn history? When will people stop comparing everything to Vietnam where is no real comparison? I'm also pretty sure the South Koreans would disagree with you.

As far as the OP goes, these reports look like the military is planning and being prepared for any contigency. That's what they do. Better to be prepared then caught with your pants down. Besides, this news also serves the purpose of telling Iran that we might be coming. It's a bit of a political scare tatic to see if they'll back off. If not then I'm sure the US willl push it a little harder.

If Iran continues with it's current path though and does develop or comes close to developing a nuclear threat then at the least I think you'll see some airstrikes to wipe out some of their nuclear ability. It fairly hard to predict what would happen after that though. It depends on how people react.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

Well, it was BluffThis that offered the VietNam lesson. Except he did not get it right.

Better to look for a history lesson from VietNam (you can offer your own) for occupying hostile countries than to look for a physics lesson from the Manhattan project for this endeavor, IMO.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
If they are going to fall, they will before the election. A rescue issue is needed.

At least that's how I would play a wager.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is wrong. You remember what the main issue was before the 2002 elections? The GOP forced the bill to "authorize" the Iraq war immediately before that election. They waited until the off year to actually launch the invasion.

This is because the actual war is ugly. People die in war. Things get screwed up during war. We have seen during the Iraq war that war is hell, and the GOP knew that it was. What sells is the combination of fear and the thought that the GOP is doing something about it.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
But we shouldn't be going there with some half-ass intention to "show them we're serious"

[/ QUOTE ]

How many civilians you propose to be killed this time?

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

I was telling everyone in May we were going to hit Iran -

and that the battle plan would be aerial bombing of the north (where the Persians, Tehran, and the army likes to hang out) while military troops with assistance from Shitte Arabs will seize the southern oil fields in Khuzistan -

I was talking about this stuff in May - all the oil is in the South. I doubt Dubya will try another occupation of the entire country - now that he's learned there are sometimes two types of Muslim - [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

but all these guys really want is the oil fields, I think - a few Neocons may actually pine for the good old days when Iran was our own Colony in the Middle East.

CIA has been in the region for a while now setting up the bribes and infrastructure among the Arabs in Southern Iran (who have no love for their fellow Persian countrymen and will switch sides easily for a few good American bribes)

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/9467/khuzestan5ng.gif

Interestingly enough - I do think Iran could be a threat someday but the moral bankrupcy of this administration would make any further pre-emptive military action a terrible idea till we get a more competant administration in power.

rb

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If they are going to fall, they will before the election. A rescue issue is needed.

At least that's how I would play a wager.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is wrong. You remember what the main issue was before the 2002 elections? The GOP forced the bill to "authorize" the Iraq war immediately before that election. They waited until the off year to actually launch the invasion.

This is because the actual war is ugly. People die in war. Things get screwed up during war. We have seen during the Iraq war that war is hell, and the GOP knew that it was. What sells is the combination of fear and the thought that the GOP is doing something about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

except Karl Rove is promising an October Surprise, and the overall tenor and mood is such I am inclined to believe these men would escalate a conflict prior to midterms if they thought it would help them retain power.

There's a new book out speculating that the Iraqi Invasion was actually pushed forward to help with Midterms in 2002 - because the groundwork was laid before the elections, as you point out - I haven't read it yet but it would no doubt be an additional boost to elections - "How the War was Sold" - it looks good

reviews say it is a nice summary of the lies of the Administration from beginning to end - my copy is on it's way [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

rb

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
but all these guys really want is the oil fields, I think - a few Neocons may actually pine for the good old days when Iran was our own Colony in the Middle East.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't buy this. Look at what's happened in Iraq with Iraqi oil - how has Iraqi oil production changed since? Further, the logistics of physically occupying just Khuzestan, let alone occupying it and ensuring oil production reaches our borders, would be immense.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but all these guys really want is the oil fields, I think - a few Neocons may actually pine for the good old days when Iran was our own Colony in the Middle East.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't buy this. Look at what's happened in Iraq with Iraqi oil - how has Iraqi oil production changed since? Further, the logistics of physically occupying just Khuzestan, let alone occupying it and ensuring oil production reaches our borders, would be immense.

[/ QUOTE ]

He didn't say that we'd be successful, just that we'd try.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If they are going to fall, they will before the election. A rescue issue is needed.

At least that's how I would play a wager.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is wrong. You remember what the main issue was before the 2002 elections? The GOP forced the bill to "authorize" the Iraq war immediately before that election. They waited until the off year to actually launch the invasion.

This is because the actual war is ugly. People die in war. Things get screwed up during war. We have seen during the Iraq war that war is hell, and the GOP knew that it was. What sells is the combination of fear and the thought that the GOP is doing something about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good points.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but all these guys really want is the oil fields, I think - a few Neocons may actually pine for the good old days when Iran was our own Colony in the Middle East.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't buy this. Look at what's happened in Iraq with Iraqi oil - how has Iraqi oil production changed since? Further, the logistics of physically occupying just Khuzestan, let alone occupying it and ensuring oil production reaches our borders, would be immense.

[/ QUOTE ]

they are going do something with Iran, and they CANNOT occupy it like they do Iraq - no way - it would be obscenly costly both for civilians, US troops, and much more destructive - Iran has been known to raise BRIGADES of suicide troops - that's how they started turning the tide of the Iran/Iraq war before we started selling arms to our buddies in Iraq in the 80's

But if you have the population in the north and a massive inhospitable desert between you and the bombed out capital (which will probably look a lot like Lebanon when done), you would have a much easier time defending that part of the country there in the south. Just like Hitler retaking the Rhineland - just a little bump on our overall front line between Iran and Iraq -

Especially if you've been playing to the loyalities of the tribesmen in the area - this isn't a stretch - it's the same thing we did in Afghanistan and Iraq - we find a local insurgency or tribe with a desire to fight the head of the state and then we fund it and they become our allies vs. the main powers - just like the Afghan Rebellion and the Kurds in Iraq.

If we do what I think we're going to do, it'll be the third time we've done it in the Middle East under this president, so it is emminently doable.

rb

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

I'm pretty sure our (U.S.) strategy is to keep the Middle East in a constant state of unrest. Play one side against the other and if any faction becomes too powerful - knock it down to keep an even par.

Whatever means justify those ends will more that likely be employeed. Our Mid-East policy hasn't changed for 30 or 40 years, despite the rhetoric.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure our (U.S.) strategy is to keep the Middle East in a constant state of unrest. Play one side against the other and if any faction becomes too powerful - knock it down to keep an even par.

Whatever means justify those ends will more that likely be employeed. Our Mid-East policy hasn't changed for 30 or 40 years, despite the rhetoric.

[/ QUOTE ]

And Americans are totally ignorant of it -

they wonder why Iranians and Iraqi's hate America - well, let's see - for 30-40 yrs, we've sold weapons to one side so they could kill the other -

and we did it interchangably between the two sides for 30-40 years depending on whether they were our ally or not - and now we're going after them both and they want our blood as repayment.

sheeit - I'd hate us too.

rb

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The cowardly appeasing politicans of pre-WWII Europe ...

[/ QUOTE ]Jesus. We've been through this so many times. You've been provided with text, links, arguments, the works. And not just by me.

Don't you examine seriously anything that contradicts your views?

Mickey Brausch

Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

Diplomacy will fail. Russia, China, and the French
will veto sanctions. The UN is usless and the USA should leave that corrupt organization.

[ QUOTE ]
So if we go in, we need to pound them with everything we got and knock them down so they (Iran & Syria) can't get up.

[/ QUOTE ]
Bomb the Iranian oil fields and their nuclear sites. Hopefully the economic loss of their oil will be enough to topple their govt. Perhaps military support for Iranian moderates will result in the theocracy being overthrown. Oil is the key. It finances their regime, Shia terrorism, and their nuclear program... Destroy their oil production and this will solve a lot of problems....

[ QUOTE ]
Tactical nukes can be justified because if we fail and allow Iran to develop and use either itself or through its proxies, nukes on us, then the long term cost to us will be much higher.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think we should use any nukes UNLESS....Iran gives nukes to terrorist groups for the purpose of nuclear terrorism. If terrorists set off a nuclear weapon in an American city......then the USA needs to eradicate all countries involved regardless of how small their role was or whether the govt officially copperated with the terrorists or not. Then we use REAL nukes.....not those useless firecrackers that we call tactical nukes.....

When nuclear terrorism occurs (not if it occurs), Saudia Arabia's clandestine support of terrorism (via sympathetic Royal family members) will result in the end of Saudia Arabia under a rain of nuclear weapons..... They get their 72 virgins and we take away their financial source of terrorism.....their oil.

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure our (U.S.) strategy is to keep the Middle East in a constant state of unrest. Play one side against the other and if any faction becomes too powerful - knock it down to keep an even par.

Whatever means justify those ends will more that likely be employeed. Our Mid-East policy hasn't changed for 30 or 40 years, despite the rhetoric.

[/ QUOTE ]

And Americans are totally ignorant of it -

they wonder why Iranians and Iraqi's hate America - well, let's see - for 30-40 yrs, we've sold weapons to one side so they could kill the other -

and we did it interchangably between the two sides for 30-40 years depending on whether they were our ally or not - and now we're going after them both and they want our blood as repayment.

sheeit - I'd hate us too.

rb

[/ QUOTE ]
Its not good but at least setting one side against another is a coherent foreign policy - much loved by the British before we lost the plot.

Now the foreign policy seems to be to unite our enemies against us. If that's the plan its being executed brilliantly but as that plan makes no sense I assume it's stunning incompetence.

[or we could view it as the plan of the other side being brilliantly executed by them]

chez

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
Diplomacy will fail. Russia, China, and the French
will veto sanctions. The UN is usless and the USA should leave that corrupt organization.

[ QUOTE ]
So if we go in, we need to pound them with everything we got and knock them down so they (Iran & Syria) can't get up.

[/ QUOTE ]
Bomb the Iranian oil fields and their nuclear sites. Hopefully the economic loss of their oil will be enough to topple their govt. Perhaps military support for Iranian moderates will result in the theocracy being overthrown. Oil is the key. It finances their regime, Shia terrorism, and their nuclear program... Destroy their oil production and this will solve a lot of problems....

[ QUOTE ]
Tactical nukes can be justified because if we fail and allow Iran to develop and use either itself or through its proxies, nukes on us, then the long term cost to us will be much higher.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't think we should use any nukes UNLESS....Iran gives nukes to terrorist groups for the purpose of nuclear terrorism. If terrorists set off a nuclear weapon in an American city......then the USA needs to eradicate all countries involved regardless of how small their role was or whether the govt officially copperated with the terrorists or not. Then we use REAL nukes.....not those useless firecrackers that we call tactical nukes.....

When nuclear terrorism occurs (not if it occurs), Saudia Arabia's clandestine support of terrorism (via sympathetic Royal family members) will result in the end of Saudia Arabia under a rain of nuclear weapons..... They get their 72 virgins and we take away their financial source of terrorism.....their oil.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like the Iraq game plan.

Shock and Awe, cheering hordes helping us overthrow the government, the key is oil.

Exactly how long has it been in Iraq since "Mission Accomplished"?

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sounds like the Iraq game plan.

[/ QUOTE ]
Not really. In Iraq the Kurds are our most valuable resource. Bush43's failure to utilize them was(is) a terrible mistake. Iraq is an artificial country created by ignorant men after WW1. If it were me, possible strategies for Iraq would include:
1. Kurdish dictatorship over Iraq
2. Partition Iraq into three different countries (Sunni, Shia, Kurds).
Also Bush's failure to arrest Sadr and his thugs when they crossed into Iraq was a display of mass incompetance. When they came, they were armed w/ AK47s, grenades, and RPGs. The US troops were only allowed to disarm them. If you try to cross any other international border with military weapons and get caught.....you will be arrested. This was a criminally STUPID blunder by Bush....

[ QUOTE ]
Shock and Awe, cheering hordes helping us overthrow the government, the key is oil.

[/ QUOTE ]
Iraqi oil is no longer funding terrorism.
As for the cheering hordes, yes the Kurds were cheering. The Sunnis were pissed. The Shia were happy intially but Sunni terrorism and Sadr's meddling screwed things up.

[ QUOTE ]
Exactly how long has it been in Iraq since "Mission Accomplished"?

[/ QUOTE ]
The mission of the US Navy was to provide air support in the battle to overthrow Saddam Hussein. The US Navy completed this mission. The US Navy sailors were returning home to their families and Bush43 joined them in they celebration. If you noticed, the Army, Marines, and Air Force never displayed banners saying their mission was accomplished..... I don't understand why you cast scorn on the US Navy for celebrating a successful mission.

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

Was I wrong in what you wrote originally, a little shock and awe, we will be welcomed as we overthrow the Saddam Govt, we will use the oil to rebuild?

In that post it was all the same "plan" for Iraq.

Now in this post there is a bunch of we coulda, should and if only woulda.

[ QUOTE ]

Iraqi oil is no longer funding terrorism.

[/ QUOTE ]

Feel free to provide an example of Iraqi oil being used to fund terrorism against the US. The linking of terrorism against us and Iraq is a lie -- plain and simple, a lie said with full knowledge and complete cynicism by a most corrupt government.

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think we should use any nukes UNLESS....Iran gives nukes to terrorist groups for the purpose of nuclear terrorism. If terrorists set off a nuclear weapon in an American city......then the USA needs to eradicate all countries involved regardless of how small their role was or whether the govt officially copperated with the terrorists or not. Then we use REAL nukes.....not those useless firecrackers that we call tactical nukes.....

[/ QUOTE ]

How will we know which contries are involved, 'however small' their role was? We may as well nuke Pakistan then, since AQ Khan was responsible for flooding the region with nuclear technology. May as well nuke every other country in between then, as they 'allowed' passage of persons and material.

You're going to trust the gov to tell you which countries are/will be involved.. and that will justify killing millions and destroying the region's environment, and guaranteeing that the survivors will have one thing on their mind ~ to kill Americans (as many as possible)

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
Was I wrong in what you wrote originally, a little shock and awe, we will be welcomed as we overthrow the Saddam Govt, we will use the oil to rebuild?

[/ QUOTE ]
You are making things up. All my posts are on record. Feel free to quote me from any of my posts but don't invent things... And yes you are wrong....

[ QUOTE ]
Feel free to provide an example of Iraqi oil being used to fund terrorism against the US. The linking of terrorism against us and Iraq is a lie

[/ QUOTE ]
I never said this. AGAIN you are making things up.
I ***SAID*** Iraq was a sponsor of terrorism and that their oil no longer sponsors terrorism. It is a FACT, that the US State Dept put Iraq on their list of nations that sponsor terrorism....years ago. How you came up with the claim that I said Iraq sponsor terrorism against the USA is a mystery to me.

It is hard to have an honest debate with a person that makes up fictional quotes about your position. Use the quote function but don't make things up... It is not honest.

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
How will we know which countries are involved, 'however small' their role was?

[/ QUOTE ]
A better question would be, "How can nuclear terrorists hide the involvement of their financial backers?"
Keeping this a secret would be next to impossible....

[ QUOTE ]
We may as well nuke Pakistan then, since AQ Khan was responsible for flooding the region with nuclear technology.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think AQ Khan should be assassinated. I believe nuclear terrorism by Islamic terrorists will occur and millions will die. Khan deserves death...

[ QUOTE ]
You're going to trust the gov to tell you which countries are/will be involved..

[/ QUOTE ]
And who do you think should be trusted? The US Govt has the resources and personnel to investigate such a matter. If you can think of someone better then feel free to share.

[ QUOTE ]
and that will justify killing millions and destroying the region's environment, and guaranteeing that the survivors will have one thing on their mind ~ to kill America

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes....million will die in a nuclear terrorist attack. So the response must be devastating and so disproportionate that they fear to attack us again. Better to be feared than loved (N.Machiavelli).
As for any survivors, if they are dumb enough to attack the USA with nuclear weapons again, then we will be improving the human gene pool by eliminating them...

Re: Is Another War on the Way?
 

[ QUOTE ]
The cowardly appeasing politicans of pre-WWII europe didn't take Hitler's "crazy rhetoric" seriously either.

[/ QUOTE ]

the question here is who you have in mind as nowadays hitler?
compare actions and rhetoric of those you have in mind with those you think i have in my mind with hitler.

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Was I wrong in what you wrote originally, a little shock and awe, we will be welcomed as we overthrow the Saddam Govt, we will use the oil to rebuild?

[/ QUOTE ]
You are making things up. All my posts are on record. Feel free to quote me from any of my posts but don't invent things... And yes you are wrong....

[ QUOTE ]
Feel free to provide an example of Iraqi oil being used to fund terrorism against the US. The linking of terrorism against us and Iraq is a lie

[/ QUOTE ]
I never said this. AGAIN you are making things up.
I ***SAID*** Iraq was a sponsor of terrorism and that their oil no longer sponsors terrorism. It is a FACT, that the US State Dept put Iraq on their list of nations that sponsor terrorism....years ago. How you came up with the claim that I said Iraq sponsor terrorism against the USA is a mystery to me.

It is hard to have an honest debate with a person that makes up fictional quotes about your position. Use the quote function but don't make things up... It is not honest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly I have not made up fictional quotes.

I said that

this post
[ QUOTE ]
Sounds like the Iraq game plan.

[/ QUOTE ]
Then I said why it sounds like the Iraq game plan:

[ QUOTE ]
Shock and Awe, cheering hordes helping us overthrow the government, the key is oil.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect you can read english. Perhaps it is not your first language -- in which case it is understandable.

No where did I say I quoted you when I asked you to provide an example of Iraq's terrorism against the US. I am quite fed up with you guys claiming that Iraq is a danger (and the only thing I am interested in is danger to US - the pronoun and the country!).

Frankly I dont give a damn if the state department put Iraq on a terrorist list. If I want to accept everything the state department did, I would have to shut my mind down and kowtow to the bureaucrats in DC. If there is evidence of their terrorist activities I want to know it, if there is none (and there is none) then I want the rest of us to hear it.

It really is difficult to have a debate with people who cannot read and pout if questioned.

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

right. and hitler is your favourite leader. poor kid.

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
Frankly I dont give a damn if the state department put Iraq on a terrorist list.

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course not...... If facts contradict your mythical view of the world then close your mind to those unpleasant facts. You a mental slave and you will never evolve into a free thinker.

[ QUOTE ]
If there is evidence of their terrorist activities I want to know it, if there is none (and there is none) then I want the rest of us to hear it.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is well known that Saddam paid $25,000 to each Palestianian family that killed jews via a suicide bombings. Here is a more comprehensive list.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9513/#1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/834528/posts

Iraq provides safehaven to terrorist and rejectionist groups and continues its efforts to rebuild its intelligence network, which it used previously to support international terrorism. 5

The Abu Nidal Organization (Fatah Revolutionary Council, Arab Revolutionary Brigades, Black September, Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims) split from the PLO in 1974. carried out terrorist attacks in 20 countries, killing or injuring almost 900 persons. Targets include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Israel, moderate Palestinians, the PLO, and various Arab countries. The leader, Abu Nidal, relocated to Baghdad in late 1998. Iraq had never admitted Abu Nidal was in the country until reports of his death in Baghdad emerged this week.


Iraq supports and supplies the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, known to be completely controlled by Iraqi intelligence within Iraq's borders. They are primarily an anti-Iranian terror group who killed several U.S. soldiers and civilians working on defense projects in Iran prior to the fall of the Shah of Iran. 6


The Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), led by Abu Abbas, is one of three factions of the original PFLP that split up in 1977. They reject the middle east peace process and use terrorism in their quest to establish an independent Palestinian. Following the attack against the Achille Lauro ship in October 1985, Abu Abbas was expelled by the Tunisian authorities and established his headquarters in Baghdad.


On October 14, 2000, A London-bound Saudi airliner was hijacked. They landed in Baghdad where the passengers were released. Saddam granted the hijackers asylum. The Iraqi regime rebuffed a request from Riyadh for the extradition of two Saudi hijackers. Disregarding its obligations under international law, the regime granted political asylum to the hijackers and time on Iraqi television to vent their criticisms of alleged abuses by the Saudi Arabian Government, echoing an Iraqi propaganda theme.8


Iraq has a long record of supporting terrorist groups and resorting to terrorism as an adjunct of foreign policy. During the 1991 Gulf War I, Saddam planned a series of worldwide terrorist attacks. Most were foiled by US and international counterterrorism efforts.7


In 1993, Saddam attempted to assassinate President George H. Bush (41).


Ramzi Yousef, the mastermind of the WTC bombing in 1993 entered the US on an Iraqi passport, originating his flight from Iraq. His intelligence file in Kuwait was altered by Iraqi officials during the occupation of Kuwait. Abdul Yasin, also involved in the bombing returned to Iraq and is living in Baghdad.7


In November 2001, two defectors from the Iraqi intelligence services said that Iraq had used Salman Pak, a camp south of Baghdad, to train Islamist radicals in the techniques of terrorism, including training on a Boeing 707 fuselage in the desert.

Salman Pak: An Iraqi Lt. general and Captain Sabah Khodada defected from Iraq and emigrated to the US in May, 2001. In separate New York Times interviews, they described Salman Pak, a highly secret terrorist training camp south of Baghdad. The trainees were Iraqi, and non-Iraqi Arabs.9


Saddam has openly and vigorously supported Palestinian suicide bombers, paying families of suicide bombers $25,000 and building a Baghdad memorial to the first woman suicide bomber.


Ansar al-Islam, a Kurdish Islamic extremist group, has terrorized the northern Iraq Kurd safe-haven over the past 2 years. The group has had al-Qaeda associations since 1989. The Iraqi government provided cash and training to Ansar, in a bid to destabilize the safe haven and weaken armed Kurdish opponents.10

Qassem Hussein Mohamed who is being held in a Kurdish prison, was a Mukhabarat intelligence officer for 20 years. In an April interview by the Christian Science Monitor in Sulaymaniyah, Iraq, he said that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has supported Ansar al-Islam for several years.

"Mohamed compared Baghdad's role to the overt help Iraq given the anti-Iran Mujahideen-e-Khalq forces, which are known to be completely controlled by Iraqi intelligence within Iraq's borders."

"Ansar and Al Qaeda groups were trained by graduates of the Mukhabarat's School 999 -- military intelligence," says Mr. Mohamed."

"My information is that the Iraqi government was directly supporting [Al Qaeda] with weapons and explosives," he says. "[Ansar] was part of Al Qaeda, and given support with training and money."

U.S. officials told Time Magazine they have also obtained electronic messages passed between Baghdad and the group. "There's all sorts of signal intercepts that indicate communications," says a State Department official. "There's clearly a dialogue going on." Those threads, the official tells Time, suggest Ansar had approached Baghdad to obtain help making biological and chemical weapons.


New York Times writer William Safire wrote,16

On Sept. 24, 2001, I reported: "The clear link between the terrorist in hiding [Osama] and the terrorist in power [Saddam] can be found in Kurdistan, that northern portion of Iraq protected by U.S. and British aircraft. . . . Kurdish sources tell me (and anyone else who will listen) that the Iraqi dictator has armed and financed a fifth column of Al Qaeda mullahs and terrorists. . . ."

Well armed and financed by both Iraq and Iran, this affiliate of Al Qaeda has since provided a haven for bin Laden followers exfiltrating from Afghanistan. They tried to assassinate an articulate Kurdish leader, Barham Salih, killing several bodyguards, but their target escaped and several killers were captured. Our National Security Council members did not learn about this bloody engagement, one of them told me a week afterward, until they read about it in The Times.
The Kurds induced the captives and some defectors to reveal that the Ansar cell of Al Qaeda had begun producing poisonous chemicals for export. One product was reported here to be a cyanide cream being smuggled through Turkey. The operation was set up by a man with a limp, the informants said, a key bin Laden lieutenant, Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi.




Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian leader of al-Qa'ida, was wounded in the leg in the Afghanistan war. In late 2001 he made it to Iran but was deported and traveled to Syria and then to Baghdad, where he received medical treatment for his leg injury. Afterwards Zarqawi went to northern Iraq and linked up with Ansar al-Islam. Zarqawi is linked to at least two terrorist strikes: a Millennium plot to bomb a hotel in Amman, Jordan, and the Oct. 28, 2002 killing of a U.S. diplomat, Laurence Foley, also in Amman. In December, the Jordanian authorities announced that the two men had confessed to killing Mr. Foley and that they had been directed by Mr. Zarqawi. British intelligence reported that Zarqawi traveled to Turkey where he met with the Algerians and delivered the ricin.15

Zarqawi was sighted last summer at a terrorist camp in South Lebanon, where he took part in a meeting of Islamic militants, including representatives of Iranian-controlled Hizbollah.

Since January 5, 2003, British authorities have arrested several Algerians on suspicion of terrorism using the lethal poison ricin. At one of their apartments, police discovered traces of ricin, a lethal product of the widely cultivated castor bean plant. Zarqawi has expertise in poisons, extensive experience in chemical and biological weapons and has been linked to the Algerians arrested in Britain. One gram of ricin is enough to kill up to 36,000 people. Yesterday, NBC News broadcast US satellite pictures of an Ansar al-Islam terrorism training camp, which includes a building identified by US intelligence experts as a biological and chemical weapons factory. The factory is used to produce ricin and cyanide so deadly that one local villager was accidentally killed during the experiments, according to NBC News.17




Mohammed Atta, leader of the 911 terrorists, met with an Iraqi Intelligence agent in Prague, Czech Republic in early April, 2001.

Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, a second consul and espionage chief in the Iraqi Embassy in Prague, was expelled on April 22, 2001, for suspected espionage. Considering the level of "tradecraft" employed by these al-Qaida, Atta would not have risked being denied reentry to the U.S. or apprehended returning or leaving unless this meeting was very critical to his mission. The CIA and FBI have said that they have no hard evidence of the meeting. This would be consistent with Atta's level of expertise. The major media outlets have spun this to mean the FBI and CIA say the meeting did not occur. That is a misinterpretation. Since then, the Czechs have reconfirmed the meeting. 11, 12, 13, 14



al-Qa'ida members held at Guantanamo Bay, Diego Garcia and elsewhere have told their interrogators that Baghdad was attempting to train al-Qa'ida in the use of chemical weapons.

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Frankly I dont give a damn if the state department put Iraq on a terrorist list.

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course not...... If facts contradict your mythical view of the world then close your mind to those unpleasant facts. You a mental slave and you will never evolve into a free thinker.

[ QUOTE ]
If there is evidence of their terrorist activities I want to know it, if there is none (and there is none) then I want the rest of us to hear it.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is well known that Saddam paid $25,000 to each Palestianian family that killed jews via a suicide bombings. Here is a more comprehensive list.

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9513/#1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/834528/posts

Iraq provides safehaven to terrorist and rejectionist groups and continues its efforts to rebuild its intelligence network, which it used previously to support international terrorism. 5

The Abu Nidal Organization (Fatah Revolutionary Council, Arab Revolutionary Brigades, Black September, Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims) split from the PLO in 1974. carried out terrorist attacks in 20 countries, killing or injuring almost 900 persons. Targets include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Israel, moderate Palestinians, the PLO, and various Arab countries. The leader, Abu Nidal, relocated to Baghdad in late 1998. Iraq had never admitted Abu Nidal was in the country until reports of his death in Baghdad emerged this week.


Iraq supports and supplies the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, known to be completely controlled by Iraqi intelligence within Iraq's borders. They are primarily an anti-Iranian terror group who killed several U.S. soldiers and civilians working on defense projects in Iran prior to the fall of the Shah of Iran. 6


The Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), led by Abu Abbas, is one of three factions of the original PFLP that split up in 1977. They reject the middle east peace process and use terrorism in their quest to establish an independent Palestinian. Following the attack against the Achille Lauro ship in October 1985, Abu Abbas was expelled by the Tunisian authorities and established his headquarters in Baghdad.


On October 14, 2000, A London-bound Saudi airliner was hijacked. They landed in Baghdad where the passengers were released. Saddam granted the hijackers asylum. The Iraqi regime rebuffed a request from Riyadh for the extradition of two Saudi hijackers. Disregarding its obligations under international law, the regime granted political asylum to the hijackers and time on Iraqi television to vent their criticisms of alleged abuses by the Saudi Arabian Government, echoing an Iraqi propaganda theme.8


Iraq has a long record of supporting terrorist groups and resorting to terrorism as an adjunct of foreign policy. During the 1991 Gulf War I, Saddam planned a series of worldwide terrorist attacks. Most were foiled by US and international counterterrorism efforts.7


In 1993, Saddam attempted to assassinate President George H. Bush (41).


Ramzi Yousef, the mastermind of the WTC bombing in 1993 entered the US on an Iraqi passport, originating his flight from Iraq. His intelligence file in Kuwait was altered by Iraqi officials during the occupation of Kuwait. Abdul Yasin, also involved in the bombing returned to Iraq and is living in Baghdad.7


In November 2001, two defectors from the Iraqi intelligence services said that Iraq had used Salman Pak, a camp south of Baghdad, to train Islamist radicals in the techniques of terrorism, including training on a Boeing 707 fuselage in the desert.

Salman Pak: An Iraqi Lt. general and Captain Sabah Khodada defected from Iraq and emigrated to the US in May, 2001. In separate New York Times interviews, they described Salman Pak, a highly secret terrorist training camp south of Baghdad. The trainees were Iraqi, and non-Iraqi Arabs.9


Saddam has openly and vigorously supported Palestinian suicide bombers, paying families of suicide bombers $25,000 and building a Baghdad memorial to the first woman suicide bomber.


Ansar al-Islam, a Kurdish Islamic extremist group, has terrorized the northern Iraq Kurd safe-haven over the past 2 years. The group has had al-Qaeda associations since 1989. The Iraqi government provided cash and training to Ansar, in a bid to destabilize the safe haven and weaken armed Kurdish opponents.10

Qassem Hussein Mohamed who is being held in a Kurdish prison, was a Mukhabarat intelligence officer for 20 years. In an April interview by the Christian Science Monitor in Sulaymaniyah, Iraq, he said that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has supported Ansar al-Islam for several years.

"Mohamed compared Baghdad's role to the overt help Iraq given the anti-Iran Mujahideen-e-Khalq forces, which are known to be completely controlled by Iraqi intelligence within Iraq's borders."

"Ansar and Al Qaeda groups were trained by graduates of the Mukhabarat's School 999 -- military intelligence," says Mr. Mohamed."

"My information is that the Iraqi government was directly supporting [Al Qaeda] with weapons and explosives," he says. "[Ansar] was part of Al Qaeda, and given support with training and money."

U.S. officials told Time Magazine they have also obtained electronic messages passed between Baghdad and the group. "There's all sorts of signal intercepts that indicate communications," says a State Department official. "There's clearly a dialogue going on." Those threads, the official tells Time, suggest Ansar had approached Baghdad to obtain help making biological and chemical weapons.


New York Times writer William Safire wrote,16

On Sept. 24, 2001, I reported: "The clear link between the terrorist in hiding [Osama] and the terrorist in power [Saddam] can be found in Kurdistan, that northern portion of Iraq protected by U.S. and British aircraft. . . . Kurdish sources tell me (and anyone else who will listen) that the Iraqi dictator has armed and financed a fifth column of Al Qaeda mullahs and terrorists. . . ."

Well armed and financed by both Iraq and Iran, this affiliate of Al Qaeda has since provided a haven for bin Laden followers exfiltrating from Afghanistan. They tried to assassinate an articulate Kurdish leader, Barham Salih, killing several bodyguards, but their target escaped and several killers were captured. Our National Security Council members did not learn about this bloody engagement, one of them told me a week afterward, until they read about it in The Times.
The Kurds induced the captives and some defectors to reveal that the Ansar cell of Al Qaeda had begun producing poisonous chemicals for export. One product was reported here to be a cyanide cream being smuggled through Turkey. The operation was set up by a man with a limp, the informants said, a key bin Laden lieutenant, Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi.




Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian leader of al-Qa'ida, was wounded in the leg in the Afghanistan war. In late 2001 he made it to Iran but was deported and traveled to Syria and then to Baghdad, where he received medical treatment for his leg injury. Afterwards Zarqawi went to northern Iraq and linked up with Ansar al-Islam. Zarqawi is linked to at least two terrorist strikes: a Millennium plot to bomb a hotel in Amman, Jordan, and the Oct. 28, 2002 killing of a U.S. diplomat, Laurence Foley, also in Amman. In December, the Jordanian authorities announced that the two men had confessed to killing Mr. Foley and that they had been directed by Mr. Zarqawi. British intelligence reported that Zarqawi traveled to Turkey where he met with the Algerians and delivered the ricin.15

Zarqawi was sighted last summer at a terrorist camp in South Lebanon, where he took part in a meeting of Islamic militants, including representatives of Iranian-controlled Hizbollah.

Since January 5, 2003, British authorities have arrested several Algerians on suspicion of terrorism using the lethal poison ricin. At one of their apartments, police discovered traces of ricin, a lethal product of the widely cultivated castor bean plant. Zarqawi has expertise in poisons, extensive experience in chemical and biological weapons and has been linked to the Algerians arrested in Britain. One gram of ricin is enough to kill up to 36,000 people. Yesterday, NBC News broadcast US satellite pictures of an Ansar al-Islam terrorism training camp, which includes a building identified by US intelligence experts as a biological and chemical weapons factory. The factory is used to produce ricin and cyanide so deadly that one local villager was accidentally killed during the experiments, according to NBC News.17




Mohammed Atta, leader of the 911 terrorists, met with an Iraqi Intelligence agent in Prague, Czech Republic in early April, 2001.

Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, a second consul and espionage chief in the Iraqi Embassy in Prague, was expelled on April 22, 2001, for suspected espionage. Considering the level of "tradecraft" employed by these al-Qaida, Atta would not have risked being denied reentry to the U.S. or apprehended returning or leaving unless this meeting was very critical to his mission. The CIA and FBI have said that they have no hard evidence of the meeting. This would be consistent with Atta's level of expertise. The major media outlets have spun this to mean the FBI and CIA say the meeting did not occur. That is a misinterpretation. Since then, the Czechs have reconfirmed the meeting. 11, 12, 13, 14



al-Qa'ida members held at Guantanamo Bay, Diego Garcia and elsewhere have told their interrogators that Baghdad was attempting to train al-Qa'ida in the use of chemical weapons.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very interesting. I question the authorities and will never be a free thinker. Look in the mirror.

I am aware of the $25,000 payment and really dont care too much, unless you can show me that he was a threat to us, first. People in other countries kill each other, threaten each other all the time. I try not to get worked up over it. First and foremost my govt should be concerned about protecting us - not some distant country.

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am aware of the $25,000 payment and really dont care too much, unless you can show me that he was a threat to us,

[/ QUOTE ]
You denied my claim that Iraq was a country that sponsored terrorism.
I cited that Iraq was on the State Dept's list of terror nations. I cited more examples. Then you just ho-hum it. I suspect trying to reason with you is a waste of time.

I'll try once more because I'm masochistic.....
Do you remember the 1993 assassination attempt on Bush41 when he went to Kuwait? Was this not a direct attack on the executive branch of the USA? Do you remember what Clinton's military response was to this assassination attempt? Do you?

I suspect you do not know and furthermore I suspect you are too lazy to learn the basic facts on topics you opine on....

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am aware of the $25,000 payment and really dont care too much, unless you can show me that he was a threat to us,

[/ QUOTE ]
You denied my claim that Iraq was a country that sponsored terrorism.
I cited that Iraq was on the State Dept's list of terror nations. I cited more examples. Then you just ho-hum it. I suspect trying to reason with you is a waste of time.

I'll try once more because I'm masochistic.....
Do you remember the 1993 assassination attempt on Bush41 when he went to Kuwait? Was this not a direct attack on the executive branch of the USA? Do you remember what Clinton's military response was to this assassination attempt? Do you?

I suspect you do not know and furthermore I suspect you are too lazy to learn the basic facts on topics you opine on....

[/ QUOTE ]

Ignoring the pointless personal attacks.

I did not deny that they did not sponsor terroism, although the evidence is sketchy and mostly circumstantial.

I denied terrorism against the US, which is generally accurate.

I will go back to reading your posts but mostly ignoring you, untill you grow up.

Re: Diplomacy is Usless: Lets Bomb Them
 

No response with regard to Iraq's assassination attempt on Bush41 in 1993 in Kuwait?
I can't say I'm surprise. I suppose you will argue that trying to assassinate a US president poses no threat.....