Staredit Network

We are potentially going to start world war 3 with our actions. BTW beer its Operation Irani LIBERATION! Remember, we're the worlds "liberators". If their muslim they have to be cleansed is obviously bush's slogan. Facism isn't just military in control and rule it in a military fasion, it could just be the first half.

Stalingrad... its like credit, to see intelligence,you first need to have intelligence.

China hates us, (and not for our freedom) but wont do anything at the moment due to our close trading ties. Can you actually prove they are obtaining wmd's? You can't and the burden of proof is on you. You know what, I've threatened bigger kids then me, does that mean i'm trying to obtain wmd's? No it doesn't. How is it that a nation that has over 20,000 nukes, is telling everyone else that doesn't like us that they can't get them too. 10 bucks says if russia didn't have nukes, we would be telling them no too.

We still have support from the Western governments and others across the world. Yes some do hate us, but that's only because the people have clouded visions of why we do things and how we do them. Then people then have major influence on the government, even if it's a minority.



The people hate our government mostly everywhere, I'm not that stupid, but once again look up ^ , you have partially fallen victim too at the hands of anti-USA propaganda.



I'm sorry but I do see the steriotype of a college student in you. (Just saying). World War III would come from strategic bombings of Iran how? If we had plans to invade Iran, why would we be pulling troops from Iraq? If ever we come to hostile relations with Iran in the near future, it will only be an Air to Surface war.



You keep saying shiz like this everywhere to me like I'm a sheep to the government or something, but notice how I have only talked about 2 topics even relating to it at all. As big as they may be, only two.



WWIII believers, pft, there would have to be a lot more than air strikes in Iran by UN forces to start WWIII.



I do have intelligence, you are just too blind because you support your view so much and hold it dear to you will most likely see anyone who disagrees with it retarded.



It's all about who has nukes and what intentions the holders of the nukes have. We support Israel so much, you probably want them gone but that's not going to happen for a while. Iran with nuclear weapons would be a really bad threat to Israel, we do not want this to happen. I never said China likes us either, I just said I wouldn't be surprised if China invaded Iran while they are down.

You see how biased and blind you are!? You think Iran would use their nukes simply because you are TOLD they will. There is no definate proof they will even get nukes. BTW, strategic bombings of iran can potentially start ww3. Are you retarded or something? (not a flame) The assassination by a single shooter started WW1.

You say I hold dearly to my beliefs. Thats because they are more logical then what you say. If you look at history, it clearly shows a chain of events which have led to disaster before and if we continue to follow them, will again.

I hate debating with children who eat up the corporate garbage. You mind is closed, funny how that biased media thread comes after a) Bush calling the media biased and b) after months of me and kelli saying it is and getting told it isn't by you children. SEN truly has been filled with kiddies... I'm starting to think Nuke commited suicide after reading most of the posts on here. *grin*

@Stalingrad:


Thanks for your contribution, but if I had wanted to hear from somebody with your IQ, I'd be at my local supermarket talking to the vegetables. Generally, there is nothing wrong with having nothing worthwhile to say - unless you insist on saying it. However, I'll consider letting you have the last word if you guarantee it will be your last. As Ellen Glasgow once remarked: "He knows so little and knows it so fluently."

Seriously, of course everybody is going to be opposing different opinions, after all it is their opinion. Also, bombing anything could potentially start a big war anywhere, chain reaction. An ally bombs and enemy, the ally of the enemy doesn't like it, so on and so fourth.

They never wanted to land or invade in the case of Pearl Harbor. They wanted to knock out our Pacific Fleet.

Which if they were smart they would have also bombed the dry docks and oil/gas station for refueling ships there. In which they did not which left the ships that were not damaged mobile.

EDIT:

If I don't reply to this thread it is becuase Im in New Orleans right now helping rebuild damaged homes. I am still amazed at the destruction still around here. I will try and post pictures and start a thread about topics involving Katrina. Side note, I saw a full house on top of a car.... Crazy.

Just because they told me? No, I do not just hear something once like that, and am convinced. Have you heard Iran's officials? Or intentions they have had in the past? Or even the terrorist organizations held in Iran are doing. No definate proof they have nukes, that's like saying there is no definate proof Area-51 isn't a military base? Think or North Korean, the world pretty much says they have 8-10 crude nukes, but if you look at their resources, they have enough to make about 8-10 a year. Their intentions on the uses of the nukes were pretty clear, they aren't for national defense...



No, they are only more logical than what I say because it is what you think and how your mind works. My mind works by looking at both sides and making the choice myself. You probably just hear that everything bad will happen from anything the American government does and that is enough isn't it? At first I was like why the hell are we starting to get hostile with Iran, but I have been convinced otherways. But what do you care? probably think of me as a "sheepon".



Debating with someone who eats up corporate garbage? No, I disagree with a lot of things any one does that affects others, but no, just because I look at a certain issue differently, you think "Bush lover!, Corporate Sheep!, American Government corrupts SOB!".



When did this happen anyways? I made that thread because of the Concentration Thread and this one. Nice one smartie.



I looked at it a different way then you stated in my thread if you want to read it.



I insist on saying it because this is what I believe to be right and logical thinking is on my side, political and economical, and just because certain few on this forum have corrupted some of your minds on light of the issues we are discussing in this thread does not mean they are right. Just because bad things happen in this world and things go wrong sometimes, does not mean we go there with bad intentions.



Except we do bombings everywhere all the time and they never lead to a full out war against other nations. And who's Iran's ally? Like some of you have said that China and US relations are purely economical, Iran's and China's relations are purley economical. China only needs Iran for oil.



Something I forgot to comment on: Who "has Iran's back"? are you retarded or something? (not a flame). Yes, ww1 was started that way but times have changed. People are not as built on revenge as much. Even though I know you'll consider the Afghan bombings a revenge strike.

Lets see:

Actually, even Bush has said the bombings in Afghanistan were for 9/11 therefore for revenge.

uh huh, You have no clue Bush said that... Thats like someone trying to invent football now saying "I never heard of the idea before."

Anyone who is blind to current events that resemble past events is a sheep. Plain and simple.

LOL so you think that us bombing everywhere all the time is ok? It never led to full scale war simply because we do it on 3rd world countrys, ones with military might. Now if we attack a country that is actually organized, has a weapons program that makes really nice weaponry, a few big allies, it could easily lead to full scale war. China if it has the chance will strike. Give it a great advantage and it will take it.

Are you retarded...? "times have changed not everyone is built on revenge." Dude where have you been...? Been dropped on your head too many times? Humans do not change, we do not learn from our mistakes. US did not learn from vietnam, we cannot win against these terrorists in iraq, The only thing that has changed in 7000 years is the little gadgets humans pride themselves with and the new ways they make war.

Have you ever heard of The Iran-Contra Scandal? Tha'ts what I thought, be quiet.

Do you really think that some greedy, power hungry dictator is going to look at both sides of an argument? For fark sakes, hell no. Are you on crack or something? And the reason we are going after Iran and making a "Regime change" is because of one thing: Oil. They will use the same petty excuse as they did with Sadam: "We need to get the dictator out of there, and establish a democracy in the name of democracy!" Yeah hu. Democracy isn't about going and killing thousands of innocent people and establishing a form of government. You've been convinced because your mind is petty. You have no common sense.

Judging by how you are justifying the war in Iraq, and our presence in The Middle East, you're a bush supporter. Or at least support his treasonous ways.

So you're justifying making the media thread with claims that you made it because of this and the other thread that he closed.. Sounds to me, you're trying to have the last word.

I don't want to read mindless garbage, sorry.

Logical thinking? Ha! If you had any logic, you would realise that what we say about how our governemt is destroying what Democracy is about, is true. To bad you can't even look at a situation and realise the great and potential harm it has behind it. Think for one second. Invading Iran. What will that do? Hmm... Cause another useless war for no reason? Cause even more countries to hate us because we are the "World's Policemen"? Possibly cause China to retaliate against us because they are sick of our crap and what we are doing in The Middle East? Cause us to establish a democracy there and get cheap Oil prices because we were the ones that put the law there? The possible start of World War III? You don't get it, do you? Invading anymore countries in The Middle East, will start a full scale WAR. How inaine do you have to be, to not understand that simple prospect??

Where? Where else do we bomb, besides the countries we are at war with? Grasping at anything possible to use as an argument are we?? We bombed Afghanistan because: We were at war with them. We bombed Iraq because: We are at war with them. Do you see us bombing North Korea (Didn't we learn the first damn time we farked with them?) Do you see us bombing China? Hell, do you see us bombing Cuba?! And you're probibly right about China needing oil from Iran. But if you were to think about it, LOGICALLY, they will defend Iran from us, because they get it cheaper than they would from us.

That is what I thought. You are groaping in the dark for arguments because you have nothing else to go on. That's very poor debate tactics.

"People are not as built on revenge as much. Even though I know you'll consider the Afghan bombings a revenge strike."

Oh my. What dillusions you have. Why do you think North Korea hates us? #1: Their leader is a nut. #2: We farked with them in the 50s.

Why do you think Iran hates us? #1: We're establishing Democracy where it should not be. #2: We're invaiding countries strickly for Oil. #3: We are the "World's Policemen"

How old are you? I ask you that again, because seriously. It's quite obvious you haven't been in the Real World at all. Human nature consists of Greed, Jealousy, Revenge, and Spite. We bombed Afghanistan to "find Osama" but at the same time, for revenge out of spite. We invaided Iraq out of complete Greed and Spite. Spite, because Bush Sr. couldn't take him out, so Bush Jr. is being daddy's little toy, and doing everything his POS father, could not. And greed for: Cheap Oil prices set by US because we put the local government into power.

I am quit humored by your apparent lack of understanding. Please, enlighten us on why your thoughts are justified, and how this, and any other war we go into, is justified.

Kellimus, couldn't you post without all of these?:


You're quickly going back to your old ways. Make your post constructive by telling him what is wrong, not attacking him repeatedly. You've been doing that a LOT lately, and I'm disbelieving in your whole "I'm a changed person, I promise" thing.

And ignoring points already brought up in other topics to. He'd make a good lawyer, he likes to dance around the topic and stir away to other things. If we were there for the reasons Kellimus and Euro are so wrapped around, would we be spending for much money on Iraq? From another topic:


This is verifiable on the Department of Defense website.

Yes, finally some one posts what some good deeds are happening in Iraq.

Beware though, since its from the department of defense its from the government and they will say the government is lies and are you actually believing what the government tells you!?!?!

lol

HAHAH http://salon.com/news/feature/2006/04/14/rummy/index_np.html

Wheres your beloved Donal Rumsfeld now Chris?

Merral shut it. Your a nuisense here and on NNR. Buzz off.

Stalingrad who are you to say "he'd make a good lawyer". I haven't jumped around anything you said, each time I've given my answer to each thing you said. Your not Chris in disquise are you? I would hope not. I hope you know that 1 good thing does not count out 1 bad thing. In fact the bad thing if bad enough (such as killing) overrides the good thing (like making a school). You of course don't understand, nor probablly don't care about human lives, just that a "school is built".

You have done that several times but Kellimus does it more than you... Are you Kellimus. SHHHHH

I think a certain somebody in this topic is an INFP (http://similarminds.com/jung_word.html).



Returning to the topic, I think that the situation in Iraq (civil war) is the unhappy consequence of the invasion and of the subsequent removal of power from a ruling minority (Sunni Muslims). When a ruling minority is removed from power then they generally get very mad indeed, and in this case a lot of sectarian violence has ensued.

What has to be understood is that this is Iraqis killing each other, and generally not Americans killing Iraqis, although a strong case can be made for the breaking of the status quo by the invasion causing all this violence.

Euro, who ever said I liked McDonald? Assumptions, assumptions I love it!

If all out civil war is unstoppable, then what we need to do is pull out our troops. Sent standards for Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the other countries surrounding Iraq to not invade and take over the country once the civil war is over.

Once we get those countries to agree to not take over, we can let the Iraqis have at it.

Our forces, even though are of high quality, are far too few to stop a civil war. We also can not fund another major military movement to stop a civil war.

To be honest, Iraq should probably be split into three countries:

Kurdistan (North)
Central Iraq (Sunni)
Southern Iraq (Shia)

Of course, there would then be a problem with the top two countries being landlocked.

It's no-win really. The situation in the Middle-East could be sorted out if all the Sunnis were put in one place, the Shias in another, the Kurds somewhere else, and keep Israel as the sole Jewish country in the area. The breakdown of Turkish rule is at the root of a lot of the problems, or rather, the problems have got out of hand since the Ottoman Empire collapsed after 1918.

True, the only way all three can be brought together is through a dictatorship which saddam presented.


Theres no assumptions there at all. I never said anything about McDonalds (though its sarcasm). You have stated numerous times how theres nothing going on at Gitmo and practically defended Donal Rumsfeld NUMEROUS times. Therefore its not an assumption, its based on intelligence recieved from your posts. HELLO have I not been saying for months to pull them out!? What was your answer for those months? "I don't think it was right to go there but we SHOULD KEEP THEM THERE AND FINISH THE JOB" was it not? Exactly. You are more hypocritical then John Kerry. Iran won't take it over, but will try to HIGHLY influence them. They won't need to forcefully attack.

Read my post more carefully.

"if" then the bolded portions after that.

There is no way me setting up a situation in the future is me being hypocritical about this matter. And I believe(could be wrong) I never said finish the job, I said I believe we should not have gone in, but while we are there we can really do some good.

Its not hypocritical when stating the fact that our armed forces cannot stop this civil war.

And Im sorry you assume too much. You cannot place me in a field and tell me who I am defending. I will tell you who I am defending, if ever.

Actually I can put you in the field of who you are defending. You have defended Bush yet say you do not like him. You say there is no proof of abuses at Gitmo, though Rumsfeld is clearly involved. Yes you have said lets finish the job. In fact if i remember clearly, you've said it more then 5 times in the past. "I don't think we should of went in there, but now that we're there we should finish the job." We cannot stop this impending civil war that we just so happen to set the stage for. Horray United States. Great job, give ourselves a pat on the back.

Don't even start that shiz.



Hmm... Will has the right mind set on this.



Yet we can waste billions of dollards on useless wars, and the now soon, invasion of Iran..

Please refrain from posting here Chris.

Stopping Iran from making nukes would not be a waste of money, leave the military tactics to me.

Funny how Iran's President calls for the death of Israel, and their death will be soon and at the same time he has nuclear programs developing, funny how these things work out.

You support useless wars. If we invade Iran, it's another pointless war for Oil with the excuess that we need to "change regimes"

You still think the war in Iraq was for oil? Blind fool. And other countries, not just the USA are ready to stop Iran's nuclear programs. Iran is in need of regime changes, what are you? Slow in the head (retarded? , not a flame, thank euro). They threaten to irradicate a whole nation. They mis-treat their citizens all the time (Mainly women). The people born before the revolution hate their government and they have reason to. But a good portion born after the revolution are blind to what is really going on, they are like "Kewl, Jihad, kill the infidels!".

And invading Iran will not cause WWIII (just incase Euro wants to put his little 2 cents back in here).

it's sad that Bush DOES NOT CARE ABOUT PEOPLE IN IRAQ & what they think about their goverment. he is there for oil, StalingradK.

about Iran. i hope that Israel will stop it's nuclear program, like it did before:

to gain nuclear fuel, you must have special turbines. they are hard to build, but they allmost managed to do so some time ago. when they were allmost done, the Israel just bombed them with an air strike, F**king all the agreements. so i hope that or Israel, or USA will do something like that again to avoid Iran getting nuclear weapons.

To bad you still flamed me, even if you tried to pull a Euro.

And invading Iran will not cause WWIII? Awwww. I'm the blind fool hu?

To bad invading Iraq wouldn't cause terrorist attacks of nations, with your logic.

Oopsie! Guess what? They did! Uh oh.. Whose the "blind fool" now eh?