INTENSITY²
Start here => What's your crime? Basic Discussion => Topic started by: skyblue1 on September 23, 2014, 05:02:05 PM
-
The United States launched several airstrikes against ISIS targets inside Syria for the first time late Monday in what a defense official said was a "successful" start in a new front in the battle against the terror group and, separately, in potentially averting an imminent threat to the homeland from a shadowy al Qaeda group.
While the United States is still "assessing the effectiveness" of the bombing campaign against ISIS, which included up to 20 targets, the Pentagon believes “that we were successful in hitting what we were aiming at,” Pentagon Press Secretary Rear Adm. John Kirby said.
"We took out command-and-control facilities, supply depots, some training areas, some vehicles and trucks, that kind of thing. Mainly, what we were going after was this group's ability to sustain itself, to resource itself and to, frankly, command and control and lead their forces,” Kirby told “Good Morning America,” referring to ISIS.
Many of the targets were in and around Raqqa, Syria, believed to be an ISIS stronghold, a defense official said Monday. Several Arab nations took part in the U.S.-led operation: Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, the U.S. military's Central Command said early today.
Separately, the U.S. military unilaterally launched eight strikes against the Khorasan Group, a little-known al Qaeda cell that Kirby said was “plotting and planning imminent attacks against Western targets to include the U.S. homeland.”
“It was on that basis that we struck targets, Khorasan targets, inside Syria. We believe the individuals [who] were plotting and planning it have been eliminated and we’re going to continue, as I said, to assess the effectiveness of our strikes going through today,” he said.
More:http://abcnews.go.com/International/airstrikes-successful-isis-targets-syria-us-military/story?id=25686031
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Ok, so more than a million people dead since two thousand three to last year directly because of American attacks in the middle east. (Which is equivalent to about thirty million americans)
Yeah, lets just keep fucking doing it man. :GA:
-
Ok, so more than a million people dead since two thousand three to last year directly because of American attacks in the middle east. (Which is equivalent to about thirty million americans)
Yeah, lets just keep fucking doing it man. :GA:
Where do you get your numbers? I am not saying that there were not a lot of deaths but more than a million seems a bit exaggerated and at the very least it probably includes attacks carried out by the resistance against their fellow Iraqis
-
I was worried that we hadn't bombed every country in the world yet.
-
Ok, so more than a million people dead since two thousand three to last year directly because of American attacks in the middle east. (Which is equivalent to about thirty million americans)
Yeah, lets just keep fucking doing it man. :GA:
Where do you get your numbers? I am not saying that there were not a lot of deaths but more than a million seems a bit exaggerated and at the very least it probably includes attacks carried out by the resistance against their fellow Iraqis
Its pretty typical to think that. I used to, until I looked at the facts. Lemme help, bro.
Al-Qaeda
http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam (http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam)
http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html (http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile)
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm)
http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror (http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html)
Iraq
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html)
http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair (http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair)
http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat (http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat)
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html)
http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias)
Libya
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html)
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis (http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis)
Syria
http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable (http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable)
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048 (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048)
http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan (http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria)
http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486 (http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486)
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html)
http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq (http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions (http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html)
Misc
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html)
http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis (http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis)
-
Just say you like to kill muslims, Scrap. I see you looking at this thread, gheying away. Why don't we talk about that? What exactly is your bloodlust about?
-
Its pretty typical to think that. I used to, until I looked at the facts. Lemme help, bro.
Al-Qaeda
http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam (http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam)
http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html (http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile)
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm)
http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror (http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html)
Iraq
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html)
http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair (http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair)
http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat (http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat)
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html)
http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias)
Libya
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html)
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis (http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis)
Syria
http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable (http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable)
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048 (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048)
http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan (http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria)
http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486 (http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486)
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html)
http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq (http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions (http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html)
Misc
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html)
http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis (http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis)
Aaah, the shotgun of bullshit approach. Bury your opponent in so much irrelevant information that they can't form a counter argument. Gee, I've never seen this done before. ::) ::) ::)
-
Tampon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampon)
http://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Tampon (http://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Tampon)
http://youngwomenshealth.org/2012/09/27/tampons/ (http://youngwomenshealth.org/2012/09/27/tampons/)
http://www.playtexplayon.com/first-time-users/how-to-use (http://www.playtexplayon.com/first-time-users/how-to-use)
http://www.playtexplayon.com/first-time-users/tampon-myths (http://www.playtexplayon.com/first-time-users/tampon-myths)
http://www.tampax.com/en-us/tampon-information/first-tampon/tampon-or-pad.aspx (http://www.tampax.com/en-us/tampon-information/first-tampon/tampon-or-pad.aspx)
http://www.tampax.com/en-us/tampon-information/tampon-101/tampax-training-camp.aspx (http://www.tampax.com/en-us/tampon-information/tampon-101/tampax-training-camp.aspx)
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2010/03/greening_the_crimson_tide.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2010/03/greening_the_crimson_tide.html)
Maxi Pad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitary_napkin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitary_napkin)
http://www.always.com/en-us/product/pads/maxi-pad.aspx (http://www.always.com/en-us/product/pads/maxi-pad.aspx)
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=maxipad (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=maxipad)
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Maxipad (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Maxipad)
http://www.femmeinternational.org/blog/the-history-of-the-sanitary-pad (http://www.femmeinternational.org/blog/the-history-of-the-sanitary-pad)
http://lunapads.com/maxi-pad.html (http://lunapads.com/maxi-pad.html)
Menstrual Cup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menstrual_cup (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menstrual_cup)
http://divacup.com/ (http://divacup.com/)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfHF0p7X4MI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfHF0p7X4MI)
http://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Menstrual-Cup (http://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Menstrual-Cup)
http://jezebel.com/5704373/my-bloody-initiation-into-the-diva-cup-cult (http://jezebel.com/5704373/my-bloody-initiation-into-the-diva-cup-cult)
Miscellaneous
http://www.myreligionislam.com/detail.asp?Aid=6070 (http://www.myreligionislam.com/detail.asp?Aid=6070)
http://www.mum.org/miscedir.htm (http://www.mum.org/miscedir.htm)
http://www.clothnappytree.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=119466 (http://www.clothnappytree.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=119466)
:zoinks:
-
Shot gun approach indeed did any of those links pertain to the question I asked? Here's a few that do, the last one being the best of the bunch. The low number is at 195000 and the high was 460000 including all sides.
https://www.iraqbodycount.org/ (https://www.iraqbodycount.org/)
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24547256 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24547256)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/9932214/Iraq-war-10-years-on-at-least-116000-civilians-killed.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/9932214/Iraq-war-10-years-on-at-least-116000-civilians-killed.html)
http://www.statista.com/statistics/269729/documented-civilian-deaths-in-iraq-war-since-2003/ (http://www.statista.com/statistics/269729/documented-civilian-deaths-in-iraq-war-since-2003/)
http://realnicetits.tumblr.com/ (http://realnicetits.tumblr.com/)
-
Its pretty typical to think that. I used to, until I looked at the facts. Lemme help, bro.
Al-Qaeda
http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam (http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam)
http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html (http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile)
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm)
http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror (http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html)
Iraq
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html)
http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair (http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair)
http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat (http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat)
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html)
http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias)
Libya
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html)
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis (http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis)
Syria
http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable (http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable)
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048 (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048)
http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan (http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria)
http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486 (http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486)
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html)
http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq (http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions (http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html)
Misc
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html)
http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis (http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis)
Aaah, the shotgun of bullshit approach. Bury your opponent in so much irrelevant information that they can't form a counter argument. Gee, I've never seen this done before. ::) ::) ::)
Irrelevant how? I see you guys are annoyed by a large amount of info on this subject. Especially crapheap, who envisions muslims as the forces of darkness from lord of the rings.
For Parts, I will narrow it down to only his question.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2007/09/14/poll-civilian-death-toll-iraq-may-top-1-million (http://www.commondreams.org/news/2007/09/14/poll-civilian-death-toll-iraq-may-top-1-million)
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/16/iraq.iraqtimeline (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/16/iraq.iraqtimeline)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/08/100827_iraq_deaths_nh_sl.shtml (http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/08/100827_iraq_deaths_nh_sl.shtml)
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14501232 (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14501232)
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/06/13/iraq-death-tolls-yet-again/ (http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/06/13/iraq-death-tolls-yet-again/)
;)
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
-
Its pretty typical to think that. I used to, until I looked at the facts. Lemme help, bro.
Al-Qaeda
http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam (http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam)
http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html (http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile)
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm)
http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror (http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html)
Iraq
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html)
http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair (http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair)
http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat (http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat)
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html)
http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias)
Libya
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html)
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis (http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis)
Syria
http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable (http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable)
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048 (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048)
http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan (http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria)
http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486 (http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486)
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html)
http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq (http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions (http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html)
Misc
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html)
http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis (http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis)
Aaah, the shotgun of bullshit approach. Bury your opponent in so much irrelevant information that they can't form a counter argument. Gee, I've never seen this done before. ::) ::) ::)
Irrelevant how? I see you guys are annoyed by a large amount of info on this subject. Especially crapheap, who envisions muslims as the forces of darkness from lord of the rings.
For Parts, I will narrow it down to only his question.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2007/09/14/poll-civilian-death-toll-iraq-may-top-1-million (http://www.commondreams.org/news/2007/09/14/poll-civilian-death-toll-iraq-may-top-1-million)
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/16/iraq.iraqtimeline (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/16/iraq.iraqtimeline)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/08/100827_iraq_deaths_nh_sl.shtml (http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/08/100827_iraq_deaths_nh_sl.shtml)
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14501232 (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14501232)
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/06/13/iraq-death-tolls-yet-again/ (http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/06/13/iraq-death-tolls-yet-again/)
;)
I can't believe that someone published the first one at all based on how it was done
According to the ORB poll, a survey of 1,461 adults suggested that the total number slain during more than four years of war was more than 1.2 million.
ORB said it drew its conclusion from responses to the question about those living under one roof: "How many members of your household, if any, have died as a result of the conflict in Iraq since 2003?"
Based on Iraq's estimated number of households -- 4,050,597 -- it said the 1.2 million figure was reasonable.
Did you even read the last one it actually refuted the bigger numbers and complained about how they were exaggerated showing flaws used in the studies used in the other links :GA:
2. I think that far too many people have died, which is a terrible indictment not of the decision to invade but of the failure to prepare for what followed. I do not agree with opponents of invasion, but that 100,000-150,000 have died should be enough for them to make their case without having to exaggerate the toll by a factor of as much as 10.
-
Newspaper this morning talked about strong indications Assad is using chemical weapons again. Apparently he feels pretty safe to do so, right now.
-
Tampon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampon)
http://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Tampon (http://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Tampon)
http://youngwomenshealth.org/2012/09/27/tampons/ (http://youngwomenshealth.org/2012/09/27/tampons/)
http://www.playtexplayon.com/first-time-users/how-to-use (http://www.playtexplayon.com/first-time-users/how-to-use)
http://www.playtexplayon.com/first-time-users/tampon-myths (http://www.playtexplayon.com/first-time-users/tampon-myths)
http://www.tampax.com/en-us/tampon-information/first-tampon/tampon-or-pad.aspx (http://www.tampax.com/en-us/tampon-information/first-tampon/tampon-or-pad.aspx)
http://www.tampax.com/en-us/tampon-information/tampon-101/tampax-training-camp.aspx (http://www.tampax.com/en-us/tampon-information/tampon-101/tampax-training-camp.aspx)
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2010/03/greening_the_crimson_tide.html (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_green_lantern/2010/03/greening_the_crimson_tide.html)
Maxi Pad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitary_napkin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitary_napkin)
http://www.always.com/en-us/product/pads/maxi-pad.aspx (http://www.always.com/en-us/product/pads/maxi-pad.aspx)
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=maxipad (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=maxipad)
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Maxipad (http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Maxipad)
http://www.femmeinternational.org/blog/the-history-of-the-sanitary-pad (http://www.femmeinternational.org/blog/the-history-of-the-sanitary-pad)
http://lunapads.com/maxi-pad.html (http://lunapads.com/maxi-pad.html)
Menstrual Cup
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menstrual_cup (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menstrual_cup)
http://divacup.com/ (http://divacup.com/)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfHF0p7X4MI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfHF0p7X4MI)
http://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Menstrual-Cup (http://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-Menstrual-Cup)
http://jezebel.com/5704373/my-bloody-initiation-into-the-diva-cup-cult (http://jezebel.com/5704373/my-bloody-initiation-into-the-diva-cup-cult)
Miscellaneous
http://www.myreligionislam.com/detail.asp?Aid=6070 (http://www.myreligionislam.com/detail.asp?Aid=6070)
http://www.mum.org/miscedir.htm (http://www.mum.org/miscedir.htm)
http://www.clothnappytree.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=119466 (http://www.clothnappytree.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=119466)
:zoinks:
You included a YouTube video. :zoinks:
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
But how do you fight an idea? air strikes can do damage, ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process. You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else! So many people have the same idea
It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit :-\
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
But how do you fight an idea? air strikes can do damage, ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process. You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else! So many people have the same idea
It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit :-\
You take out the Imams who are spreading this evil crap. The moderate Imams then have to denounce these people as heretics.
-
Do Imams have deputies, reserve Imams, 2nd in command,
- number 2's?
It's whackamole again.
-
You included a YouTube video. :zoinks:
I know. I added the s to https, so it would post as a link. :nerdy:
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
There's a lot more than the US involved, but everyone else is very skilled at the appearances of sucking their cocks. :zoinks:
-
Its pretty typical to think that. I used to, until I looked at the facts. Lemme help, bro.
Al-Qaeda
http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam (http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/jan/17/yemen.islam)
http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html (http://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2004/11/200849163336457223.html)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan#1986:_Stinger_Missile)
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm (http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch5.htm)
http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror (http://nation.time.com/2011/06/29/the-5-trillion-war-on-terror)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fed-americans-wealth-dropped-40-percent/2012/06/11/gJQAlIsCVV_story.html)
Iraq
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/17/iraq-tony-blair_n_5503110.html)
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq (http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/jan/21/iraq.iraq)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2665670/ISIS-seize-key-border-crossings-Syria-Jordan-John-Kerry-lands-Baghdad-showdown-talks-Iraqi-PM.html)
http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair (http://www.tonyblairoffice.org/news/entry/iraq-syria-and-the-middle-east-an-essay-by-tony-blair)
http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat (http://thediplomat.com/2014/09/how-the-us-made-isis-a-threat)
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/11/world/middleeast/us-actions-in-iraq-fueled-rise-of-a-rebel.html)
http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias (http://www.vox.com/2014/6/20/5827046/who-are-sunnis-who-are-shias)
Libya
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-j-kucinich/isis-libya-nato_b_5764988.html)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2610598/Group-US-switched-sides-War-Terror-facilitating-500-MILLION-weapons-deliveries-Libyan-al-Qaeda-militias-leading-Benghazi-attack.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/africa/in-a-turnabout-syria-rebels-get-libyan-weapons.html)
http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis (http://video.foxnews.com/v/3760226769001/gen-mcinerney-provides-insight-into-ukraine-crisis)
Syria
http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable (http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2014/09/08/14-million-refugees-make-the-levant-unmanageable)
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048 (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303410404577464763551149048)
http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan (http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/officials-u-s-trained-isis-at-secret-base-in-jordan)
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/06/06/rice-united-states-is-leading-with-lethal-and-non-lethal-aid-to-syria)
http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486 (http://online.wsj.com/articles/obama-proposes-500-million-to-aid-syrian-rebels-1403813486)
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/07/08/US-Backed-Moderate-Free-Syrian-Army-Factions-Join-Islamic-State-Terror-Group)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11052919/How-Isil-is-funded-trained-and-operating-in-Iraq-and-Syria.html)
http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq (http://stopwar.org.uk/news/eight-facts-everyone-should-know-about-the-rise-of-isis-and-the-new-war-in-iraq)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-begins-weapons-delivery-to-syrian-rebels/2013/09/11/9fcf2ed8-1b0c-11e3-a628-7e6dde8f889d_story.html)
http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions (http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/asking_the_wrong_questions)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/syria-death-toll_n_5626482.html)
Misc
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740998/ISIS-release-video-showing-beheading-American-journalist-Steven-Sotloff.html)
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/text-obamas-speech-destroying-isis_804732.html)
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/08/world/middleeast/a-return-to-action.html)
http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis (http://www.vox.com/c...ow/what-is-isis)
Aaah, the shotgun of bullshit approach. Bury your opponent in so much irrelevant information that they can't form a counter argument. Gee, I've never seen this done before. ::) ::) ::)
Irrelevant how? I see you guys are annoyed by a large amount of info on this subject. Especially crapheap, who envisions muslims as the forces of darkness from lord of the rings.
For Parts, I will narrow it down to only his question.
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2007/09/14/poll-civilian-death-toll-iraq-may-top-1-million (http://www.commondreams.org/news/2007/09/14/poll-civilian-death-toll-iraq-may-top-1-million)
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/16/iraq.iraqtimeline (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/sep/16/iraq.iraqtimeline)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/08/100827_iraq_deaths_nh_sl.shtml (http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/2010/08/100827_iraq_deaths_nh_sl.shtml)
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14501232 (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14501232)
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/06/13/iraq-death-tolls-yet-again/ (http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/06/13/iraq-death-tolls-yet-again/)
;)
I can't believe that someone published the first one at all based on how it was done
According to the ORB poll, a survey of 1,461 adults suggested that the total number slain during more than four years of war was more than 1.2 million.
ORB said it drew its conclusion from responses to the question about those living under one roof: "How many members of your household, if any, have died as a result of the conflict in Iraq since 2003?"
Based on Iraq's estimated number of households -- 4,050,597 -- it said the 1.2 million figure was reasonable.
Did you even read the last one it actually refuted the bigger numbers and complained about how they were exaggerated showing flaws used in the studies used in the other links :GA:
2. I think that far too many people have died, which is a terrible indictment not of the decision to invade but of the failure to prepare for what followed. I do not agree with opponents of invasion, but that 100,000-150,000 have died should be enough for them to make their case without having to exaggerate the toll by a factor of as much as 10.
I included it to be fair, but I have also read how the surveys were done, dude. Bodies buried in mass graves, people too scared to take to the streets and go door to door. I'll stick by the prior figure. It seems more reasonable when considering the situation there and how many people were killed, along with how impossible it was to find all the bodies or even ask the families.
-
Not as many links, but so much more sense.
-
Sloppy surveys sloppy stats sloppy research it cheapens the message and puts the seeds of doubt in the minds of people on the fence on issues and more times than not turns them against you.
-
Do Imams have deputies, reserve Imams, 2nd in command,
- number 2's?
It's whackamole again.
Not if moderate Imams succeed in discrediting the remaining Jihadists.
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
But how do you fight an idea? air strikes can do damage, ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process. You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else! So many people have the same idea
It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit :-\
This particular idea is punishing civilians for the airstrikes even as I write this. I certainly agree with you that the idea will take a different form and reappear somewhere else if you destroy the capabilities of the current embodyment, but in the short term, something needs to be done.
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
But how do you fight an idea? air strikes can do damage, ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process. You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else! So many people have the same idea
It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit :-\
You take out the Imams who are spreading this evil crap. The moderate Imams then have to denounce these people as heretics.
Not a viable method. Leaders are replaceable. While these people are nutjobs, the fact that they tend to reappear means that there are bigger issues to address.
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
There's a lot more than the US involved, but everyone else is very skilled at the appearances of sucking their cocks. :zoinks:
The others wouldn't have done much without the US.
-
Sloppy surveys sloppy stats sloppy research it cheapens the message and puts the seeds of doubt in the minds of people on the fence on issues and more times than not turns them against you.
Agreed.
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
There's a lot more than the US involved, but everyone else is very skilled at the appearances of sucking their cocks. :zoinks:
The others wouldn't have done much without the US.
That's because they like the taste of Arab cock. :zoinks: Seriously though, they probably would, because without the US they wouldn't have much other choice.
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
But how do you fight an idea? air strikes can do damage, ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process. You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else! So many people have the same idea
It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit :-\
This particular idea is punishing civilians for the airstrikes even as I write this. I certainly agree with you that the idea will take a different form and reappear somewhere else if you destroy the capabilities of the current embodyment, but in the short term, something needs to be done.
There was an Army Major on newsnight yesterday giving his take on things. He said air strikes alone won't work without boots on the ground. No one wants to send their own troops in. He said that the allies were going to be training the Iraq army, the Free Syria Army and locals from Jordan.
I don't want to sound pessimistic but I can see several major flaws in training and arming shepherds who don't even have proper shoes on their feet!
Prepare for the eternal war me thinks.
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
But how do you fight an idea? air strikes can do damage, ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process. You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else! So many people have the same idea
It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit :-\
This particular idea is punishing civilians for the airstrikes even as I write this. I certainly agree with you that the idea will take a different form and reappear somewhere else if you destroy the capabilities of the current embodyment, but in the short term, something needs to be done.
There was an Army Major on newsnight yesterday giving his take on things. He said air strikes alone won't work without boots on the ground. No one wants to send their own troops in. He said that the allies were going to be training the Iraq army, the Free Syria Army and locals from Jordan.
I don't want to sound pessimistic but I can see several major flaws in training and arming shepherds who don't even have proper shoes on their feet!
Prepare for the eternal war me thinks.
Agreed. It might be better for them to send in troops themselves. Or nuke the Middle East.
-
Too much oil. ::)
-
Which is why they went in in the first place. :zoinks:
-
It would be smokin for a while >:D
-
Some problems would be solved for a long time to come. ;D
-
Yes but there would be a lot of tears to mop up. I am sure it would make some western leaders cry a little.
Then, we would have to put up with frantic fracking everywhere as the world panics :spaz:
-
They would weep for the oil.
-
They they they. Le eyes roll.
-
It would be smokin for a while >:D
No, that's why they make neutron bombs. 8)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb)
-
I'm not usually in favour of the US starting wars in the middle east, but I'd say that everyone benefits from someone doing something about the Islamic State.
But how do you fight an idea? air strikes can do damage, ground troops can also do some damage and harm themselves in the process. You can obliterate infrastructure, buildings, homes, land even countries but then the same threat pops up somewhere else! So many people have the same idea
It's like Whackamole but without the fun bit :-\
This particular idea is punishing civilians for the airstrikes even as I write this. I certainly agree with you that the idea will take a different form and reappear somewhere else if you destroy the capabilities of the current embodyment, but in the short term, something needs to be done.
There was an Army Major on newsnight yesterday giving his take on things. He said air strikes alone won't work without boots on the ground. No one wants to send their own troops in. He said that the allies were going to be training the Iraq army, the Free Syria Army and locals from Jordan.
I don't want to sound pessimistic but I can see several major flaws in training and arming shepherds who don't even have proper shoes on their feet!
Prepare for the eternal war me thinks.
Agreed. It might be better for them to send in troops themselves. Or nuke the Middle East.
:thumbdn:
-
:thumbdn:
Agreed.
-
:thumbdn:
Agreed.
:)
-
:thumbdn:
Agreed.
Is that a no to nuking the Middle East?
-
I believe it was not a serious solution.
-
I was serious about the neutron bombs. :green:
-
Oh boy what :CanofWorms:
Let's see...anyone who uses there 'religion' as an excuse to behead people frankly any excuse to behead folks (saw off heads really they don't even do it correctly)...needs to be killed because frankly they cannot and will not function in a somewhat civil society (because they choose not to)
that said, how do you fight an idea? My take on that one is to be the change myself by not giving an audience to their steaming piles of poo...IE don't watch the video's (I saw one of those a long rear time ago not even related to this, one is enough thanks) :thumbdn:
Be the change yourself in a positive way, not just by typing it, or saying it but by living it...
For example, my faith or as some of you might view religion has actually kept me sane...isn't that what it is supposed to do? well at least for me it has, it with my willingness to change to better myself has kept me afloat in hard times (hanging in there when life happens) and it has been something I've been able to anchor myself to and point to as a beacon of hope...not just in what I say but what I do...
I don't see any change for the better in this as far as an idea goes it's pure evil in it's most twisted form, and it's easy to take life (including to go out with a bang for the cause as in a person themselves)
but it isn't as easy to extend mercy or grace now is it? It isn't as easy to be the change for better? but it's worth it...that is something I will bank on and if need be put my life on the line for if it comes to that (hopefully not...)
Every life on this planet is precious in my humble opinion, and any force form or person who chooses to take life well what goes around will come around eventually...these folks will reap what they sow and I shudder to think what they will reap...but they bring that upon themselves...
In closing, I really don't have much to add other then what was said above...seems being a decent human being has gone out the window along with a lot of other things... :thumbdn:
-
I was serious about the neutron bombs. :green:
They are not exactly what people think they are and work best against tanks and such. If you want this sort of option better to go with VX or some other nerve agent then you would not have to worry about any radiological contamination :nerdy:
-
I was serious about the neutron bombs. :green:
They are not exactly what people think they are and work best against tanks and such. If you want this sort of option better to go with VX or some other nerve agent then you would not have to worry about any radiological contamination :nerdy:
This is true... :apondering:
-
Or we could like, you know.. stop killing people, man.
-
Every life on this planet is precious in my humble opinion, and any force form or person who chooses to take life well what goes around will come around eventually...these folks will reap what they sow and I shudder to think what they will reap...but they bring that upon themselves...
I agree that all life is valuable. The life of a Palestinian child, for example is worth no more or no less than an Israeli child, or a Syrian child.
I used to believe in karma and what goes around comes around. My experience in life made me ditch those beliefs. Too many get away with murder.
But don't let me piss in your fire because your post actually made me smile. An 'if only' kind of smile, but it was a smile and not a smirk. Please send me some of your positivity, as my tank is a little low. :thumbup:
-
Or we could like, you know.. stop killing people, man.
:yarly: This as well...it's not going to happen on this side of eternity I'm afraid :headhurts:
-
Actually what was written previously, Hannah, was a little self-contradictory. Making the statement of all life being precious, after already stating the view that people who behead in the name of religion should be killed. Absolutely believe some people deserve to die, and the lives of certain people have no value and in no way precious, but also don't believe their death is a decision which should be the right of other humans or the right of the state. Society has the right to be protected, but death isn't necessarily the answer to that.
-
Force simply isn't ever going to be the answer. It has been used to "solve" problems countless times in the past, and it always creates several new ones.
-
Actually what was written previously, Hannah, was a little self-contradictory. Making the statement of all life being precious, after already stating the view that people who behead in the name of religion should be killed. Absolutely believe some people deserve to die, and the lives of certain people have no value and in no way precious, but also don't believe their death is a decision which should be the right of other humans or the right of the state. Society has the right to be protected, but death isn't necessarily the answer to that.
Thanks for this view jack it really is food for thought for my brain...
I think the point I was trying to make is it just makes no sense what the insanity of what isis is doing for example in the name of 'religion' honestly I'm not sure what point they are trying to make any longer...There lives have just as much valuse as well by the simple fact that they are humans and have free will to choose to do what they will however what they are doing is just evil and what I meant was with their free will to do evil to choose to be brainwashed it should have some negative consequences...should key word it's hard to get across points often times in written form... ???
I apologize for any confusion Jack and your statement is correct so far as to say my post...I just find that level of choice to be that emotionally, humanly, or otherwise callus and evil-----dumbfounding...
-
I apologize for any confusion Jack
No worries, nor need for apology. :)
-
Didn't the US and UK want to fight with these guys against Assad last year?
-
Force simply isn't ever going to be the answer.
Unless it's force against Israel which is perfectly OK because hypocrisy. :thumbup:
-
Force simply isn't ever going to be the answer.
Unless it's force against Israel which is perfectly OK because hypocrisy. :thumbup:
Perhaps I should say the initiation of force, then.
-
Didn't the US and UK want to fight with these guys against Assad last year?
I'm pretty sure that they are "these guys".
If their Caliph has any devine plans, then seriously.... go ahead and explain.
I'll just sit in my room, and play the :violin:
-
ISIS does attack very strategically, they aim for western sense of freedom. Kill a journalist, kill a woman who criticizes the destruction of ancient mosques in Mosul on FB.
ISIS aims for where the west feels comfortable and free, journalists doing their jobs, and the right not to agree with what has been done. And, by doing all this very public, they aim at our sense of safety. They are token kills, and they have effect, on our minds.
I fear that bombing ISIS, and other extremist groups will not have the effect on the mind of ISIS like their actions have on our mind. They are prepared to die, they are anticipating this reaction. There needs to be more than that. The United Arab Emirates announcing that it might be a woman dropping the deadly bombs is said to be threatening to their minds, it may block the eternal rewards awaiting a zealous fighter.
But, if I read that many recruited people in ISIS are not there for the religious goal, but are criminals now finally getting a license to kill and maim, I don't know what will get to the mindset and idea of them.
How do you kill an idea? By giving something instead of that idea? If so, what would that be? Democracy does not work as a gift, democracy has to come from the people themselves.
-
In closing, I really don't have much to add other then what was said above...seems being a decent human being has gone out the window along with a lot of other things... :thumbdn:
I think most people are still human, some even decent, and only a select few would seriously consider beheading others for whatever reason. The problem is that it's the latter that gets all the attention.
-
I was serious about the neutron bombs. :green:
They are not exactly what people think they are and work best against tanks and such. If you want this sort of option better to go with VX or some other nerve agent then you would not have to worry about any radiological contamination :nerdy:
An EMP might prove to be beneficial, though. I very much doubt the IS would be able to advance anywhere in a while. :zoinks:
-
Or we could like, you know.. stop killing people, man.
And everyone could, you know, just hold hands and sing, I dunno, something like "We Shall Overcome".
-
Or we could like, you know.. stop killing people, man.
And everyone could, you know, just hold hands and sing, I dunno, something like "We Shall Overcome".
:kumbaya:
-
Force simply isn't ever going to be the answer. It has been used to "solve" problems countless times in the past, and it always creates several new ones.
That independence thing you guys had a couple of hundred years ago didn't solve anything. I know. :P
-
Didn't the US and UK want to fight with these guys against Assad last year?
Some of their buddies, I think, but not the IS themselves. I think. The IS is sprung from al Qaeda and I'm pretty sure it's been a few years since they got help from the West.
-
How do you kill an idea?
By replacing it with another idea.
-
How do you kill an idea?
By replacing it with another idea.
Duhh, but how do you do that.
Bringing democracy will not help.
Calvinism once spread to Northern Europe at massive speed. I do not think it was the message that did that, but what came with it. It was imperative that everyone learned to read. So, it came with schooling, for everyone, regardless of status, and in some areas even regardless of gender. It came with empowerment for the people.
Something like that may help spread a new idea. But, what could it be? Something that can spread in a grassroot way.
-
How do you kill an idea?
By replacing it with another idea.
Duhh, but how do you do that.
Bringing democracy will not help.
Not by itself, but if you bother to explain its benefits first it might. You have to sell an idea before you can implement it.
-
I was serious about the neutron bombs. :green:
They are not exactly what people think they are and work best against tanks and such. If you want this sort of option better to go with VX or some other nerve agent then you would not have to worry about any radiological contamination :nerdy:
An EMP might prove to be beneficial, though. I very much doubt the IS would be able to advance anywhere in a while. :zoinks:
They would have to go back to using camels :zoinks:
-
I was serious about the neutron bombs. :green:
They are not exactly what people think they are and work best against tanks and such. If you want this sort of option better to go with VX or some other nerve agent then you would not have to worry about any radiological contamination :nerdy:
An EMP might prove to be beneficial, though. I very much doubt the IS would be able to advance anywhere in a while. :zoinks:
They would have to go back to using camels :zoinks:
After which a nerve gas could finish the job. :zoinks:
-
I was serious about the neutron bombs. :green:
They are not exactly what people think they are and work best against tanks and such. If you want this sort of option better to go with VX or some other nerve agent then you would not have to worry about any radiological contamination :nerdy:
An EMP might prove to be beneficial, though. I very much doubt the IS would be able to advance anywhere in a while. :zoinks:
They would have to go back to using camels :zoinks:
After which a nerve gas could finish the job. :zoinks:
But then PETA would be mad at us for hurting the camels:zoinks:
-
I didn't know camels would be affected. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :M
-
I think most people are still human, some even decent, and only a select few would seriously consider beheading others for whatever reason. The problem is that it's the latter that gets all the attention.
Not exactly accurate. The majority of Germans killing Jews at the concentration camps were normal "decent" people. Many of them had to drink themselves into oblivion in order to do their jobs.
-
I think most people are still human, some even decent, and only a select few would seriously consider beheading others for whatever reason. The problem is that it's the latter that gets all the attention.
Not exactly accurate. The majority of Germans killing Jews at the concentration camps were normal "decent" people. Many of them had to drink themselves into oblivion in order to do their jobs.
The majority of the Germans killing Jews at the concentrations was a minority of the total population. I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.
-
He's going to disagree with anything that doesn't involve exterminating middle eastern people, as per his immovable cognitive bias.
-
The IS types were the ones cutting out people's organs and eating them, the West wanted to fund them. Even if they're not the same, that's irrelevant. It just shows that America has zero integrity. They don't want to bomb them for the greater good. The US will back anything, no matter how evil. They need to be stopped.
-
I think most people are still human, some even decent, and only a select few would seriously consider beheading others for whatever reason. The problem is that it's the latter that gets all the attention.
Not exactly accurate. The majority of Germans killing Jews at the concentration camps were normal "decent" people. Many of them had to drink themselves into oblivion in order to do their jobs.
The majority of the Germans killing Jews at the concentrations was a minority of the total population. I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.
Of course they were a minority of Germans but they were a good cross section of German society, they were "regular Joes". My point is that even "good" people will do evil things when commanded to by higher authority
-
The IS types were the ones cutting out people's organs and eating them, the West wanted to fund them. Even if they're not the same, that's irrelevant. It just shows that America has zero integrity. They don't want to bomb them for the greater good. The US will back anything, no matter how evil. They need to be stopped.
How many governments have integrity? Some may be better than others but they all do what is in their own best interests.
bomb them for the greater good
:lol1:
-
bomb them for the greater good
:lol1:
Now that would be integrity. :laugh:
-
Lol, yeah, that didn't come out quite as I intended. :P
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
So they're all a bunch of liars; nothing new about that. Not only the citizens of the US, but also Europe, believed Obama was anti-war. It was a major platform of his campaign to get elected, pulling US troops out of the middle east and ending the war. Never happened, and the founding principal of his goals as president quickly changed. The article in the OP of this thread contains this quote from Obama:
In a national address Sept. 10, President Obama said the first part of his strategy to counter ISIS was to "conduct a systematic campaign of airstrikes against these terrorists."
"Moreover, I have made it clear that we will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are. That means I will not hesitate to take action against ISIL [ISIS] in Syria as well as Iraq," Obama said. "This is a core principle of my presidency: If you threaten America, you will find no safe haven."
If that doesn't sound like he's a puppet with George W Bush's hand straight up his ass, then not sure what it is. Though yes, all sounding very noble.
-
Bush, Obomber, whoever, they are all puppets.
If America expected every other country to go by those standards, they'd have been nuked long ago.
-
Obama is worse than George Bush and Tony Blair says Noam Chomsky (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mA4HYTO790#ws)
-
Bush, Obomber, whoever, they are all puppets.
If America expected every other country to go by those standards, they'd have been nuked long ago.
Of course they're puppets, and the general public are all sheep who simply can't do anything about it. The US can't end the war because the US isn't the only one calling the shots nor the only one with a stake in the results. This is a world effort, and all major decision of war are made by leaders within the UN. America isn't the big evil; either the leaders of the entire eastern and western world are evil, or it's actually about a greater good and the leaders of the middle east are the evil.
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
While the leaders of China foot the bill and no one even considers them.
-
Zionism is the poison. It's all about the US furthering their interests in the region, and that's why they support Israel and supply them with $7 million a day and pay for their weapons to massacre innocent civilians. They both create a unrest and conflict in each surrounding country, so they can come in and level the place and install a USrael puppet leader. Anyone who shows support for the Palestinian cause is taken care of.
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
While the leaders of China foot the bill and no one even considers them.
The banks you mean?
-
No. China has been funding the war all along. The US mans the war, China funds the war, and the entire continent of Europe carries the duty of assimilating the general public of the middle east to accept western standards of society. Haven't you ever wondered why a continent, formally considered extremely difficult for foreign immigration to gain citizenship, suddenly is so open armed to accept so may people? The UK has the role nice guy right now, but will one day stand up as the world superpower they truly are, and the US will be their noble ally. In the meantime the politicians will convince the general public they're doing the honorable thing, rescuing those people from the evil USofA.
-
No. China has been funding the war all along. The US mans the war, China funds the war, and the entire continent of Europe carries the duty of assimilating the general public of the middle east to accept western standards of society. Haven't you ever wondered why a continent, formally considered extremely difficult for foreign immigration to gain citizenship, suddenly is so open armed to accept so may people? The UK has the role nice guy right now, but will one day stand up as the world superpower they truly are, and the US will be their noble ally. In the meantime the politicians will convince the general public they're doing the honorable thing, rescuing those people from the evil USofA.
:zombiefuck:
-
No. China has been funding the war all along. The US mans the war, China funds the war, and the entire continent of Europe carries the duty of assimilating the general public of the middle east to accept western standards of society. Haven't you ever wondered why a continent, formally considered extremely difficult for foreign immigration to gain citizenship, suddenly is so open armed to accept so may people? The UK has the role nice guy right now, but will one day stand up as the world superpower they truly are, and the US will be their noble ally. In the meantime the politicians will convince the general public they're doing the honorable thing, rescuing those people from the evil USofA.
:zombiefuck:
Have already said it all here before. Jack is brilliantly insightful when having her tinfoil hat on. :laugh:
http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,22268.0.html (http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,22268.0.html)
-
No. China has been funding the war all along. The US mans the war, China funds the war, and the entire continent of Europe carries the duty of assimilating the general public of the middle east to accept western standards of society. Haven't you ever wondered why a continent, formally considered extremely difficult for foreign immigration to gain citizenship, suddenly is so open armed to accept so may people? The UK has the role nice guy right now, but will one day stand up as the world superpower they truly are, and the US will be their noble ally. In the meantime the politicians will convince the general public they're doing the honorable thing, rescuing those people from the evil USofA.
Chinese banks? Yes I have. Then I wonder why so many ancient aliens love multiculturalism in Europe, yet despise it in Israel. The UK is nothing, it's just some little island in Europe that gives away it's own laws. Globalization will never end.
-
The UK is far from nothing.
-
It's a joke.
-
I remember seeing this video with Peter Hitchens. Where he says something about how when England loses a football match there will be people weeping in the street, but when our politicians gives away our sovereignty to the European Union, no one cares. Sums it up pretty well. Too many brainwashed citizens worried more about their team or who's gonna win Strictly Come Dancing, rather than important issues. The people have been dumbed down to create the Jeremy Kyle generation.
-
It's a joke.
Would have to disagree with calling any world superpower a joke; though tend to prefer a big picture perspective of the situation.
-
I remember seeing this video with Peter Hitchens. Where he says something about how when England loses a football match there will be people weeping in the street, but when our politicians gives away our sovereignty to the European Union, no one cares. Sums it up pretty well. Too many brainwashed citizens worried more about their team or who's gonna win Strictly Come Dancing, rather than important issues. The people have been dumbed down to create the Jeremy Kyle generation.
Personally would rather attend a hockey game than watch any of this crap on the news. :laugh: Don't see as being able to do anything about it anyway; might as well try to enjoy life in the meantime.
-
It's a joke.
Would have to disagree with calling any world superpower a joke; though tend to prefer a big picture perspective of the situation.
We don't have any power. We're just like a boil on USrael's arse.
-
I remember seeing this video with Peter Hitchens. Where he says something about how when England loses a football match there will be people weeping in the street, but when our politicians gives away our sovereignty to the European Union, no one cares. Sums it up pretty well. Too many brainwashed citizens worried more about their team or who's gonna win Strictly Come Dancing, rather than important issues. The people have been dumbed down to create the Jeremy Kyle generation.
Personally would rather attend a hockey game than watch any of this crap on the news. :laugh: Don't see as being able to do anything about it anyway; might as well try to enjoy life in the meantime.
There's always hope, but yeah, it's best just to try and enjoy life.
-
We don't have any power. We're just like a boil on USrael's arse.
When looking very closely at the details, it could seem that way.
There's always hope, but yeah, it's best just to try and enjoy life.
It's good to have you back here, benjimanbreeg.
-
Thanks friend.
-
I think most people are still human, some even decent, and only a select few would seriously consider beheading others for whatever reason. The problem is that it's the latter that gets all the attention.
Not exactly accurate. The majority of Germans killing Jews at the concentration camps were normal "decent" people. Many of them had to drink themselves into oblivion in order to do their jobs.
The majority of the Germans killing Jews at the concentrations was a minority of the total population. I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.
Of course they were a minority of Germans but they were a good cross section of German society, they were "regular Joes". My point is that even "good" people will do evil things when commanded to by higher authority
That's where we disagree. I don't think most people would get into beheading others.
-
bomb them for the greater good
:lol1:
Now that would be integrity. :laugh:
True altruism. :laugh:
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
It's what politicians do.
-
Force simply isn't ever going to be the answer. It has been used to "solve" problems countless times in the past, and it always creates several new ones.
That independence thing you guys had a couple of hundred years ago didn't solve anything. I know. :P
Now we're a problem for everyone else. :zoinks:
No. China has been funding the war all along. The US mans the war, China funds the war, and the entire continent of Europe carries the duty of assimilating the general public of the middle east to accept western standards of society. Haven't you ever wondered why a continent, formally considered extremely difficult for foreign immigration to gain citizenship, suddenly is so open armed to accept so may people? The UK has the role nice guy right now, but will one day stand up as the world superpower they truly are, and the US will be their noble ally. In the meantime the politicians will convince the general public they're doing the honorable thing, rescuing those people from the evil USofA.
The UK is important, but it's not a superpower.
It's a joke.
Would have to disagree with calling any world superpower a joke; though tend to prefer a big picture perspective of the situation.
We don't have any power. We're just like a boil on USrael's arse.
:hahaha:
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
It's what politicians do.
Its murder.
-
I think most people are still human, some even decent, and only a select few would seriously consider beheading others for whatever reason. The problem is that it's the latter that gets all the attention.
Not exactly accurate. The majority of Germans killing Jews at the concentration camps were normal "decent" people. Many of them had to drink themselves into oblivion in order to do their jobs.
The majority of the Germans killing Jews at the concentrations was a minority of the total population. I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.
Of course they were a minority of Germans but they were a good cross section of German society, they were "regular Joes". My point is that even "good" people will do evil things when commanded to by higher authority
That's where we disagree. I don't think most people would get into beheading others.
You're forgetting the important psychological studies on the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment)
I have science and recorded history to back up my opinion. You just have an opinion.
-
No. China has been funding the war all along. The US mans the war, China funds the war, and the entire continent of Europe carries the duty of assimilating the general public of the middle east to accept western standards of society. Haven't you ever wondered why a continent, formally considered extremely difficult for foreign immigration to gain citizenship, suddenly is so open armed to accept so may people? The UK has the role nice guy right now, but will one day stand up as the world superpower they truly are, and the US will be their noble ally. In the meantime the politicians will convince the general public they're doing the honorable thing, rescuing those people from the evil USofA.
:zombiefuck:
Have already said it all here before. Jack is brilliantly insightful when having her tinfoil hat on. :laugh:
http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,22268.0.html (http://www.intensitysquared.com/index.php/topic,22268.0.html)
(http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/conspiracy-theories-everywhere-480x261.jpg)
-
You no like Jack's conspiracy theory? It's very logical.
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
It's what politicians do.
Right. Politics as a whole needs to be torn apart and just start things from scratch.
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
It's what politicians do.
Right. Politics as a whole needs to be torn apart and just start things from scratch.
It wouldn't matter. People who can be trusted in positions of power generally don't want positions of power.
-
Force simply isn't ever going to be the answer. It has been used to "solve" problems countless times in the past, and it always creates several new ones.
That independence thing you guys had a couple of hundred years ago didn't solve anything. I know. :P
Now we're a problem for everyone else. :zoinks:
No. China has been funding the war all along. The US mans the war, China funds the war, and the entire continent of Europe carries the duty of assimilating the general public of the middle east to accept western standards of society. Haven't you ever wondered why a continent, formally considered extremely difficult for foreign immigration to gain citizenship, suddenly is so open armed to accept so may people? The UK has the role nice guy right now, but will one day stand up as the world superpower they truly are, and the US will be their noble ally. In the meantime the politicians will convince the general public they're doing the honorable thing, rescuing those people from the evil USofA.
The UK is important, but it's not a superpower.
It's a joke.
Would have to disagree with calling any world superpower a joke; though tend to prefer a big picture perspective of the situation.
We don't have any power. We're just like a boil on USrael's arse.
:hahaha:
I don't really think it's that funny. We get dragged into the endless wars and are too pathetic to say no thanks.
-
They should be on minimum wage.
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
It's what politicians do.
Right. Politics as a whole needs to be torn apart and just start things from scratch.
It wouldn't matter. People who can be trusted in positions of power generally don't want positions of power.
Not to mention that power can corrupt people.
-
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely"
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
It's what politicians do.
Right. Politics as a whole needs to be torn apart and just start things from scratch.
It wouldn't matter. People who can be trusted in positions of power generally don't want positions of power.
Not to mention that power can corrupt people.
Such power can corrupt anyone, no matter how virtuous they were to begin with. This is why it makes absolutely no sense to condense it all into a small space among a few people. That only makes things infinitely worse when those people become dishonest or complacent and start to make horrible decisions, which under the magnifying glass of state power focuses their destructive thinking into a BEAM. A beam that is responsible for more deaths and injustice than anything that has ever existed in all of human history, or any natural phenomenon that has ever happened as long as humans have existed.
An elite class, or oligarchy. Fucking STUPID. Allowing people such power is like begging to be stolen from, have your labor and resources wasted, and to be killed.
-
I think most people are still human, some even decent, and only a select few would seriously consider beheading others for whatever reason. The problem is that it's the latter that gets all the attention.
Not exactly accurate. The majority of Germans killing Jews at the concentration camps were normal "decent" people. Many of them had to drink themselves into oblivion in order to do their jobs.
The majority of the Germans killing Jews at the concentrations was a minority of the total population. I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with.
Of course they were a minority of Germans but they were a good cross section of German society, they were "regular Joes". My point is that even "good" people will do evil things when commanded to by higher authority
That's where we disagree. I don't think most people would get into beheading others.
You're forgetting the important psychological studies on the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment)
I have science and recorded history to back up my opinion. You just have an opinion.
You might want to skip to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment#Criticism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment#Criticism) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment#Criticism, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment#Criticism,) respectively. My views remain unchanged are not just opinions.
-
The US and UK politicians do actually make out like they're doing the honorable thing by bombing people.
It's what politicians do.
Right. Politics as a whole needs to be torn apart and just start things from scratch.
And we need to stop fighting and love our neighbours. Dream on.
-
Says the guy with John Lennon as his avatar :lol1:
-
That's because I'm complicated.
-
Does facebook have an "I am complicated" choice?
-
Does facebook have an "I am complicated" choice?
It should, to be used by every teenager on the interwebs. :M
-
That's because I'm complicated.
I like that song of his 'give war a chance'
-
That's because I'm complicated.
I like that song of his 'give war a chance'
Ooh, I almost missed the sarcasm there.
-
So, what's your solution, Benji? There's this growing group of religious fanatics who plan to reintroduce the middle ages throughout the Middle East. They're well funded and I'm guessing that that a couple of dreamy-eyed idealists singing Kumbaya won't really make a huge difference. Or, for that matter, idealists yelling "globalisation is evil!".
What's your plan?
-
So, what's your solution, Benji? There's this growing group of religious fanatics who plan to reintroduce the middle ages throughout the Middle East. They're well funded and I'm guessing that that a couple of dreamy-eyed idealists singing Kumbaya won't really make a huge difference. Or, for that matter, idealists yelling "globalisation is evil!".
What's your plan?
(http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/e9/e9f637d62aa1bd732b7133470b76ae1938c5b46076a2c8a0f0d333c8d46a3d6e.jpg)
:zoinks:
-
That's because I'm complicated.
I like that song of his 'give war a chance'
Ooh, I almost missed the sarcasm there.
I was going for subtle ;)
-
So, what's your solution, Benji? There's this growing group of religious fanatics who plan to reintroduce the middle ages throughout the Middle East. They're well funded and I'm guessing that that a couple of dreamy-eyed idealists singing Kumbaya won't really make a huge difference. Or, for that matter, idealists yelling "globalisation is evil!".
What's your plan?
"They're well funded" Yeah, by Qatar and Saudi, 2 US puppet states. The US and Israel were foaming at the mouth about getting into Syria last year and were funding these lunatics. They want these maniacs to go on a rampage so the countries fall apart and they too become USrael puppet states. Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Egypt. These things weren't just some coincidence. The lunatics that took Gaddafi down were funded and made out to be democracy loving freedom fighters. They are being funded to do the dirty work, then Team America-World Police comes in to finish the job. They know that them just going in like they did in Iraq, won't be accepted, like it wasn't in Syria last year to take down Assad, they need to create a reason.
The plan would obviously be to stop Israel and the US. International Law doesn't apply to them.
-
So, what's your solution, Benji? There's this growing group of religious fanatics who plan to reintroduce the middle ages throughout the Middle East. They're well funded and I'm guessing that that a couple of dreamy-eyed idealists singing Kumbaya won't really make a huge difference. Or, for that matter, idealists yelling "globalisation is evil!".
What's your plan?
"They're well funded" Yeah, by Qatar and Saudi, 2 US puppet states. The US and Israel were foaming at the mouth about getting into Syria last year and were funding these lunatics. They want these maniacs to go on a rampage so the countries fall apart and they too become USrael puppet states. Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and Egypt. These things weren't just some coincidence. The lunatics that took Gaddafi down were funded and made out to be democracy loving freedom fighters. They are being funded to do the dirty work, then Team America-World Police comes in to finish the job. They know that them just going in like they did in Iraq, won't be accepted, like it wasn't in Syria last year to take down Assad, they need to create a reason.
The plan would obviously be to stop Israel and the US. International Law doesn't apply to them.
That would be more of a goal than a plan. What would you do about the problem at hand and how would that fit in with your goals?
-
Stop funding ISIS and Al Qaeda etc. Support the Syrian government and co who are fighting against the butchers.
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
-
As for the funding of the Islamic State, there is still little or no evidence to support that the Saudis or Qatar are doing it. However, there are links between it and the Syrian government. You might want to reconsider your position.
-
As for the funding of the Islamic State, there is still little or no evidence to support that the Saudis or Qatar are doing it. However, there are links between it and the Syrian government. You might want to reconsider your position.
There are links between it and NATO/U.S. in both funding and weaponry.
All of the sudden a bunch of religious thugs poof out of nowhere one day, and they all have top of the line western weaponry. :apondering:
-
Odeon, you cannot take the "grown up who don't believe in fairy-tales"-stance with everything that is not "by the book". ISIS is most likely created and funded by western powers, as an extension of the ancient alien agenda. This is where you sigh and eye-roll, and go "ancient aliens don't exist! They're like ghouls, ghosts and Israel, they are fairy-tales!"
But no, Israel DOES exist, it's not just a spooky story told over camp-fires at night. Corruption DOES exist, and the creation of terrorist organizations DOES happen.
"Sheehs, AS IF! AS IF humans, as we know them, would willingly, knowingly, create conflict that despite costing human lives, will generate enormous wealth for a few. Humans never put wealth that high! Never! I am Buddha!"
That said, Ben is offering quite naive solutions. Stop the USA? Doing what exactly? It's not like they have open bank accounts, visible transfers. This is about what you can prove - and even when it's proven, it typically means nothing, the invasion of Iraq was agreed upon - globally - to be illegal.
It meant nothing.
My position is this one:
If I create a dooms-day robot, and unleash it among the people, and then demand a ransom to deactivate it - something only I can do, what would be the best course of action?
Punish me, by allowing my robot to annihilate mankind?
No.
Just pay me the damn ransom. Think of the innocent civilians.
The US, UK and Israel have taken the entire Middle East hostage, and they are now kindly asking for some support in taking out the hostagetaker. The least we can do is squint our eyes, sigh heavily, think of the civilians, and provide them with some jetfighter support.
-
Stop funding ISIS and Al Qaeda etc. Support the Syrian government and co who are fighting against the butchers.
So send one butcher after another that will work out well.
-
Odeon, you cannot take the "grown up who don't believe in fairy-tales"-stance with everything that is not "by the book". ISIS is most likely created and funded by western powers, as an extension of the ancient alien agenda. This is where you sigh and eye-roll, and go "ancient aliens don't exist! They're like ghouls, ghosts and Israel, they are fairy-tales!"
But no, Israel DOES exist, it's not just a spooky story told over camp-fires at night. Corruption DOES exist, and the creation of terrorist organizations DOES happen.
"Sheehs, AS IF! AS IF humans, as we know them, would willingly, knowingly, create conflict that despite costing human lives, will generate enormous wealth for a few. Humans never put wealth that high! Never! I am Buddha!"
That said, Ben is offering quite naive solutions. Stop the USA? Doing what exactly? It's not like they have open bank accounts, visible transfers. This is about what you can prove - and even when it's proven, it typically means nothing, the invasion of Iraq was agreed upon - globally - to be illegal.
It meant nothing.
My position is this one:
If I create a dooms-day robot, and unleash it among the people, and then demand a ransom to deactivate it - something only I can do, what would be the best course of action?
Punish me, by allowing my robot to annihilate mankind?
No.
Just pay me the damn ransom. Think of the innocent civilians.
The US, UK and Israel have taken the entire Middle East hostage, and they are now kindly asking for some support in taking out the hostagetaker. The least we can do is squint our eyes, sigh heavily, think of the civilians, and provide them with some jetfighter support.
I'm taking Zeg hostage and demanding loads of cash to deactivate him. :green:
-
Odeon, you cannot take the "grown up who don't believe in fairy-tales"-stance with everything that is not "by the book". ISIS is most likely created and funded by western powers, as an extension of the ancient alien agenda. This is where you sigh and eye-roll, and go "ancient aliens don't exist! They're like ghouls, ghosts and Israel, they are fairy-tales!"
But no, Israel DOES exist, it's not just a spooky story told over camp-fires at night. Corruption DOES exist, and the creation of terrorist organizations DOES happen.
"Sheehs, AS IF! AS IF humans, as we know them, would willingly, knowingly, create conflict that despite costing human lives, will generate enormous wealth for a few. Humans never put wealth that high! Never! I am Buddha!"
That said, Ben is offering quite naive solutions. Stop the USA? Doing what exactly? It's not like they have open bank accounts, visible transfers. This is about what you can prove - and even when it's proven, it typically means nothing, the invasion of Iraq was agreed upon - globally - to be illegal.
It meant nothing.
My position is this one:
If I create a dooms-day robot, and unleash it among the people, and then demand a ransom to deactivate it - something only I can do, what would be the best course of action?
Punish me, by allowing my robot to annihilate mankind?
No.
Just pay me the damn ransom. Think of the innocent civilians.
The US, UK and Israel have taken the entire Middle East hostage, and they are now kindly asking for some support in taking out the hostagetaker. The least we can do is squint our eyes, sigh heavily, think of the civilians, and provide them with some jetfighter support.
I believe their origins are reasonable well researched. Speaking of fairy tales, though, will you be bringing up Ancient Aliens next?
(http://memecrunch.com/meme/13W56/isis/image.jpg)
-
Odeon, you cannot take the "grown up who don't believe in fairy-tales"-stance with everything that is not "by the book". ISIS is most likely created and funded by western powers, as an extension of the ancient alien agenda. This is where you sigh and eye-roll, and go "ancient aliens don't exist! They're like ghouls, ghosts and Israel, they are fairy-tales!"
But no, Israel DOES exist, it's not just a spooky story told over camp-fires at night. Corruption DOES exist, and the creation of terrorist organizations DOES happen.
"Sheehs, AS IF! AS IF humans, as we know them, would willingly, knowingly, create conflict that despite costing human lives, will generate enormous wealth for a few. Humans never put wealth that high! Never! I am Buddha!"
That said, Ben is offering quite naive solutions. Stop the USA? Doing what exactly? It's not like they have open bank accounts, visible transfers. This is about what you can prove - and even when it's proven, it typically means nothing, the invasion of Iraq was agreed upon - globally - to be illegal.
It meant nothing.
My position is this one:
If I create a dooms-day robot, and unleash it among the people, and then demand a ransom to deactivate it - something only I can do, what would be the best course of action?
Punish me, by allowing my robot to annihilate mankind?
No.
Just pay me the damn ransom. Think of the innocent civilians.
The US, UK and Israel have taken the entire Middle East hostage, and they are now kindly asking for some support in taking out the hostagetaker. The least we can do is squint our eyes, sigh heavily, think of the civilians, and provide them with some jetfighter support.
I believe their origins are reasonable well researched. Speaking of fairy tales, though, will you be bringing up Ancient Aliens next?
(http://memecrunch.com/meme/13W56/isis/image.jpg)
How do you come to such conclusions? Aliens?
I have said: IS' origin is a deliberate tension of the Middle East. I've said - people high up in IS might have Mossad connections.
You equate that with ALIENS.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aMyWheewxNw/Tb6eSdg2yeI/AAAAAAAABSo/8lKh2jKW1x0/s400/osman.gif)
^Osama, with CIA dude.
Nono, you will. Not. Accept that, becaaaause? Countries are trustworthy? Official story-lines are trustworthy? Really?
I'm saying IS has been created. I never said a word about aliens, but something as elemental as a terror-group being created, that is UNTHINKABLE to you?
Also, when you say "well researched", someone like me is gonna notice.
What exactly is well researched? How is it researched in a way you consider well? What part of the research sits best with you ::)
I know what you did, you said "well researched", but there is no meaning to that, cus I have access to the same TV and same news as you, and there is no "research" whatsoever. There's a bunch of guessing.
But go on, inform me about this research, I'm curious now :I
-
:zoinks:
This is kind of like the well researched official story of what happened to the WTC. Its well researched, citizen. I know it looks a bit strange to you, but you need to move along. I don't want any "why did/does" questions, y'hear me? *points a gun*
-
Fuck! are we going to go down the rabbit hole of 9/11 conspiracy theories too?? ::) :tinfoil:
-
Fuck! are we going to go down the rabbit hole of 9/11 conspiracy theories too?? ::) :tinfoil:
No. I'm honest enough to say I do not believe the official story(too many inconsistencies), and I have no idea what actually did happen. I am not a scientist or a professional skyscraper builder. I'd very much like to be told the truth about it, but probably nothing short of all out warfare against the U.S. state then waterboarding the officials involved would reveal it, and these things just aren't something I condone doing.
-
Odeon, you cannot take the "grown up who don't believe in fairy-tales"-stance with everything that is not "by the book". ISIS is most likely created and funded by western powers, as an extension of the ancient alien agenda. This is where you sigh and eye-roll, and go "ancient aliens don't exist! They're like ghouls, ghosts and Israel, they are fairy-tales!"
But no, Israel DOES exist, it's not just a spooky story told over camp-fires at night. Corruption DOES exist, and the creation of terrorist organizations DOES happen.
"Sheehs, AS IF! AS IF humans, as we know them, would willingly, knowingly, create conflict that despite costing human lives, will generate enormous wealth for a few. Humans never put wealth that high! Never! I am Buddha!"
That said, Ben is offering quite naive solutions. Stop the USA? Doing what exactly? It's not like they have open bank accounts, visible transfers. This is about what you can prove - and even when it's proven, it typically means nothing, the invasion of Iraq was agreed upon - globally - to be illegal.
It meant nothing.
My position is this one:
If I create a dooms-day robot, and unleash it among the people, and then demand a ransom to deactivate it - something only I can do, what would be the best course of action?
Punish me, by allowing my robot to annihilate mankind?
No.
Just pay me the damn ransom. Think of the innocent civilians.
The US, UK and Israel have taken the entire Middle East hostage, and they are now kindly asking for some support in taking out the hostagetaker. The least we can do is squint our eyes, sigh heavily, think of the civilians, and provide them with some jetfighter support.
I believe their origins are reasonable well researched. Speaking of fairy tales, though, will you be bringing up Ancient Aliens next?
(http://memecrunch.com/meme/13W56/isis/image.jpg)
How do you come to such conclusions? Aliens?
I have said: IS' origin is a deliberate tension of the Middle East. I've said - people high up in IS might have Mossad connections.
You equate that with ALIENS.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aMyWheewxNw/Tb6eSdg2yeI/AAAAAAAABSo/8lKh2jKW1x0/s400/osman.gif)
^Osama, with CIA dude.
Nono, you will. Not. Accept that, becaaaause? Countries are trustworthy? Official story-lines are trustworthy? Really?
I'm saying IS has been created. I never said a word about aliens, but something as elemental as a terror-group being created, that is UNTHINKABLE to you?
Also, when you say "well researched", someone like me is gonna notice.
What exactly is well researched? How is it researched in a way you consider well? What part of the research sits best with you ::)
I know what you did, you said "well researched", but there is no meaning to that, cus I have access to the same TV and same news as you, and there is no "research" whatsoever. There's a bunch of guessing.
But go on, inform me about this research, I'm curious now :I
I am making fun of your initial statement, "ISIS is most likely created and funded by western powers, as an extension of the ancient alien agenda." It's only a step or two away from Ancient Aliens, in my no-so-humble opinion. Great entertainment value but that's about it.
As for research, IIRC, Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant) is an excellent way to start, with both a reasonably non-sensationalist article and a number of relevant references. Very few conspiracy theories, though, so you lot might be disappointed.
-
Oh, and btw. Yes, I know about Osama's Afghanistan days. It's not a big secret. It is, however, not particularly relevant in this context and does not mean that (OMG) the CIA funded Al Qaeda.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-aMyWheewxNw/Tb6eSdg2yeI/AAAAAAAABSo/8lKh2jKW1x0/s400/osman.gif)
^Osama, with CIA dude.
-
Fuck! are we going to go down the rabbit hole of 9/11 conspiracy theories too?? ::) :tinfoil:
See why I brought in Ancient Aliens?
-
::)
-
(http://assets.diylol.com/hfs/a0f/828/da6/resized/ancient-aliens-invisible-something-meme-generator-i-m-not-saying-it-was-aliens-but-aliens-were-totally-behind-9-11-a08777.jpg)
Those damn aliens are behind everything :zoinks:
-
Fuck! are we going to go down the rabbit hole of 9/11 conspiracy theories too?? ::) :tinfoil:
See why I brought in Ancient Aliens?
Yup. You can't have a rational conversation with these nutjobs (Rage, Zegh and Benji) about anything pertaining to the middle east.
They've engaged in so much confirmation bias that they can't be convinced they're wrong.
I've even got a way to prove it. ;)
-
Well, you surprise me Odeon, these aren't "conspiracy theories", and the statements I've presented really aren't more bold than "humans will do incredible shit for money, especially powerful humans."
Terror groups are autonomous, all you have to do is kick them along.
Another situation, that is guided in much the same manner is the pro-Russian rebellion in the Ukraine. Do you think these rebellions are also completely spontaneous, or is it easyer to believe conflict has been designed in this region, because Russia is more evil and corrupt?
Conflicts are designed, wether you like it or not. Even WW2 was triggered on false premises. I'm not saying "Bush drove the planes into 911 maaan!" or "Osama bin laden is an alien!" I'm saying terror groups and wars are not as out-of-the-blue as they seem.
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
-
As for the funding of the Islamic State, there is still little or no evidence to support that the Saudis or Qatar are doing it. However, there are links between it and the Syrian government. You might want to reconsider your position.
True. Fox, the BBC or CNN haven't mentioned it yet!
-
Stop funding ISIS and Al Qaeda etc. Support the Syrian government and co who are fighting against the butchers.
So send one butcher after another that will work out well.
The US are the biggest butchers on earth, and you want them to go in?
-
I don't think the US are going to be "stopped", of course not. They make the rules up as they go along. But it's what should happen.
It's so lazy and ignorant just to brush something off as a "conspiracy theory", because you were unaware of that information.
The CIA did fund Al Qaeda, to fight the Russians.
-
Speaking of 9/11, this is fucking eerie
A chief architect of 9-11, Ehud Barak, interviewed on BBC an hour after attacks (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAueLjdKh1s#)
-
Fuck! are we going to go down the rabbit hole of 9/11 conspiracy theories too?? ::) :tinfoil:
See why I brought in Ancient Aliens?
Yup. You can't have a rational conversation with these nutjobs (Rage, Zegh and Benji) about anything pertaining to the middle east.
They've engaged in so much confirmation bias that they can't be convinced they're wrong.
I've even got a way to prove it. ;)
Then prove it.
-
So let's see what happens when someone with Pappy's narrative goes up against someone who knows what they're talking about. Dershowitz is humiliated.
Dershowitz–Finkelstein Debate (Democracy Now!) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKvRzgCPd4Q#ws)
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
I don't have much of an opinion to offer. I haven't been following events that closely. However, it stuck out like a big sore thumb. The way Assad was judged guilty with no definitive proof. Cameron rallied parliament to go to war before the evidence had even been looked at! Such a terrible war crime against children requires the full force of the allies. Yeah right! Great defenders of children!
However, no such action was even contemplated when Israel launched a relentless attack on the children of Palestine. Well, if i remember the news did say once that John Kerry was beginning to talk to Israel in a much firmer tone!
Just saying, for someone who was deliberately trying not to follow this, I could not fail to notice the hypocrisy.
If world leaders stoop so low that they pretend to care about the children in Syria to justify their military action, then the least they could do is pretend to care about the children in Palestine. :dunno:
-
Stop funding ISIS and Al Qaeda etc. Support the Syrian government and co who are fighting against the butchers.
So send one butcher after another that will work out well.
The US are the biggest butchers on earth, and you want them to go in?
I would prefer regional powers to handle it with aid if they want it.
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
I don't have much of an opinion to offer. I haven't been following events that closely. However, it stuck out like a big sore thumb. The way Assad was judged guilty with no definitive proof. Cameron rallied parliament to go to war before the evidence had even been looked at! Such a terrible war crime against children requires the full force of the allies. Yeah right! Great defenders of children!
However, no such action was even contemplated when Israel launched a relentless attack on the children of Palestine. Well, if i remember the news did say once that John Kerry was beginning to talk to Israel in a much firmer tone!
Just saying, for someone who was deliberately trying not to follow this, I could not fail to notice the hypocrisy.
If world leaders stoop so low that they pretend to care about the children in Syria to justify their military action, then the least they could do is pretend to care about the children in Palestine. :dunno:
The hypocrisy is endless. Like when the US enemies in Cambodia were slaughtering their people, the US was comparing it to the Holocaust, yet around the same time, when the US backed government in Indonesia was slaughtering a third of the population in East Timor, it didn't even warrant news coverage.
Camoron and Obomber are just ancient alien puppets that know which side their bread is best buttered.
-
Pro-Israel Lobby Pushes US War With Syria (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBCZLG7MyU0#ws)
-
Stop funding ISIS and Al Qaeda etc. Support the Syrian government and co who are fighting against the butchers.
So send one butcher after another that will work out well.
The US are the biggest butchers on earth, and you want them to go in?
I would prefer regional powers to handle it with aid if they want it.
That's exactly what I suggested lol.
-
Fuck! are we going to go down the rabbit hole of 9/11 conspiracy theories too?? ::) :tinfoil:
See why I brought in Ancient Aliens?
Yup. You can't have a rational conversation with these nutjobs (Rage, Zegh and Benji) about anything pertaining to the middle east.
They've engaged in so much confirmation bias that they can't be convinced they're wrong.
I've even got a way to prove it. ;)
Then prove it.
You can't expect him to use HIS NUKE right away!
But he's got it, man, he's got the PROOF!
-
Stop funding ISIS and Al Qaeda etc. Support the Syrian government and co who are fighting against the butchers.
So send one butcher after another that will work out well.
The US are the biggest butchers on earth, and you want them to go in?
I would prefer regional powers to handle it with aid if they want it.
That's exactly what I suggested lol.
I'm not big on supporting the Syrian government, Iraq, Jordan fine and Turkey should be doing more
-
Fuck! are we going to go down the rabbit hole of 9/11 conspiracy theories too?? ::) :tinfoil:
See why I brought in Ancient Aliens?
Yup. You can't have a rational conversation with these nutjobs (Rage, Zegh and Benji) about anything pertaining to the middle east.
They've engaged in so much confirmation bias that they can't be convinced they're wrong.
I've even got a way to prove it. ;)
Then prove it.
You can't expect him to use HIS NUKE right away!
But he's got it, man, he's got the PROOF!
:zoinks:
-
Stop funding ISIS and Al Qaeda etc. Support the Syrian government and co who are fighting against the butchers.
So send one butcher after another that will work out well.
The US are the biggest butchers on earth, and you want them to go in?
I would prefer regional powers to handle it with aid if they want it.
That's exactly what I suggested lol.
I'm not big on supporting the Syrian government, Iraq, Jordan fine and Turkey should be doing more
Why? Iraq can't look after itself.
-
Iraq should and could.
They have 20 million people, enough to force out an army of over a million men if they really want to.
The complete and utter lack of morale and fighting spirit seen in Iraq today is almost remarkable, but kindov understandable too. They have been - as an army - completely defeated several times in a row by now.
That has to be a good morale-killer.
-
Well, you surprise me Odeon, these aren't "conspiracy theories", and the statements I've presented really aren't more bold than "humans will do incredible shit for money, especially powerful humans."
Your problem is that the statements aren't credible. They come off as tinfoil fodder, and for good reason. There's plenty of information on the origins and funding of ISIS, but you choose to disregard it all.
Terror groups are autonomous, all you have to do is kick them along.
Another situation, that is guided in much the same manner is the pro-Russian rebellion in the Ukraine. Do you think these rebellions are also completely spontaneous, or is it easyer to believe conflict has been designed in this region, because Russia is more evil and corrupt?
It's a different discussion. Start a thread and I might respond. IF you bother to include facts.
Conflicts are designed, wether you like it or not. Even WW2 was triggered on false premises. I'm not saying "Bush drove the planes into 911 maaan!" or "Osama bin laden is an alien!" I'm saying terror groups and wars are not as out-of-the-blue as they seem.
There are many reasons to why WW2 happened but I think it is generally accepted that the actual trigger was the German invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939. Not sure what your false premises are supposed to mean in this context.
Maybe you should start another thread for this one, too.
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.
These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.
But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.
-
As for the funding of the Islamic State, there is still little or no evidence to support that the Saudis or Qatar are doing it. However, there are links between it and the Syrian government. You might want to reconsider your position.
True. Fox, the BBC or CNN haven't mentioned it yet!
:tinfoil:
Your assumptions regarding my sources do amuse me, though. :popcorn:
-
Oh, and...
(http://i1065.photobucket.com/albums/u396/wildbillhdmax01/Argument-Ancient-Aliens_zpsddce91c3.jpg)
:zoinks:
-
Does not matter Isis is going underground now. The bombs dropped first were by Aus. They killed 1 man. The bombs dropped by Brittan and France a single tank. Government should just give up now and save the three hundred million+ it will be spending (cad anyways)
-
If you bomb the crap out of an area, you're going to have civilian casualties. That's a tactic a guerilla force will use. They attack, then they hide when the bombs fall. The survivors of "operation bomb the crap out of this area" are then more likely to join them.
Did our leaders learn nothing from Iraq?
-
Not sure what your false premises are supposed to mean in this context.
The "false premises" were the Polish attack on a German radio station on the frontier. Vicious and uncalled for, leaving several German civilians killed.
That ^
Did you hear about that? Cus EVERY German in Germany heard about it. To every last German German, THAT^ was the reason WW2 begun. Not Jews, not Hitler, not Russians, but Polish aggression towards their civilians.
All the newspapers told the same story.
Now, 75 years later we know that the real reason for war was not unfounded Polish aggression, but a meticulous, sneaky plan, a big plan not just for Poland, but a plan so complete, it had visions for all of Europe, Asia, Scandinavia, North Africa.
So, okay, I'm gonna give you this: None of what I say can be proven, and I shouldn't be so sure about it when talking about it to other people. But you can't sit around and pretend that event after event, are ALL ass-random complete accidents nobody could ever have foreseen. You can't truly expect the Vietnam War to be the last time in history, when war was deliberate.
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.
These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.
But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.
If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section. So really, you cannot lose.
Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad? You will believe anything you see on TV, without question. You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area? Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?
-
There's always other reasons for wars.
“Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” Winston Churchill
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.
These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.
But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.
If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section. So really, you cannot lose.
Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad? You will believe anything you see on TV, without question. You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area? Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?
I think it's hilarious that you resort to name-calling and unfounded assumptions every time you reply to my posts. You really aren't very good at this, are you? :lol1:
-
The "false premises" were the Polish attack on a German radio station on the frontier. Vicious and uncalled for, leaving several German civilians killed.
Explain to me how this means WW2 was triggered on false premises.
-
There's always other reasons for wars.
“Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” Winston Churchill
There are many reasons for wars. I believe Winston Churchill repeatedly urged Britain not to ignore the threat from Germany long before they started their expansion. Mr Chamberlain managed to ignore most of them and Churchill remained ousted throughout most of the 30s, IIRC.
-
Where's Adam when we need him? He knows more about WW2 than most people here.
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.
These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.
But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.
If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section. So really, you cannot lose.
Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad? You will believe anything you see on TV, without question. You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area? Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?
I think it's hilarious that you resort to name-calling and unfounded assumptions every time you reply to my posts. You really aren't very good at this, are you? :lol1:
Cause you're above all of that? You, who counter people with condescending memes and hint that people are mentally ill if they share stuff that you were unaware of. I don't think it was over the top to ask if you were stupid enough to believe such nonsense.
-
There's always other reasons for wars.
“Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” Winston Churchill
There are many reasons for wars. I believe Winston Churchill repeatedly urged Britain not to ignore the threat from Germany long before they started their expansion. Mr Chamberlain managed to ignore most of them and Churchill remained ousted throughout most of the 30s, IIRC.
Yeah, that ancient alien slug was certainly beating the drum about Germany. If we went to war because Germany invaded Poland, then why didn't we declare war on the Soviets, rather than fighting with them? Maybe it was acceptable to attack Poland from the East, but not the West? Hitler says he admired our Empire and say us as natural allies, where as Roosevelt said his greatest ambition was "to see the destruction of the British Empire", yet we made an alliance with the US and the Soviets? ???
-
The "false premises" were the Polish attack on a German radio station on the frontier. Vicious and uncalled for, leaving several German civilians killed.
Explain to me how this means WW2 was triggered on false premises.
I'm saying that at the time, that would have been the Wikipedia-explanation for the outbreak of WW2: Polish aggression. The article would explain the place and time for the aggression. It would document the victims identities, because there were real victims (killed by German commandos)
So, in the reality of 1939, if we were there, we were Germans, and we knew what was real, we would know that the war started because of Poland, not Germany. We would be saying that this war is about stopping Poland from terrorizing the German frontier with unprovoked attacks on civilians (as well as Czech mistreatment of Germans). Some would be saying that no, this war is carefully planned, and Germany intends to expands its borders to invlude Scandinavia, all of Eastern Europe - far into Asia, and it would sound absolutely insane.
I'm not saying we're "repeating history", I'm just showing you the possibility of such a scenario unfolding. You seem to think it unlikely. I see it as a human default. War for the sake of war, the money generated through war, both in terms of arms sales and rebuilding infrastructure afterwards. War must happen, and it is orchestrated to go on continously, even if civilians are proven again and again, to be perfectly capable of living in normal harmony - untill they are aggitated by manipulative politicians - who have something to gain from a war.
-
Just a few dots joined
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Kristol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Kristol)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Committee_for_Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Committee_for_Israel)
-
Debunking debunkers, 911 truck bombs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z02QrY-jcdk#)
-
(http://i.imgur.com/AB13MJb.jpg)
-
I blame Semicolon. :zoinks:
-
Is that all you've got Parts?
-
I blame Semicolon. :zoinks:
Was 9/11 caused by a mastodon stampede? :zoinks:
-
Is that all you've got Parts?
Well it true I have links!!!
9/11 THE 411 How the Saudi government is using the Bush administration and Alien Technology to destroy America (http://www.greatdreams.com/political/911-411.htm)
Scientist: Directed energy weapons turned World Trade Center into nanoparticles on 9/11
(https://www.alien-ufos.com/conspiracy-theories/29453-high-tech-directed-energy-weapons-caused-9-11-compelling-evidence-here.html)
Alien ETs, Hybrids and 9/11 (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/11/28/alien-ets-hybrids-and-911/)
9-11 AND THE ALIEN QUESTION (http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/alien-911.htm)
Evil Alien Invasion Planned for 9/9/11 (http://www.exohuman.com/wordpress/2011/06/evil-alien-invasion-planned-for-9-9-11/)
Timeshift: Did Reality Reset After 911? (http://beforeitsnews.com/science-and-technology/2012/05/timeshift-did-reality-reset-after-911-2137945.html)
Added bonus link the Jews were in on it with them :o
CONSPIRACY!! JEWS and reptilians are accountable for 911 (http://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/714472/CONSPIRACY----JEWS-and-reptilians-are-accountable-for-911)
-
Is that all you've got Parts?
Well it true I have links!!!
9/11 THE 411 How the Saudi government is using the Bush administration and Alien Technology to destroy America (http://www.greatdreams.com/political/911-411.htm)
Scientist: Directed energy weapons turned World Trade Center into nanoparticles on 9/11
(https://www.alien-ufos.com/conspiracy-theories/29453-high-tech-directed-energy-weapons-caused-9-11-compelling-evidence-here.html)
Alien ETs, Hybrids and 9/11 (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/11/28/alien-ets-hybrids-and-911/)
9-11 AND THE ALIEN QUESTION (http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/alien-911.htm)
Evil Alien Invasion Planned for 9/9/11 (http://www.exohuman.com/wordpress/2011/06/evil-alien-invasion-planned-for-9-9-11/)
Timeshift: Did Reality Reset After 911? (http://beforeitsnews.com/science-and-technology/2012/05/timeshift-did-reality-reset-after-911-2137945.html)
Added bonus link the Jews were in on it with them :o
CONSPIRACY!! JEWS and reptilians are accountable for 911 (http://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/714472/CONSPIRACY----JEWS-and-reptilians-are-accountable-for-911)
Again, is that all you've got parts?
You can't counter what I posted, either cause you didn't bother to read/watch it, or because you simply aren't capable.
-
Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. :hahaha:
-
Is that all you've got Parts?
Well it true I have links!!!
9/11 THE 411 How the Saudi government is using the Bush administration and Alien Technology to destroy America (http://www.greatdreams.com/political/911-411.htm)
Scientist: Directed energy weapons turned World Trade Center into nanoparticles on 9/11
(https://www.alien-ufos.com/conspiracy-theories/29453-high-tech-directed-energy-weapons-caused-9-11-compelling-evidence-here.html)
Alien ETs, Hybrids and 9/11 (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/11/28/alien-ets-hybrids-and-911/)
9-11 AND THE ALIEN QUESTION (http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/alien-911.htm)
Evil Alien Invasion Planned for 9/9/11 (http://www.exohuman.com/wordpress/2011/06/evil-alien-invasion-planned-for-9-9-11/)
Timeshift: Did Reality Reset After 911? (http://beforeitsnews.com/science-and-technology/2012/05/timeshift-did-reality-reset-after-911-2137945.html)
Added bonus link the Jews were in on it with them :o
CONSPIRACY!! JEWS and reptilians are accountable for 911 (http://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/714472/CONSPIRACY----JEWS-and-reptilians-are-accountable-for-911)
Again, is that all you've got parts?
You can't counter what I posted, either cause you didn't bother to read/watch it, or because you simply aren't capable.
Watched it, is that all he's got? I saw no compelling evidence in the vid just talking about how the police chief is a shady liar. Show me photos of the trucks, explosives and people arrested not just people talking about them with the 'It's been reported' disclaimer. I'm not sure how old you were in 2001 or how much you remember there were LOTS of reports on all kinds of things floating around that day from a lot more planes and terrorists jumping out everywhere, it was chaos nobody knew what was really going on and rumors were rampant. I live in the NYC metro area and listen to WCBS news radio from NYC everyday and listened from the time the first plane hit, this site has some audio of the traffic helicopter reports Link (http://cranfordradio.wordpress.com/2014/01/19/cranfords-tom-kaminski-wcbs-newsradio-880-helicopter-traffic-reporter-part-3/) to give you a feel for it. I also remember the first attack in 1993 that day I was working in the Bronx listening to the same WCBS station talk about it and that they were looking for white work vans in connection to it and being very happy I had taken one of the brown vans that day instead of one of the white ones, later they found out there were no white vans involved.
-
Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. :hahaha:
Nonsense. Everyone here has used both sources. They are irrelevant. I posted links that people were obviously unaware of. I'm only interested in the truth, not protecting government interests or being brainwashed enough to do so, or just believing the opposite of everything seen on TV for the sake of it. Please go ahead and explain about the dancing Israelis, the news reports etc, i'm very interested. If not, then shut the fuck up.
-
Is that all you've got Parts?
Well it true I have links!!!
9/11 THE 411 How the Saudi government is using the Bush administration and Alien Technology to destroy America (http://www.greatdreams.com/political/911-411.htm)
Scientist: Directed energy weapons turned World Trade Center into nanoparticles on 9/11
(https://www.alien-ufos.com/conspiracy-theories/29453-high-tech-directed-energy-weapons-caused-9-11-compelling-evidence-here.html)
Alien ETs, Hybrids and 9/11 (http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/11/28/alien-ets-hybrids-and-911/)
9-11 AND THE ALIEN QUESTION (http://www.thewatcherfiles.com/alien-911.htm)
Evil Alien Invasion Planned for 9/9/11 (http://www.exohuman.com/wordpress/2011/06/evil-alien-invasion-planned-for-9-9-11/)
Timeshift: Did Reality Reset After 911? (http://beforeitsnews.com/science-and-technology/2012/05/timeshift-did-reality-reset-after-911-2137945.html)
Added bonus link the Jews were in on it with them :o
CONSPIRACY!! JEWS and reptilians are accountable for 911 (http://www.newschoolers.com/forum/thread/714472/CONSPIRACY----JEWS-and-reptilians-are-accountable-for-911)
Again, is that all you've got parts?
You can't counter what I posted, either cause you didn't bother to read/watch it, or because you simply aren't capable.
Watched it, is that all he's got? I saw no compelling evidence in the vid just talking about how the police chief is a shady liar. Show me photos of the trucks, explosives and people arrested not just people talking about them with the 'It's been reported' disclaimer. I'm not sure how old you were in 2001 or how much you remember there were LOTS of reports on all kinds of things floating around that day from a lot more planes and terrorists jumping out everywhere, it was chaos nobody knew what was really going on and rumors were rampant. I live in the NYC metro area and listen to WCBS news radio from NYC everyday and listened from the time the first plane hit, this site has some audio of the traffic helicopter reports Link (http://cranfordradio.wordpress.com/2014/01/19/cranfords-tom-kaminski-wcbs-newsradio-880-helicopter-traffic-reporter-part-3/) to give you a feel for it. I also remember the first attack in 1993 that day I was working in the Bronx listening to the same WCBS station talk about it and that they were looking for white work vans in connection to it and being very happy I had taken one of the brown vans that day instead of one of the white ones, later they found out there were no white vans involved.
http://www.takeourworldback.com/dancingisraelisfbireport.htm (http://www.takeourworldback.com/dancingisraelisfbireport.htm)
911 cover up condensed to 28mins :mainly info on the Israelis (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8EweNlo8LA#)
Right, that's better. I'm not automatically buying into this stuff anyway, i'm trying to talk about it. Why were the Israelis there filming close to the Towers, and why lie about their location? If they'd been Muslim Arabs, do you think it'd have been swept under the rug? Why was the ex Israeli PM on the BBC the same day talking about bombing the Middle East? Why did Netanyahu say it was "good for Israel"? Why was there so much confusion about WTC7? Why was it hinted that it'd fallen earlier in the day, and then later in the day reported to have collapsed 30-40 mins before it did? Why were powerful ancient aliens talking about needing to go back into Iraq from the late 90's and needing "another Pearl Harbour"?
Sorry, but it's normal to be suspicious about all of this.
-
Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. :hahaha:
Nonsense. Everyone here has used both sources. They are irrelevant. I posted links that people were obviously unaware of. I'm only interested in the truth, not protecting government interests or being brainwashed enough to do so, or just believing the opposite of everything seen on TV for the sake of it. Please go ahead and explain about the dancing Israelis, the news reports etc, i'm very interested. If not, then shut the fuck up.
Fine then, I'll give you the videos, but I mocked rage's links and I'll mock yours too. Go read part's links. :hahaha: Posting wiki links with no commentary is condescending, and I think it's assumed no one is going to click or read them. :dunno:
-
28 minutes is too long to watch will read some later perhaps. I did hear the WCBS helicopter mentioned in what I did watch though :green:
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.
These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.
But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.
If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section. So really, you cannot lose.
Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad? You will believe anything you see on TV, without question. You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area? Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?
I think it's hilarious that you resort to name-calling and unfounded assumptions every time you reply to my posts. You really aren't very good at this, are you? :lol1:
Cause you're above all of that? You, who counter people with condescending memes and hint that people are mentally ill if they share stuff that you were unaware of. I don't think it was over the top to ask if you were stupid enough to believe such nonsense.
You might want to reread the thread and remind yourself of the discussion so far. In particular, read your own posts.
You really suck at this, don't you?
-
There's always other reasons for wars.
“Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” Winston Churchill
There are many reasons for wars. I believe Winston Churchill repeatedly urged Britain not to ignore the threat from Germany long before they started their expansion. Mr Chamberlain managed to ignore most of them and Churchill remained ousted throughout most of the 30s, IIRC.
Yeah, that ancient alien slug was certainly beating the drum about Germany. If we went to war because Germany invaded Poland, then why didn't we declare war on the Soviets, rather than fighting with them? Maybe it was acceptable to attack Poland from the East, but not the West? Hitler says he admired our Empire and say us as natural allies, where as Roosevelt said his greatest ambition was "to see the destruction of the British Empire", yet we made an alliance with the US and the Soviets? ???
I fail to see your point here, but the reasons to WW2 and the alliances made are quite well researched by now. You might want to read up on them, cos I can't be arsed to link to the Wikipedia articles (hint: plenty of sources listed there).
-
The "false premises" were the Polish attack on a German radio station on the frontier. Vicious and uncalled for, leaving several German civilians killed.
Explain to me how this means WW2 was triggered on false premises.
I'm saying that at the time, that would have been the Wikipedia-explanation for the outbreak of WW2: Polish aggression. The article would explain the place and time for the aggression. It would document the victims identities, because there were real victims (killed by German commandos)
So, in the reality of 1939, if we were there, we were Germans, and we knew what was real, we would know that the war started because of Poland, not Germany. We would be saying that this war is about stopping Poland from terrorizing the German frontier with unprovoked attacks on civilians (as well as Czech mistreatment of Germans). Some would be saying that no, this war is carefully planned, and Germany intends to expands its borders to invlude Scandinavia, all of Eastern Europe - far into Asia, and it would sound absolutely insane.
I'm not saying we're "repeating history", I'm just showing you the possibility of such a scenario unfolding. You seem to think it unlikely. I see it as a human default. War for the sake of war, the money generated through war, both in terms of arms sales and rebuilding infrastructure afterwards. War must happen, and it is orchestrated to go on continously, even if civilians are proven again and again, to be perfectly capable of living in normal harmony - untill they are aggitated by manipulative politicians - who have something to gain from a war.
Sorry, Zegh, there's just too many what ifs in your scenario, too many instances of ignoring what was well known back then. The German invasion of Poland was the last straw, one that even Chamberlain could not ignore, but there were numerous other triggers.
Adam should come back. He knows more about this than the rest of us.
-
Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. :hahaha:
Nonsense. Everyone here has used both sources. They are irrelevant. I posted links that people were obviously unaware of. I'm only interested in the truth, not protecting government interests or being brainwashed enough to do so, or just believing the opposite of everything seen on TV for the sake of it. Please go ahead and explain about the dancing Israelis, the news reports etc, i'm very interested. If not, then shut the fuck up.
There you go again. "Brainwashed".
I love your methods, but only for the entertainment value.
-
Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. :hahaha:
Nonsense. Everyone here has used both sources. They are irrelevant. I posted links that people were obviously unaware of. I'm only interested in the truth, not protecting government interests or being brainwashed enough to do so, or just believing the opposite of everything seen on TV for the sake of it. Please go ahead and explain about the dancing Israelis, the news reports etc, i'm very interested. If not, then shut the fuck up.
Fine then, I'll give you the videos, but I mocked rage's links and I'll mock yours too. Go read part's links. :hahaha: Posting wiki links with no commentary is condescending, and I think it's assumed no one is going to click or read them. :dunno:
Would you like me to tuck you up in bed and read them for you? ;)
Fair enough, in future I will, but they are pretty relevant and self explanatory.
-
28 minutes is too long to watch will read some later perhaps. I did hear the WCBS helicopter mentioned in what I did watch though :green:
Ok
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.
These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.
But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.
If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section. So really, you cannot lose.
Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad? You will believe anything you see on TV, without question. You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area? Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?
I think it's hilarious that you resort to name-calling and unfounded assumptions every time you reply to my posts. You really aren't very good at this, are you? :lol1:
Cause you're above all of that? You, who counter people with condescending memes and hint that people are mentally ill if they share stuff that you were unaware of. I don't think it was over the top to ask if you were stupid enough to believe such nonsense.
You might want to reread the thread and remind yourself of the discussion so far. In particular, read your own posts.
You really suck at this, don't you?
Pot calling the kettle black sonny jim.
You mean you disagree with me? So fine, if I suck, it shouldn't be a problem for you to counter my points or explain the information, but you're not capable, so you'd rather talk about me? :eyelash:
-
There's always other reasons for wars.
“Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” Winston Churchill
There are many reasons for wars. I believe Winston Churchill repeatedly urged Britain not to ignore the threat from Germany long before they started their expansion. Mr Chamberlain managed to ignore most of them and Churchill remained ousted throughout most of the 30s, IIRC.
Yeah, that ancient alien slug was certainly beating the drum about Germany. If we went to war because Germany invaded Poland, then why didn't we declare war on the Soviets, rather than fighting with them? Maybe it was acceptable to attack Poland from the East, but not the West? Hitler says he admired our Empire and say us as natural allies, where as Roosevelt said his greatest ambition was "to see the destruction of the British Empire", yet we made an alliance with the US and the Soviets? ???
I fail to see your point here, but the reasons to WW2 and the alliances made are quite well researched by now. You might want to read up on them, cos I can't be arsed to link to the Wikipedia articles (hint: plenty of sources listed there).
"I fail to see your point here" I think that's the main problem, and it's yours. Like I don't know that? Lol. We've been told repeatedly why we went to war, but there's plenty of information you were oblivious to that says otherwise.
-
Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. :hahaha:
Nonsense. Everyone here has used both sources. They are irrelevant. I posted links that people were obviously unaware of. I'm only interested in the truth, not protecting government interests or being brainwashed enough to do so, or just believing the opposite of everything seen on TV for the sake of it. Please go ahead and explain about the dancing Israelis, the news reports etc, i'm very interested. If not, then shut the fuck up.
There you go again. "Brainwashed".
I love your methods, but only for the entertainment value.
Sorry, are you assuming only religious people can be brainwashed by those in power? You may want to read "Media Control" by Noam Chomsky, or just be a little more open minded.
Unfortunately your naivety isn't so entertaining.
-
The "false premises" were the Polish attack on a German radio station on the frontier. Vicious and uncalled for, leaving several German civilians killed.
Explain to me how this means WW2 was triggered on false premises.
I'm saying that at the time, that would have been the Wikipedia-explanation for the outbreak of WW2: Polish aggression. The article would explain the place and time for the aggression. It would document the victims identities, because there were real victims (killed by German commandos)
So, in the reality of 1939, if we were there, we were Germans, and we knew what was real, we would know that the war started because of Poland, not Germany. We would be saying that this war is about stopping Poland from terrorizing the German frontier with unprovoked attacks on civilians (as well as Czech mistreatment of Germans). Some would be saying that no, this war is carefully planned, and Germany intends to expands its borders to invlude Scandinavia, all of Eastern Europe - far into Asia, and it would sound absolutely insane.
I'm not saying we're "repeating history", I'm just showing you the possibility of such a scenario unfolding. You seem to think it unlikely. I see it as a human default. War for the sake of war, the money generated through war, both in terms of arms sales and rebuilding infrastructure afterwards. War must happen, and it is orchestrated to go on continously, even if civilians are proven again and again, to be perfectly capable of living in normal harmony - untill they are aggitated by manipulative politicians - who have something to gain from a war.
Sorry, Zegh, there's just too many what ifs in your scenario, too many instances of ignoring what was well known back then. The German invasion of Poland was the last straw, one that even Chamberlain could not ignore, but there were numerous other triggers.
Adam should come back. He knows more about this than the rest of us.
You misunderstand me
I'm describing the official reason given by Germany, as to why Poland should be invaded.
The real "secret" reason was: We want to expand deep - and I mean DEEP - into Eastern Europe, fuck it, deep into Asia. You heard me: Asia.
The official reason was: We need to stop Poland from killing radio-men.
I give this only as an example of the difference between what "everyone knows" and what is real. 90% of the world knows the bible is true.
Don't conform to consensus JUST because it is consensus.
Hell, you may be right about ISIS, and I may be wrong, but YOU are telling me - from your own mouth - that you confirm your knowledge of ISIS using Wikipedia. The absolute pinnacle of official consensus.
That's all I'm saying. And hey, I read about ISIS on Wikipedia too, aaand I agreed about it! I'm just saying there's more to it
-
... and there you have it folks. Zegh has gone so far down the rabbit hole of PoMo nonsense that he can't tell the difference between contrived state propaganda and news reported by independent sources.
Epic :facepalm2:
(not to mention the invoking of Godwin's Law)
-
What did I tell you about trying to grasp politics?
And you're still not managing to turn me into some "forum pariah", maybe if you try even harder
-
A lot of what we "know" now could be propaganda. If Germany had won the war, the historians would be writing a different story. "History is written by the victors".
-
And you're still not managing to turn me into some "forum pariah", maybe if you try even harder
The only one trying to turn you into a "forum pariah" is you. :hahaha:
-
Would you like me to tuck you up in bed and read them for you? ;)
Read them in the voice of Yosemite Sam. :zoinks:
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.
These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.
But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.
If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section. So really, you cannot lose.
Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad? You will believe anything you see on TV, without question. You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area? Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?
I think it's hilarious that you resort to name-calling and unfounded assumptions every time you reply to my posts. You really aren't very good at this, are you? :lol1:
Cause you're above all of that? You, who counter people with condescending memes and hint that people are mentally ill if they share stuff that you were unaware of. I don't think it was over the top to ask if you were stupid enough to believe such nonsense.
You might want to reread the thread and remind yourself of the discussion so far. In particular, read your own posts.
You really suck at this, don't you?
Pot calling the kettle black sonny jim.
You mean you disagree with me? So fine, if I suck, it shouldn't be a problem for you to counter my points or explain the information, but you're not capable, so you'd rather talk about me? :eyelash:
Sure. Rather than repeating the information here, I'd suggest you to start with the obvious, namely Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant). Plenty of information there, including links to sources. You might find the section on the group's finances (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Finances) to be of particular interest. Don't forget to follow up on the sources, as they will give a lot more detail.
As for Assad and Syria, again, Wikipedia provides an excellent starting point, as do the official reports that were conducted. You should start there.
The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting.
And again, I'd urge you to reread this thread.
-
There's always other reasons for wars.
“Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” Winston Churchill
There are many reasons for wars. I believe Winston Churchill repeatedly urged Britain not to ignore the threat from Germany long before they started their expansion. Mr Chamberlain managed to ignore most of them and Churchill remained ousted throughout most of the 30s, IIRC.
Yeah, that ancient alien slug was certainly beating the drum about Germany. If we went to war because Germany invaded Poland, then why didn't we declare war on the Soviets, rather than fighting with them? Maybe it was acceptable to attack Poland from the East, but not the West? Hitler says he admired our Empire and say us as natural allies, where as Roosevelt said his greatest ambition was "to see the destruction of the British Empire", yet we made an alliance with the US and the Soviets? ???
I fail to see your point here, but the reasons to WW2 and the alliances made are quite well researched by now. You might want to read up on them, cos I can't be arsed to link to the Wikipedia articles (hint: plenty of sources listed there).
"I fail to see your point here" I think that's the main problem, and it's yours. Like I don't know that? Lol. We've been told repeatedly why we went to war, but there's plenty of information you were oblivious to that says otherwise.
You're assuming that I'm oblivious to some information you hint at when actually I simply reject the argumentation made. There is a difference.
Take off the tinfoil hat and show me the facts.
-
Sorry, man, but he's right. A post saying, here go watch some youtube and learn some Wikipedia, deserves the response it got. :hahaha:
Nonsense. Everyone here has used both sources. They are irrelevant. I posted links that people were obviously unaware of. I'm only interested in the truth, not protecting government interests or being brainwashed enough to do so, or just believing the opposite of everything seen on TV for the sake of it. Please go ahead and explain about the dancing Israelis, the news reports etc, i'm very interested. If not, then shut the fuck up.
There you go again. "Brainwashed".
I love your methods, but only for the entertainment value.
Sorry, are you assuming only religious people can be brainwashed by those in power? You may want to read "Media Control" by Noam Chomsky, or just be a little more open minded.
Unfortunately your naivety isn't so entertaining.
Not assuming anything, but you calling me brainwashed simply because I disagree with you is not a credible strategy, nor is invoking Chomsky to support that notion.
-
You misunderstand me
I'm describing the official reason given by Germany, as to why Poland should be invaded.
The real "secret" reason was: We want to expand deep - and I mean DEEP - into Eastern Europe, fuck it, deep into Asia. You heard me: Asia.
The official reason was: We need to stop Poland from killing radio-men.
Ah, thanks. I did indeed misunderstand your point. Lebensraum was indeed the actual motivation behind Germany's eastward expansion.
-
... and there you have it folks. Zegh has gone so far down the rabbit hole of PoMo nonsense that he can't tell the difference between contrived state propaganda and news reported by independent sources.
Epic :facepalm2:
(not to mention the invoking of Godwin's Law)
Actually Zegh's point about Germany's real motives is valid.
-
A lot of what we "know" now could be propaganda. If Germany had won the war, the historians would be writing a different story. "History is written by the victors".
You're still not making an actual point.
-
on a lighter note, every-time I see your avi odeon I find it to be the most relevant point regardless of a thread :laugh:
-
... and there you have it folks. Zegh has gone so far down the rabbit hole of PoMo nonsense that he can't tell the difference between contrived state propaganda and news reported by independent sources.
Epic :facepalm2:
(not to mention the invoking of Godwin's Law)
Actually Zegh's point about Germany's real motives is valid.
That wasn't the main point he was trying to make though.
His main point was Nazi Propaganda = Modern Journalism, samey samey. Complete bullshit.
-
... and there you have it folks. Zegh has gone so far down the rabbit hole of PoMo nonsense that he can't tell the difference between contrived state propaganda and news reported by independent sources.
Epic :facepalm2:
(not to mention the invoking of Godwin's Law)
Actually Zegh's point about Germany's real motives is valid.
That wasn't the main point he was trying to make though.
His main point was Nazi Propaganda = Modern Journalism, samey samey. Complete bullshit.
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
Let me explain it to you then, sigh... You are so malfunctional in your incessant blunders, that it would have been interesting to find out what exactly it is that is blocking up your mind.
If at any other point you fail to understand what I'm saying, feel free to ask me to explain. I'm not a bad guy.
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
It's a compliment.
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
It's a compliment.
I think Zegh confused hashish with black tar heroin and is having a bad trip. :orly:
-
on a lighter note, every-time I see your avi odeon I find it to be the most relevant point regardless of a thread :laugh:
Odeon wants to be worshiped for his body, not his mind. :hahaha:
-
I think Zegh confused hashish with black tar heroin and is having a bad trip. :orly:
:lol1:
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
It's a compliment.
I think Zegh confused hashish with black tar heroin and is having a bad trip. :orly:
Outside of real friendships, people online are largely entertainment. You maintain his interest.
-
on a lighter note, every-time I see your avi odeon I find it to be the most relevant point regardless of a thread :laugh:
:laugh: +
I do always make the most relevant points, though. :M
-
... and there you have it folks. Zegh has gone so far down the rabbit hole of PoMo nonsense that he can't tell the difference between contrived state propaganda and news reported by independent sources.
Epic :facepalm2:
(not to mention the invoking of Godwin's Law)
Actually Zegh's point about Germany's real motives is valid.
That wasn't the main point he was trying to make though.
His main point was Nazi Propaganda = Modern Journalism, samey samey. Complete bullshit.
Indeed, but I think points should be awarded when appropriate.
Still waiting for the other guy to make an actual point. Not holding my breath. :P
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
Let me explain it to you then, sigh... You are so malfunctional in your incessant blunders, that it would have been interesting to find out what exactly it is that is blocking up your mind.
If at any other point you fail to understand what I'm saying, feel free to ask me to explain. I'm not a bad guy.
I LOL'd. +
Although you should probably address his points.
-
on a lighter note, every-time I see your avi odeon I find it to be the most relevant point regardless of a thread :laugh:
Odeon wants to be worshiped for his body, not his mind. :hahaha:
I'm OK with both, actually.
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
Let me explain it to you then, sigh... You are so malfunctional in your incessant blunders, that it would have been interesting to find out what exactly it is that is blocking up your mind.
If at any other point you fail to understand what I'm saying, feel free to ask me to explain. I'm not a bad guy.
I LOL'd. +
Although you should probably address his points.
Should I?
:zoinks:
I will. Later on. Just sit really tight and wait, Pappy :]
-
on a lighter note, every-time I see your avi odeon I find it to be the most relevant point regardless of a thread :laugh:
Odeon wants to be worshiped for his body, not his mind. :hahaha:
I'm OK with both, actually.
I didn't consider she might be doing both. :zoinks:
-
Would you like me to tuck you up in bed and read them for you? ;)
Read them in the voice of Yosemite Sam. :zoinks:
Buggs was an Anti-Semite :orly:
-
A lot of what we "know" now could be propaganda. If Germany had won the war, the historians would be writing a different story. "History is written by the victors".
You're still not making an actual point.
You don't get the points, that's the difference ;)
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.
These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.
But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.
If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section. So really, you cannot lose.
Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad? You will believe anything you see on TV, without question. You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area? Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?
I think it's hilarious that you resort to name-calling and unfounded assumptions every time you reply to my posts. You really aren't very good at this, are you? :lol1:
Cause you're above all of that? You, who counter people with condescending memes and hint that people are mentally ill if they share stuff that you were unaware of. I don't think it was over the top to ask if you were stupid enough to believe such nonsense.
You might want to reread the thread and remind yourself of the discussion so far. In particular, read your own posts.
You really suck at this, don't you?
Pot calling the kettle black sonny jim.
You mean you disagree with me? So fine, if I suck, it shouldn't be a problem for you to counter my points or explain the information, but you're not capable, so you'd rather talk about me? :eyelash:
Sure. Rather than repeating the information here, I'd suggest you to start with the obvious, namely Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant). Plenty of information there, including links to sources. You might find the section on the group's finances (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Finances) to be of particular interest. Don't forget to follow up on the sources, as they will give a lot more detail.
As for Assad and Syria, again, Wikipedia provides an excellent starting point, as do the official reports that were conducted. You should start there.
The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting.
And again, I'd urge you to reread this thread.
So basically your stance is, "go to wikpedia for facts" :rofl:
-
There's always other reasons for wars.
“Germany’s unforgivable crime before the second world war was her attempt to extricate her economic power from the world’s trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.” Winston Churchill
There are many reasons for wars. I believe Winston Churchill repeatedly urged Britain not to ignore the threat from Germany long before they started their expansion. Mr Chamberlain managed to ignore most of them and Churchill remained ousted throughout most of the 30s, IIRC.
Yeah, that ancient alien slug was certainly beating the drum about Germany. If we went to war because Germany invaded Poland, then why didn't we declare war on the Soviets, rather than fighting with them? Maybe it was acceptable to attack Poland from the East, but not the West? Hitler says he admired our Empire and say us as natural allies, where as Roosevelt said his greatest ambition was "to see the destruction of the British Empire", yet we made an alliance with the US and the Soviets? ???
I fail to see your point here, but the reasons to WW2 and the alliances made are quite well researched by now. You might want to read up on them, cos I can't be arsed to link to the Wikipedia articles (hint: plenty of sources listed there).
"I fail to see your point here" I think that's the main problem, and it's yours. Like I don't know that? Lol. We've been told repeatedly why we went to war, but there's plenty of information you were oblivious to that says otherwise.
You're assuming that I'm oblivious to some information you hint at when actually I simply reject the argumentation made. There is a difference.
Take off the tinfoil hat and show me the facts.
You made it very apparent. Pleading for Adam to come back to rescue you, cause Adam knows more than us all about WWII, or, you agree with Adam more like.
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
The UN report did not definitely pinpoint the origins of the chemical weapons, no, but the investigators were able to confirm the trajectories of some of the missiles--they came from government-controlled areas. There have also been accusations of the rebels using sarin gas, namely by one of the UN investigators.
These are not fairy tales. Horror stories, maybe, but not fairy tales.
But you do with your tinfoil hat what you will. It's obvious even to the most casual observer that you won't let facts get in the way.
If there are facts you were unaware of, they come under the tinfoil hat/conspiracy section. So really, you cannot lose.
Again, are you stupid enough to believe that Assad would bomb people while the inspectors were in town and Israeli lobbyists, Cameron and Obomber were foaming at the mouth about fighting Assad? You will believe anything you see on TV, without question. You realize if it wasn't the government, whoever did it would find a way of firing from a government controlled area? Weren't some of your kind of "facts" in the past, ones like Saddam having nukes and was ready to blow us up in 45 minutes?
I think it's hilarious that you resort to name-calling and unfounded assumptions every time you reply to my posts. You really aren't very good at this, are you? :lol1:
Cause you're above all of that? You, who counter people with condescending memes and hint that people are mentally ill if they share stuff that you were unaware of. I don't think it was over the top to ask if you were stupid enough to believe such nonsense.
You might want to reread the thread and remind yourself of the discussion so far. In particular, read your own posts.
You really suck at this, don't you?
Pot calling the kettle black sonny jim.
You mean you disagree with me? So fine, if I suck, it shouldn't be a problem for you to counter my points or explain the information, but you're not capable, so you'd rather talk about me? :eyelash:
Sure. Rather than repeating the information here, I'd suggest you to start with the obvious, namely Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant). Plenty of information there, including links to sources. You might find the section on the group's finances (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Finances) to be of particular interest. Don't forget to follow up on the sources, as they will give a lot more detail.
As for Assad and Syria, again, Wikipedia provides an excellent starting point, as do the official reports that were conducted. You should start there.
The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting.
And again, I'd urge you to reread this thread.
"The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting."
:facepalm2: How is it "largely irrelevant"? It shows the US will support it when their "allies" do it, but cry their eyes out when someone they want to bomb does it. You simply don't understand, or don't want to.
-
A lot of what we "know" now could be propaganda. If Germany had won the war, the historians would be writing a different story. "History is written by the victors".
You're still not making an actual point.
You don't get the points, that's the difference ;)
Yeah, you're just too subtle.
-
Sure. Rather than repeating the information here, I'd suggest you to start with the obvious, namely Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant). Plenty of information there, including links to sources. You might find the section on the group's finances (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Finances) to be of particular interest. Don't forget to follow up on the sources, as they will give a lot more detail.
As for Assad and Syria, again, Wikipedia provides an excellent starting point, as do the official reports that were conducted. You should start there.
The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting.
And again, I'd urge you to reread this thread.
So basically your stance is, "go to wikpedia for facts" :rofl:
Your research skills seem to only be matched by your reading skills.
-
You're assuming that I'm oblivious to some information you hint at when actually I simply reject the argumentation made. There is a difference.
Take off the tinfoil hat and show me the facts.
You made it very apparent. Pleading for Adam to come back to rescue you, cause Adam knows more than us all about WWII, or, you agree with Adam more like.
Actually Adam's WW2 knowledge is vastly superior to ours, yes. It's one of his special interests.
However, I do know a bit about the subject. I assume you don't, since you've carefully avoided any facts in your replies.
-
"The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting."
:facepalm2: How is it "largely irrelevant"? It shows the US will support it when their "allies" do it, but cry their eyes out when someone they want to bomb does it. You simply don't understand, or don't want to.
It isn't relevant because it doesn't prove anything.
-
Oh, and here's the thing about Wikipedia:
It usually provides an excellent starting point for researching subjects. There are frequently a lot of references to various sources, from newspapers to reports, which saves time since you can easily locate studies, reports and the like. Not every study and not every report, but enough to get you going, in most cases.
Wikipedia, of course, has built-in weaknesses of which the most obvious is that anyone can edit the content, at any time. If you research recent events, especially anything even slightly controversial, you need to be aware of this. It's a rookie mistake, but one sometimes committed by people who do a lot more day-to-day light research than most.
Googling a subject, while tempting and easy and therefore often the first and only research done, is far more inefficient since most Google searches are weighted based on ads, local cookies, your Google accounts, etc. If we all searched on the exact same terms, we'd each get different results, and most would still not offer the relevance needed.
Library searches are a bit more trustworthy but are usually outdated, always static, and usually weighted by some rather bizarre considerations. If you have access to a university library it's often a better bet than pretty much everything else, provided that they carry the topic you're interested in.
But still, regardless of how you go about your research, you do need to be somewhat well read to do it properly, and it means going beyond the tinfoil stuff that is oh-so-easy but frequently oh-so-wrong.
Good luck.
-
Wiki has gotten a bad rep cus of lazy students and angry teachers.
It does have its weaknesses tho. As a moderate hobby dinosaur expert, I can notice easily whenever a Jurassic Park fanboy has entered an edit :D
-
My irony meter just pegged out. :rofl:
-
You're assuming that I'm oblivious to some information you hint at when actually I simply reject the argumentation made. There is a difference.
Take off the tinfoil hat and show me the facts.
You made it very apparent. Pleading for Adam to come back to rescue you, cause Adam knows more than us all about WWII, or, you agree with Adam more like.
Actually Adam's WW2 knowledge is vastly superior to ours, yes. It's one of his special interests.
However, I do know a bit about the subject. I assume you don't, since you've carefully avoided any facts in your replies.
You don't seem to understand history or facts in general.
-
"The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting."
:facepalm2: How is it "largely irrelevant"? It shows the US will support it when their "allies" do it, but cry their eyes out when someone they want to bomb does it. You simply don't understand, or don't want to.
It isn't relevant because it doesn't prove anything.
It proves that the US aren't credible. They will allegedly be against a country when the country is their enemy or has resources it wants to steal, and they will support and fund another country who are committing the same kind of crimes.
What is it you don't understand?
-
Oh, and here's the thing about Wikipedia:
It usually provides an excellent starting point for researching subjects. There are frequently a lot of references to various sources, from newspapers to reports, which saves time since you can easily locate studies, reports and the like. Not every study and not every report, but enough to get you going, in most cases.
Wikipedia, of course, has built-in weaknesses of which the most obvious is that anyone can edit the content, at any time. If you research recent events, especially anything even slightly controversial, you need to be aware of this. It's a rookie mistake, but one sometimes committed by people who do a lot more day-to-day light research than most.
Googling a subject, while tempting and easy and therefore often the first and only research done, is far more inefficient since most Google searches are weighted based on ads, local cookies, your Google accounts, etc. If we all searched on the exact same terms, we'd each get different results, and most would still not offer the relevance needed.
Library searches are a bit more trustworthy but are usually outdated, always static, and usually weighted by some rather bizarre considerations. If you have access to a university library it's often a better bet than pretty much everything else, provided that they carry the topic you're interested in.
But still, regardless of how you go about your research, you do need to be somewhat well read to do it properly, and it means going beyond the tinfoil stuff that is oh-so-easy but frequently oh-so-wrong.
Good luck.
If it isn't on wikpedia, it's tinfoil stuff? Even though anyone can put anything on there? :lol1: I actually posted the wikpedia link about how powerful ancient alien think tanks in the US were gagging to go into Iraq before 9/11 and spoke about needing a Pearl Harbour like disaster. I also posted a video showing all the news coverage of the Israelis who were arrested on 9/11 with bombs in their truck and posted the FBI report, then suddenly, the news forgets it all and it's never spoken of again. Imagine 5 Palestinians had been arrested on the bridge with a van full of explosives, do you think that'd have been swept under the rug? yet you choose to ignore that and brush it off as "tinfoil stuff". Anyone who ignores all of that is in sheer denial.
If I read anything on wikpedia, I will look around for numerous other sources on the issue, before taking it at face value.
-
My irony meter just pegged out. :rofl:
The fact that you talk about irony, is ironic
-
My irony meter just pegged out. :rofl:
The fact that you talk about irony, is ironic
OMG THE IRONY!! :GA:
-
Wiki has gotten a bad rep cus of lazy students and angry teachers.
It does have its weaknesses tho. As a moderate hobby dinosaur expert, I can notice easily whenever a Jurassic Park fanboy has entered an edit :D
You forgot the lazy journalists. :D
-
You're assuming that I'm oblivious to some information you hint at when actually I simply reject the argumentation made. There is a difference.
Take off the tinfoil hat and show me the facts.
You made it very apparent. Pleading for Adam to come back to rescue you, cause Adam knows more than us all about WWII, or, you agree with Adam more like.
Actually Adam's WW2 knowledge is vastly superior to ours, yes. It's one of his special interests.
However, I do know a bit about the subject. I assume you don't, since you've carefully avoided any facts in your replies.
You don't seem to understand history or facts in general.
:hahaha:
(http://www.memphisflyer.com/imager/ancient-aliens/b/original/3718021/6c5e/film3_AncientAliens2-w.jpg)
-
"The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting."
:facepalm2: How is it "largely irrelevant"? It shows the US will support it when their "allies" do it, but cry their eyes out when someone they want to bomb does it. You simply don't understand, or don't want to.
It isn't relevant because it doesn't prove anything.
It proves that the US aren't credible. They will allegedly be against a country when the country is their enemy or has resources it wants to steal, and they will support and fund another country who are committing the same kind of crimes.
What is it you don't understand?
Does this argument work anywhere, in your experience? While I don't approve of what the Israelis are doing in Gaza, it's quite a leap between that and the IS bringing the middle ages to the Middle East, besides the obvious fact that your statement doesn't actually prove anything.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. You really suck at this. Do you even know what you're arguing for, or are you simply parroting the single-syllable sentences produced by your idols?
-
If I read anything on wikpedia, I will look around for numerous other sources on the issue, before taking it at face value.
Which is basically what I said. We seem to have a point of agreement.
Of course, you choose your sources far more selectively than that, as made obvious by your Chomsky video in that other thread.
-
If it isn't on wikpedia, it's tinfoil stuff? Even though anyone can put anything on there?
I bother to explain how this works and this is your understanding if it? Your reading comprehension is as poor as your argumentation techniques.
But seriously: Wikipedia has a lot of tinfoil stuff, too. First of all, it's in the nature of a wiki. Anyone can edit one, which means that there will always be inaccuracies and poorly researched subjects. Wikipedia, specifically, does attempt to address these built-in weaknesses, however. If you're interested, the Help pages do a decent job of explaining how it works.
Second, the tinfoil stuff are valid topics, too. From 9/11 conspiracies to Zionism, the point is always to describe the subject as factually as possible, providing as many sources as possible. Ideally, there should be no bias.
-
Flat out: I am always going to have bias when imperialism is involved.
-
In other words you hate the victors and love the losers.
EVERY society is trying to be imperialistic, some are just better than others at it.
-
In other words you hate the victors and love the losers.
EVERY society is trying to be imperialistic, some are just better than others at it.
I know. To me, that is just failing at life and being human.
>Lets kill the most god damn foreigners and steal the most shit, u guise
>high score omgzokool
-
You're assuming that I'm oblivious to some information you hint at when actually I simply reject the argumentation made. There is a difference.
Take off the tinfoil hat and show me the facts.
You made it very apparent. Pleading for Adam to come back to rescue you, cause Adam knows more than us all about WWII, or, you agree with Adam more like.
Actually Adam's WW2 knowledge is vastly superior to ours, yes. It's one of his special interests.
However, I do know a bit about the subject. I assume you don't, since you've carefully avoided any facts in your replies.
You don't seem to understand history or facts in general.
:hahaha:
(http://www.memphisflyer.com/imager/ancient-aliens/b/original/3718021/6c5e/film3_AncientAliens2-w.jpg)
Same old meme's. I don't really think you have a leg to stand on Mr wikpedia.
-
"The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting."
:facepalm2: How is it "largely irrelevant"? It shows the US will support it when their "allies" do it, but cry their eyes out when someone they want to bomb does it. You simply don't understand, or don't want to.
It isn't relevant because it doesn't prove anything.
It proves that the US aren't credible. They will allegedly be against a country when the country is their enemy or has resources it wants to steal, and they will support and fund another country who are committing the same kind of crimes.
What is it you don't understand?
Does this argument work anywhere, in your experience? While I don't approve of what the Israelis are doing in Gaza, it's quite a leap between that and the IS bringing the middle ages to the Middle East, besides the obvious fact that your statement doesn't actually prove anything.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. You really suck at this. Do you even know what you're arguing for, or are you simply parroting the single-syllable sentences produced by your idols?
Not on you, as you don't understand. Boddie seemed to agree, and millions of people around the world can see the US's outrageous double standards, so yes, it works on open minded and intelligent people. "the IS bringing the middle ages to the Middle East" :facepalm2: Cause the Middle East was so 21st century before IS :facepalm2: Israel itself goes round destroying people's homes that are in the way of them trying to find evidence for "King David", who may have existed 3000 years ago. The statement proves plenty, but again, you aren't capable of understanding.
I'm discussing a subject, with people who need to turn it into a personal fight, to disguise their lack of knowledge.
-
If I read anything on wikpedia, I will look around for numerous other sources on the issue, before taking it at face value.
Which is basically what I said. We seem to have a point of agreement.
Of course, you choose your sources far more selectively than that, as made obvious by your Chomsky video in that other thread.
Right.
Meaning?
-
If it isn't on wikpedia, it's tinfoil stuff? Even though anyone can put anything on there?
I bother to explain how this works and this is your understanding if it? Your reading comprehension is as poor as your argumentation techniques.
But seriously: Wikipedia has a lot of tinfoil stuff, too. First of all, it's in the nature of a wiki. Anyone can edit one, which means that there will always be inaccuracies and poorly researched subjects. Wikipedia, specifically, does attempt to address these built-in weaknesses, however. If you're interested, the Help pages do a decent job of explaining how it works.
Second, the tinfoil stuff are valid topics, too. From 9/11 conspiracies to Zionism, the point is always to describe the subject as factually as possible, providing as many sources as possible. Ideally, there should be no bias.
Because you're accusing me of "tinfoil stuff", when you are using a site that you've just said has that kind of stuff on it.
True, there should be no bias, but that's not always the case on there.
-
The pro war side is biased as all hell. They argue for this because they receive information that their political ideologue releases which makes it seem as though "the enemy" is well.. an enemy. In reality the war on terror is being fought to secure resources and maintain control of supply lines. Nothing more.
What is being accomplished? Theft and murder, same as it has always been. My own country was founded on this, slaughtering the native americans and raping their lands. Although tragic, I had nothing to do with this myself. Although I am of the opinion that large pieces of America being given back to them is a good idea.
ITT: Myself and my own generation had nothing to do with the conquest in the new world, but that doesn't mean I think it is acceptable to continue wars for profit in the present. There is a better way, and I am EXTREMELY biased on this subject concerning at least my own country. This is a bias I am proud to wear right on my sleeve. I hate mass murderers, I hate oligarchs. I hate wealthy thieves.
I think it would be prudent to cut ties with Israel, defund the war on terror, and focus the military soley on national security. The money being spent on prior activities would yield many happy returns in other areas like education and infrastructure.
-
Flat out: I am always going to have bias when imperialism is involved.
For it or against it? :zoinks:
-
You're assuming that I'm oblivious to some information you hint at when actually I simply reject the argumentation made. There is a difference.
Take off the tinfoil hat and show me the facts.
You made it very apparent. Pleading for Adam to come back to rescue you, cause Adam knows more than us all about WWII, or, you agree with Adam more like.
Actually Adam's WW2 knowledge is vastly superior to ours, yes. It's one of his special interests.
However, I do know a bit about the subject. I assume you don't, since you've carefully avoided any facts in your replies.
You don't seem to understand history or facts in general.
:hahaha:
(http://www.memphisflyer.com/imager/ancient-aliens/b/original/3718021/6c5e/film3_AncientAliens2-w.jpg)
Same old meme's. I don't really think you have a leg to stand on Mr wikpedia.
Based on your brilliant reasoning so far? I'm on solid ground. I'm just not taking you seriously.
-
"The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting."
:facepalm2: How is it "largely irrelevant"? It shows the US will support it when their "allies" do it, but cry their eyes out when someone they want to bomb does it. You simply don't understand, or don't want to.
It isn't relevant because it doesn't prove anything.
It proves that the US aren't credible. They will allegedly be against a country when the country is their enemy or has resources it wants to steal, and they will support and fund another country who are committing the same kind of crimes.
What is it you don't understand?
Does this argument work anywhere, in your experience? While I don't approve of what the Israelis are doing in Gaza, it's quite a leap between that and the IS bringing the middle ages to the Middle East, besides the obvious fact that your statement doesn't actually prove anything.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. You really suck at this. Do you even know what you're arguing for, or are you simply parroting the single-syllable sentences produced by your idols?
Not on you, as you don't understand. Boddie seemed to agree, and millions of people around the world can see the US's outrageous double standards, so yes, it works on open minded and intelligent people. "the IS bringing the middle ages to the Middle East" :facepalm2: Cause the Middle East was so 21st century before IS :facepalm2: Israel itself goes round destroying people's homes that are in the way of them trying to find evidence for "King David", who may have existed 3000 years ago. The statement proves plenty, but again, you aren't capable of understanding.
I'm discussing a subject, with people who need to turn it into a personal fight, to disguise their lack of knowledge.
Here's a hint to you, mate: this discussion was not about the US' double standards. You went far beyond that, trying to connect dots where only your tinfoil friends and supporters see them.
Where have I claimed that the US does not exhibit double standards? The fact that they do does not validate your points. Pretty much every nation on the planet is like that. The difference between the US and, say, Sweden is that what Sweden does is not very visible in comparison.
-
If I read anything on wikpedia, I will look around for numerous other sources on the issue, before taking it at face value.
Which is basically what I said. We seem to have a point of agreement.
Of course, you choose your sources far more selectively than that, as made obvious by your Chomsky video in that other thread.
Right.
Meaning?
Meaning that you don't allow facts to get in your way. You're no different from the rest of the tinfoil crowd. I think Pappy and parts made that clear in that other thread.
-
If it isn't on wikpedia, it's tinfoil stuff? Even though anyone can put anything on there?
I bother to explain how this works and this is your understanding if it? Your reading comprehension is as poor as your argumentation techniques.
But seriously: Wikipedia has a lot of tinfoil stuff, too. First of all, it's in the nature of a wiki. Anyone can edit one, which means that there will always be inaccuracies and poorly researched subjects. Wikipedia, specifically, does attempt to address these built-in weaknesses, however. If you're interested, the Help pages do a decent job of explaining how it works.
Second, the tinfoil stuff are valid topics, too. From 9/11 conspiracies to Zionism, the point is always to describe the subject as factually as possible, providing as many sources as possible. Ideally, there should be no bias.
Because you're accusing me of "tinfoil stuff", when you are using a site that you've just said has that kind of stuff on it.
True, there should be no bias, but that's not always the case on there.
Let me try to explain this. Feel free to ask questions if you don't understand.
Wikipedia is basically an online encyclopaedia. It contains articles on just about anything, from the war in Syria to Game of Thrones episode guides and pretty much everything between, including 9/11 conspiracies and ancient aliens. This means that there will be factual articles on the tinfoil stuff, just as there will be factual articles on the IS.
Anyone can add an article or update an existing one. Regular people, the tinfoil crowd, the CIA. Anyone. And anyone can review them.
And there will be sources. Most more controversial articles get a lot of them because they get edited often, and because it's the best way to back up your stuff. An article that lacks them will be flagged as such.
If you're an expert on something, you'll probably check out the topics you're interested in on Wikipedia, to see if they are reasonably complete and correct. It's in your best interests. Take me, for example. I am an acknowledged expert on some topics and so have done just that, because I know that my knowledge will help others, but also because like so many others, I simply think it's very cool that you can look up pretty much anything on the web and get better answers than what a simple Google search will provide.
HTH
-
"The Gaza argument you're making is largely irrelevant, of course, but then, I assume you knew it when posting."
:facepalm2: How is it "largely irrelevant"? It shows the US will support it when their "allies" do it, but cry their eyes out when someone they want to bomb does it. You simply don't understand, or don't want to.
It isn't relevant because it doesn't prove anything.
It proves that the US aren't credible. They will allegedly be against a country when the country is their enemy or has resources it wants to steal, and they will support and fund another country who are committing the same kind of crimes.
What is it you don't understand?
Does this argument work anywhere, in your experience? While I don't approve of what the Israelis are doing in Gaza, it's quite a leap between that and the IS bringing the middle ages to the Middle East, besides the obvious fact that your statement doesn't actually prove anything.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. You really suck at this. Do you even know what you're arguing for, or are you simply parroting the single-syllable sentences produced by your idols?
Not on you, as you don't understand. Boddie seemed to agree, and millions of people around the world can see the US's outrageous double standards, so yes, it works on open minded and intelligent people. "the IS bringing the middle ages to the Middle East" :facepalm2: Cause the Middle East was so 21st century before IS :facepalm2: Israel itself goes round destroying people's homes that are in the way of them trying to find evidence for "King David", who may have existed 3000 years ago. The statement proves plenty, but again, you aren't capable of understanding.
I'm discussing a subject, with people who need to turn it into a personal fight, to disguise their lack of knowledge.
Here's a hint to you, mate: this discussion was not about the US' double standards. You went far beyond that, trying to connect dots where only your tinfoil friends and supporters see them.
Where have I claimed that the US does not exhibit double standards? The fact that they do does not validate your points. Pretty much every nation on the planet is like that. The difference between the US and, say, Sweden is that what Sweden does is not very visible in comparison.
I made it about the US's double standards, and point out that the air strikes are against an "enemy" that they have created, and that if they were consistent they'd be launching strikes against their "allies". This has nothing to do with "tinfoil". It's about what the media hasn't informed you of.
"The fact that they do does not validate your points. Pretty much every nation on the planet is like that." So that validates yours? The difference between Sweden and the US is power.
-
If I read anything on wikpedia, I will look around for numerous other sources on the issue, before taking it at face value.
Which is basically what I said. We seem to have a point of agreement.
Of course, you choose your sources far more selectively than that, as made obvious by your Chomsky video in that other thread.
Right.
Meaning?
Meaning that you don't allow facts to get in your way. You're no different from the rest of the tinfoil crowd. I think Pappy and parts made that clear in that other thread.
They, along with you, just have no idea what they're talking about. What facts? Tell me some that discredit some of the things i've said? You ignore any facts i've posted and aren't capable of countering them. Instead you resort to talking about me, or blabbing on about it being tinfoil stuff, or post the same meme. You're out of your depth and aren't capable of a serious discussion.
-
If it isn't on wikpedia, it's tinfoil stuff? Even though anyone can put anything on there?
I bother to explain how this works and this is your understanding if it? Your reading comprehension is as poor as your argumentation techniques.
But seriously: Wikipedia has a lot of tinfoil stuff, too. First of all, it's in the nature of a wiki. Anyone can edit one, which means that there will always be inaccuracies and poorly researched subjects. Wikipedia, specifically, does attempt to address these built-in weaknesses, however. If you're interested, the Help pages do a decent job of explaining how it works.
Second, the tinfoil stuff are valid topics, too. From 9/11 conspiracies to Zionism, the point is always to describe the subject as factually as possible, providing as many sources as possible. Ideally, there should be no bias.
Because you're accusing me of "tinfoil stuff", when you are using a site that you've just said has that kind of stuff on it.
True, there should be no bias, but that's not always the case on there.
Let me try to explain this. Feel free to ask questions if you don't understand.
Wikipedia is basically an online encyclopaedia. It contains articles on just about anything, from the war in Syria to Game of Thrones episode guides and pretty much everything between, including 9/11 conspiracies and ancient aliens. This means that there will be factual articles on the tinfoil stuff, just as there will be factual articles on the IS.
Anyone can add an article or update an existing one. Regular people, the tinfoil crowd, the CIA. Anyone. And anyone can review them.
And there will be sources. Most more controversial articles get a lot of them because they get edited often, and because it's the best way to back up your stuff. An article that lacks them will be flagged as such.
If you're an expert on something, you'll probably check out the topics you're interested in on Wikipedia, to see if they are reasonably complete and correct. It's in your best interests. Take me, for example. I am an acknowledged expert on some topics and so have done just that, because I know that my knowledge will help others, but also because like so many others, I simply think it's very cool that you can look up pretty much anything on the web and get better answers than what a simple Google search will provide.
HTH
It's funny that someone so mentally bankrupt can be so condescending and arrogant.
I know what Wikpedia is. Really it doesn't matter, cause as I said, it will be tinfoil stuff to you if it doesn't fit your beliefs.
I agree. You probably should stick to your expertise subjects and forget politics though.
-
If I read anything on wikpedia, I will look around for numerous other sources on the issue, before taking it at face value.
Which is basically what I said. We seem to have a point of agreement.
Of course, you choose your sources far more selectively than that, as made obvious by your Chomsky video in that other thread.
Right.
Meaning?
Meaning that you don't allow facts to get in your way. You're no different from the rest of the tinfoil crowd. I think Pappy and parts made that clear in that other thread.
They, along with you, just have no idea what they're talking about. What facts? Tell me some that discredit some of the things i've said? You ignore any facts i've posted and aren't capable of countering them. Instead you resort to talking about me, or blabbing on about it being tinfoil stuff, or post the same meme. You're out of your depth and aren't capable of a serious discussion.
Your just in denial
-
This has nothing to do with "tinfoil". It's about what the media hasn't informed you of.
This is hilarious. :rofl:
-
If I read anything on wikpedia, I will look around for numerous other sources on the issue, before taking it at face value.
Which is basically what I said. We seem to have a point of agreement.
Of course, you choose your sources far more selectively than that, as made obvious by your Chomsky video in that other thread.
Right.
Meaning?
Meaning that you don't allow facts to get in your way. You're no different from the rest of the tinfoil crowd. I think Pappy and parts made that clear in that other thread.
They, along with you, just have no idea what they're talking about. What facts? Tell me some that discredit some of the things i've said? You ignore any facts i've posted and aren't capable of countering them. Instead you resort to talking about me, or blabbing on about it being tinfoil stuff, or post the same meme. You're out of your depth and aren't capable of a serious discussion.
:rofl:
This is not a serious discussion. You're incapable of one. But I do think you're fun.
Post another Chomsky video and then disagree with the stuff that doesn't harmonise with your tinfoil. Makes me giggle.
-
If it isn't on wikpedia, it's tinfoil stuff? Even though anyone can put anything on there?
I bother to explain how this works and this is your understanding if it? Your reading comprehension is as poor as your argumentation techniques.
But seriously: Wikipedia has a lot of tinfoil stuff, too. First of all, it's in the nature of a wiki. Anyone can edit one, which means that there will always be inaccuracies and poorly researched subjects. Wikipedia, specifically, does attempt to address these built-in weaknesses, however. If you're interested, the Help pages do a decent job of explaining how it works.
Second, the tinfoil stuff are valid topics, too. From 9/11 conspiracies to Zionism, the point is always to describe the subject as factually as possible, providing as many sources as possible. Ideally, there should be no bias.
Because you're accusing me of "tinfoil stuff", when you are using a site that you've just said has that kind of stuff on it.
True, there should be no bias, but that's not always the case on there.
Let me try to explain this. Feel free to ask questions if you don't understand.
Wikipedia is basically an online encyclopaedia. It contains articles on just about anything, from the war in Syria to Game of Thrones episode guides and pretty much everything between, including 9/11 conspiracies and ancient aliens. This means that there will be factual articles on the tinfoil stuff, just as there will be factual articles on the IS.
Anyone can add an article or update an existing one. Regular people, the tinfoil crowd, the CIA. Anyone. And anyone can review them.
And there will be sources. Most more controversial articles get a lot of them because they get edited often, and because it's the best way to back up your stuff. An article that lacks them will be flagged as such.
If you're an expert on something, you'll probably check out the topics you're interested in on Wikipedia, to see if they are reasonably complete and correct. It's in your best interests. Take me, for example. I am an acknowledged expert on some topics and so have done just that, because I know that my knowledge will help others, but also because like so many others, I simply think it's very cool that you can look up pretty much anything on the web and get better answers than what a simple Google search will provide.
HTH
It's funny that someone so mentally bankrupt can be so condescending and arrogant.
I don't suffer fools but I do like to see them suffer. Are you going to cry now?
I know what Wikpedia is. Really it doesn't matter, cause as I said, it will be tinfoil stuff to you if it doesn't fit your beliefs.
No, apparently you don't know what Wikipedia is. Should I quote all the things you've said about it or can I simply suggest you to reread your own posts?
I agree. You probably should stick to your expertise subjects and forget politics though.
You're not discussing politics, mate. You're discussing conspiracy theories and general tinfoilism without backing anything up. You're posting videos and hoping it will make you look clever and informed.
-
Oh, and... :zoinks:
(http://www.knowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Parents-Ancient-Aliens.jpg)
-
Are you OK Odeon?
Let me know when you're ready for a serious discussion, without acting like a petulant child.
If you want, please let's discuss what i've said that falls under "tinfolism"?
-
(http://lolpics.se/pics/5430.jpg)
-
Didn't the gopher give you crap about posting Wikipedia links with no commentary? Are you siding with the gopher? Happen to like alternative political ideas, though thinking scrapheap was the only one kind enough to mock my world conspiracy theory. Arguing for an idea which the vast majority of people disagree or see as tinfoilish, is a struggle no matter what the idea or how controversial.
-
Didn't the gopher give you crap about posting Wikipedia links with no commentary? Are you siding with the gopher? Happen to like alternative political ideas, though thinking scrapheap was the only one kind enough to mock my world conspiracy theory. Arguing for an idea which the vast majority of people disagree or see as tinfoilish, is a struggle no matter what the idea or how controversial.
Didn't I also tell him to embrace his foil hat? Are you agreeing with the gopher? :hahaha:
-
Are you OK Odeon?
Let me know when you're ready for a serious discussion, without acting like a petulant child.
If you want, please let's discuss what i've said that falls under "tinfolism"?
:rofl:
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tin_foil_hat) :zoinks:
-
Oh, and in case you're wondering, Benji:
Having read your other recent entries on the board, it's obvious that there's no point whatsoever in attempting a "serious" discussion with you. You are a garden variety kook (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crank_%28person%29). You are without any particular talent and certainly without any originality, and as such, the likes of you are being disproved and ridiculed all over the net daily. Legitimising you with anything resembling a serious discussion will therefore not serve any purpose.
Ridiculing you, on the other hand, is fun.
(http://oldhatcreative.com/sites/default/files/blog_images/9189283.jpg)
:-*
-
:lol1: Yeah, keep disproving me by avoiding the issues, calling me names and posting the same meme. ::)
-
Didn't the gopher give you crap about posting Wikipedia links with no commentary? Are you siding with the gopher? Happen to like alternative political ideas, though thinking scrapheap was the only one kind enough to mock my world conspiracy theory. Arguing for an idea which the vast majority of people disagree or see as tinfoilish, is a struggle no matter what the idea or how controversial.
The commentary was within the links :zoinks:
-
Flat out: I am always going to have bias when imperialism is involved.
For it or against it? :zoinks:
I'd be against this even if someone was pointing a gun at my head. :dunno:
-
:lol1: Yeah, keep disproving me by avoiding the issues, calling me names and posting the same meme. ::)
Pay attention. It's not the same meme.
Kooks don't need to be disproved. They are what they are, useful only as target practice.
(http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/58/d3/58d38fcd1fd4173b0028a11d06beb247.jpg?itok=ASxDDxjy)
-
Same picture, same name calling, same bullshit. You're out of your depth son :orly:
-
(http://www.myfacewhen.net/uploads/3212-now-kiss.jpg)
:zoinks:
-
Same picture, same name calling, same bullshit. You're out of your depth son :orly:
Not my fault you are a kook. :dunno:
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/52166833.jpg)
-
Didn't the gopher give you crap about posting Wikipedia links with no commentary? Are you siding with the gopher? Happen to like alternative political ideas, though thinking scrapheap was the only one kind enough to mock my world conspiracy theory. Arguing for an idea which the vast majority of people disagree or see as tinfoilish, is a struggle no matter what the idea or how controversial.
The commentary was within the links :zoinks:
No it's not. :M
-
The funny thing is that in spite of his clear descent into tinfoilism, Benji has not managed to put together a coherent post about the topic at hand. He seems to blame the US in general, he obviously hates Israel, but I'm still waiting for an actual point.
Which, of course, is the kind of non-content this guy excels at.
(http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/158/329/9189283.jpg)
-
This is just divisive bullshit.
-
I've made plenty of points Odeon, and shown in the other thread that when you say "tinfoilism", that's code word for you being oblivious to the information :lol1:
-
There's many reasons for the air strikes, but the main point is, we wouldn't be at this point, had the West not caused the problems in Syria and Iraq. They always need an enemy. The US thrives on war, and it's been involved in some kind of war for about 95% of the time it's existed.
-
This is just divisive bullshit.
:agreed: :plus: Bullshit attacks and memes. :thumbup:
-
:thumbup:
-
This is just divisive bullshit.
Hey, that's Ancient Aliens you're talking about. >:(
-
I've made plenty of points Odeon, and shown in the other thread that when you say "tinfoilism", that's code word for you being oblivious to the information :lol1:
And you might even believe you have. Reality sucks, doesn't it?
-
There's many reasons for the air strikes, but the main point is, we wouldn't be at this point, had the West not caused the problems in Syria and Iraq. They always need an enemy. The US thrives on war, and it's been involved in some kind of war for about 95% of the time it's existed.
That's so vague that it's not an actual point at all.
Yes, I happen to agree with you that the US was part in causing the current lack of stability in Iraq which has made it possible for ISIL to thrive there. The US, however, did not create ISIL and did not cause the current situation in Syria. Unless you somehow draw a line between the so-called Arab Spring and the US.
Try again.
-
This is just divisive bullshit.
:agreed: :plus: Bullshit attacks and memes. :thumbup:
(http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/50190553.jpg)
:P
-
:probe:
-
:probe:
This is obviously so much better than the memes. :zoinks:
-
:probe: You must be confused. I am not Benji. I share some of his views, but it never ceases to amaze me how I am regarded as "part of something" when discussions are going on. I am not nor ever will be, "part of something".
I think that little phenomenon is the source code of the stupidity that actually killed all those Jewish people in the first place, to be blunt.
-
I'm not confusing you with Benji. I commented on the smiley. :M
-
:probe: You must be confused. I am not Benji. I share some of his views, but it never ceases to amaze me how I am regarded as "part of something" when discussions are going on. I am not nor ever will be, "part of something".
I think that little phenomenon is the source code of the stupidity that actually killed all those Jewish people in the first place, to be blunt.
To be "part of something"? Not following you.
-
:thumbup:
-
I've made plenty of points Odeon, and shown in the other thread that when you say "tinfoilism", that's code word for you being oblivious to the information :lol1:
And you might even believe you have. Reality sucks, doesn't it?
You're too immature to admit it, and if you're too lazy to quickly go and rescue yourself on your beloved wiki, you'll just post that meme :orly:
-
There's many reasons for the air strikes, but the main point is, we wouldn't be at this point, had the West not caused the problems in Syria and Iraq. They always need an enemy. The US thrives on war, and it's been involved in some kind of war for about 95% of the time it's existed.
That's so vague that it's not an actual point at all.
Yes, I happen to agree with you that the US was part in causing the current lack of stability in Iraq which has made it possible for ISIL to thrive there. The US, however, did not create ISIL and did not cause the current situation in Syria. Unless you somehow draw a line between the so-called Arab Spring and the US.
Try again.
Don't be so fucking naive. Do you actually believe powerful people are that stupid? In part, yes, they created IS/ISIL/ISIS/ISILS/SIS. Yes, they have cause most of the problems in the Middle East, by supporting brutal governments who are anti democratic for decades. Powerful people in the US had talked about this exact thing happening for the US's advantage, years ago, as I posted before about the think tank group.
The US has been play Arab nation against each other and causing civil wars for decades.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/ (http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/)
-
I've made plenty of points Odeon, and shown in the other thread that when you say "tinfoilism", that's code word for you being oblivious to the information :lol1:
And you might even believe you have. Reality sucks, doesn't it?
You're too immature to admit it, and if you're too lazy to quickly go and rescue yourself on your beloved wiki, you'll just post that meme :orly:
(http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/1d/c8/1dc865f5baac7864fa0b0fb127903e08.jpeg?itok=nW7F2VqJ)
-
There's many reasons for the air strikes, but the main point is, we wouldn't be at this point, had the West not caused the problems in Syria and Iraq. They always need an enemy. The US thrives on war, and it's been involved in some kind of war for about 95% of the time it's existed.
That's so vague that it's not an actual point at all.
Yes, I happen to agree with you that the US was part in causing the current lack of stability in Iraq which has made it possible for ISIL to thrive there. The US, however, did not create ISIL and did not cause the current situation in Syria. Unless you somehow draw a line between the so-called Arab Spring and the US.
Try again.
Don't be so fucking naive. Do you actually believe powerful people are that stupid? In part, yes, they created IS/ISIL/ISIS/ISILS/SIS. Yes, they have cause most of the problems in the Middle East, by supporting brutal governments who are anti democratic for decades. Powerful people in the US had talked about this exact thing happening for the US's advantage, years ago, as I posted before about the think tank group.
The US has been play Arab nation against each other and causing civil wars for decades.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/ (http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/)
I love it how the article uses "it's common knowledge that..." How very scholarly of this particular kook.
Since your kook refers to Wikipedia (but apparently only when it is convenient) you might want to check it yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29)
-
There's many reasons for the air strikes, but the main point is, we wouldn't be at this point, had the West not caused the problems in Syria and Iraq. They always need an enemy. The US thrives on war, and it's been involved in some kind of war for about 95% of the time it's existed.
That's so vague that it's not an actual point at all.
Yes, I happen to agree with you that the US was part in causing the current lack of stability in Iraq which has made it possible for ISIL to thrive there. The US, however, did not create ISIL and did not cause the current situation in Syria. Unless you somehow draw a line between the so-called Arab Spring and the US.
Try again.
Don't be so fucking naive. Do you actually believe powerful people are that stupid? In part, yes, they created IS/ISIL/ISIS/ISILS/SIS. Yes, they have cause most of the problems in the Middle East, by supporting brutal governments who are anti democratic for decades. Powerful people in the US had talked about this exact thing happening for the US's advantage, years ago, as I posted before about the think tank group.
The US has been play Arab nation against each other and causing civil wars for decades.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/ (http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/)
I love it how the article uses "it's common knowledge that..." How very scholarly of this particular kook.
Since your kook refers to Wikipedia (but apparently only when it is convenient) you might want to check it yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29)
"Public knowledge" you mean?
Sorry, where does she speak against Wikipedia? Did you only read the first paragraph of the article?
Stop trying to avoid the issue. You were wrong, again. The US is very much to blame for the current turmoil in Syria.
-
There's many reasons for the air strikes, but the main point is, we wouldn't be at this point, had the West not caused the problems in Syria and Iraq. They always need an enemy. The US thrives on war, and it's been involved in some kind of war for about 95% of the time it's existed.
That's so vague that it's not an actual point at all.
Yes, I happen to agree with you that the US was part in causing the current lack of stability in Iraq which has made it possible for ISIL to thrive there. The US, however, did not create ISIL and did not cause the current situation in Syria. Unless you somehow draw a line between the so-called Arab Spring and the US.
Try again.
Don't be so fucking naive. Do you actually believe powerful people are that stupid? In part, yes, they created IS/ISIL/ISIS/ISILS/SIS. Yes, they have cause most of the problems in the Middle East, by supporting brutal governments who are anti democratic for decades. Powerful people in the US had talked about this exact thing happening for the US's advantage, years ago, as I posted before about the think tank group.
The US has been play Arab nation against each other and causing civil wars for decades.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/ (http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/)
I love it how the article uses "it's common knowledge that..." How very scholarly of this particular kook.
Since your kook refers to Wikipedia (but apparently only when it is convenient) you might want to check it yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29)
"Public knowledge" you mean?
Sorry, where does she speak against Wikipedia? Did you only read the first paragraph of the article?
Stop trying to avoid the issue. You were wrong, again. The US is very much to blame for the current turmoil in Syria.
Do you have reading comprehension issues? I said "common knowledge". I said "refers to".
No wonder you have problems.
-
There's many reasons for the air strikes, but the main point is, we wouldn't be at this point, had the West not caused the problems in Syria and Iraq. They always need an enemy. The US thrives on war, and it's been involved in some kind of war for about 95% of the time it's existed.
That's so vague that it's not an actual point at all.
Yes, I happen to agree with you that the US was part in causing the current lack of stability in Iraq which has made it possible for ISIL to thrive there. The US, however, did not create ISIL and did not cause the current situation in Syria. Unless you somehow draw a line between the so-called Arab Spring and the US.
Try again.
Don't be so fucking naive. Do you actually believe powerful people are that stupid? In part, yes, they created IS/ISIL/ISIS/ISILS/SIS. Yes, they have cause most of the problems in the Middle East, by supporting brutal governments who are anti democratic for decades. Powerful people in the US had talked about this exact thing happening for the US's advantage, years ago, as I posted before about the think tank group.
The US has been play Arab nation against each other and causing civil wars for decades.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/ (http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/)
I love it how the article uses "it's common knowledge that..." How very scholarly of this particular kook.
Since your kook refers to Wikipedia (but apparently only when it is convenient) you might want to check it yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29)
"Public knowledge" you mean?
Sorry, where does she speak against Wikipedia? Did you only read the first paragraph of the article?
Stop trying to avoid the issue. You were wrong, again. The US is very much to blame for the current turmoil in Syria.
Do you have reading comprehension issues? I said "common knowledge". I said "refers to".
No wonder you have problems.
Fair enough, I found it. My bad. What's wrong with using that term? Is it because you don't believe that people do know about it? Yes, and where does she say anything against Wikipedia? Are you confusing her with me?
-
There's many reasons for the air strikes, but the main point is, we wouldn't be at this point, had the West not caused the problems in Syria and Iraq. They always need an enemy. The US thrives on war, and it's been involved in some kind of war for about 95% of the time it's existed.
That's so vague that it's not an actual point at all.
Yes, I happen to agree with you that the US was part in causing the current lack of stability in Iraq which has made it possible for ISIL to thrive there. The US, however, did not create ISIL and did not cause the current situation in Syria. Unless you somehow draw a line between the so-called Arab Spring and the US.
Try again.
Don't be so fucking naive. Do you actually believe powerful people are that stupid? In part, yes, they created IS/ISIL/ISIS/ISILS/SIS. Yes, they have cause most of the problems in the Middle East, by supporting brutal governments who are anti democratic for decades. Powerful people in the US had talked about this exact thing happening for the US's advantage, years ago, as I posted before about the think tank group.
The US has been play Arab nation against each other and causing civil wars for decades.
http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/ (http://mycatbirdseat.com/2014/06/terror-in-iraq-roots-and-motivation/)
I love it how the article uses "it's common knowledge that..." How very scholarly of this particular kook.
Since your kook refers to Wikipedia (but apparently only when it is convenient) you might want to check it yourself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant#Foundation_of_the_group_.281999.E2.80.932006.29)
"Public knowledge" you mean?
Sorry, where does she speak against Wikipedia? Did you only read the first paragraph of the article?
Stop trying to avoid the issue. You were wrong, again. The US is very much to blame for the current turmoil in Syria.
Do you have reading comprehension issues? I said "common knowledge". I said "refers to".
No wonder you have problems.
Fair enough, I found it. My bad. What's wrong with using that term? Is it because you don't believe that people do know about it? Yes, and where does she say anything against Wikipedia? Are you confusing her with me?
Have I claimed she says something against Wikipedia? Anywhere? You do need to address your reading comprehension issues, you know.
My point is (and I will try to put this as simply as I can) that she only uses it when it suits her. Good for her, considering that there are other articles in there that would shoot her down.
-
Lol, so Wikipedia is the be all and end all? :lol1: But wait, there's articles on there that would shoot you down... oh no wait, they are just tinfoil ones that you can get on Wikipedia... but hang on, does that mean you only use Wikipedia when it suits you? Does this mean you're a kook? :orly:
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
Let me explain it to you then, sigh... You are so malfunctional in your incessant blunders, that it would have been interesting to find out what exactly it is that is blocking up your mind.
If at any other point you fail to understand what I'm saying, feel free to ask me to explain. I'm not a bad guy.
I LOL'd. +
Although you should probably address his points.
Should I?
:zoinks:
I will. Later on. Just sit really tight and wait, Pappy :]
Still waiting. :jaded: ::) ::) ::)
-
:laugh:
-
Lol, so Wikipedia is the be all and end all? :lol1: But wait, there's articles on there that would shoot you down... oh no wait, they are just tinfoil ones that you can get on Wikipedia... but hang on, does that mean you only use Wikipedia when it suits you? Does this mean you're a kook? :orly:
I really think you should address (and understand) my point before trying to use it against me.
-
The point is Odeon, you're just a major hypocrite who tries to make up all these silly rules, and contradict yourself in so many ways, purely, because you cannot deal with being wrong.
-
The point is Odeon, you're just a major hypocrite who tries to make up all these silly rules, and contradict yourself in so many ways, purely, because you cannot deal with being wrong.
UM, pardon sir but pot kettle perhaps? just an observation is all... :nerdy:
-
The point is Odeon, you're just a major hypocrite who tries to make up all these silly rules, and contradict yourself in so many ways, purely, because you cannot deal with being wrong.
And you're still not addressing anything. Poor kook.
-
Pot kettle black ::)
Anyone who shares information with odeon that he was oblivious too, becomes a "kook" :lol1: I've addressed endless points he's attempted to make, but if he isn't familiar with any of the information, he puts it in the "tinfoil" bracket. Amusing to watch. And Hannah, considering you thought Palestinians were as real as the tooth fairy, i'd suggest you move on :zoinks:
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
Let me explain it to you then, sigh... You are so malfunctional in your incessant blunders, that it would have been interesting to find out what exactly it is that is blocking up your mind.
If at any other point you fail to understand what I'm saying, feel free to ask me to explain. I'm not a bad guy.
I LOL'd. +
Although you should probably address his points.
Should I?
:zoinks:
I will. Later on. Just sit really tight and wait, Pappy :]
Still waiting. :jaded: ::) ::) ::)
Like a good boy. Sit tight!
-
You are such a fuckin idiot. I've said it before, I'll say it again - I kinda want to research you.
That doesn't even make sense.
Let me explain it to you then, sigh... You are so malfunctional in your incessant blunders, that it would have been interesting to find out what exactly it is that is blocking up your mind.
If at any other point you fail to understand what I'm saying, feel free to ask me to explain. I'm not a bad guy.
I LOL'd. +
Although you should probably address his points.
Should I?
:zoinks:
I will. Later on. Just sit really tight and wait, Pappy :]
Still waiting. :jaded: ::) ::) ::)
Like a good boy. Sit tight!
:laugh: The role of dominator suits you. :dominatrix:
-
Pot kettle black ::)
Anyone who shares information with odeon that he was oblivious too, becomes a "kook" :lol1: I've addressed endless points he's attempted to make, but if he isn't familiar with any of the information, he puts it in the "tinfoil" bracket. Amusing to watch. And Hannah, considering you thought Palestinians were as real as the tooth fairy, i'd suggest you move on :zoinks:
Isn't it interesting how you seem to be the only kook around, then? I sure know a lot. :zoinks:
-
Only one around on the planet? There's only about 5 active members on your site :zoinks:
-
Only one around on the planet? There's only about 5 active members on your site :zoinks:
On the planet, no. Here, yes.
-
So I take it you're OK with a leader using chemical weapons against his people?
:facepalm:
Talking about believing fairy tales. Yes, the US/Israel/UK were foaming at the mouth about going into Syria, begging for an excuse, then while the chemical weapons inspectors were in town, Assad thought it'd be a great idea to attack people with some chemical weapons!
You realize it wasn't proven that it definitely was Assad? Most likely cause it wasn't. Funny news channels manipulate people. They will believe anything they see on TV, and won't believe anything, until it's been confirmed for them on TV.
Let's say Assad did use them. Then still, why not be consistent and still fund him? Israel poured white phosphorus over schools and hospitals in Gaza, and the US still gives them $7 million a day.
I don't have much of an opinion to offer. I haven't been following events that closely. However, it stuck out like a big sore thumb. The way Assad was judged guilty with no definitive proof. Cameron rallied parliament to go to war before the evidence had even been looked at! Such a terrible war crime against children requires the full force of the allies. Yeah right! Great defenders of children!
However, no such action was even contemplated when Israel launched a relentless attack on the children of Palestine. Well, if i remember the news did say once that John Kerry was beginning to talk to Israel in a much firmer tone!
Just saying, for someone who was deliberately trying not to follow this, I could not fail to notice the hypocrisy.
If world leaders stoop so low that they pretend to care about the children in Syria to justify their military action, then the least they could do is pretend to care about the children in Palestine. :dunno:
This was Bodie's last post, 4 years ago. :'(