Obama admits end goal is Iran

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • onwebcam
    Fake Nick 1.0
    • Oct 2005
    • 27689

    #1

    Obama admits end goal is Iran

    "Earlier, Obama ramped up his parallel sales pitches for striking Syria, warning lawmakers that the standoff amounts to a dress rehearsal for a possible confrontation with Iran while assuring the U.S. public he won’t give them a rerun of Iraq or Afghanistan."

    http://news.yahoo.com/-obama-puts-tw...152634247.html

    Ofcourse it won't be a rerun Syria and Iran have conventional weapons...
    Last edited by onwebcam; 09-03-2013, 11:38 AM.
    PLEASE WAIT WHILE BIDEN ADMIN UNINSTALLS ITSELF.....
    ██████████████████▒ 99.5% complete.
  • mineistaken
    See signature :)
    • Apr 2007
    • 29656

    #2
    African war monger

    Comment

    • mikesinner
      Confirmed User
      • Nov 2005
      • 5646

      #3
      Nuclear weapons don't mean shit any more when you are going up against one of the major superpowers. All other countries are just pawns in the game.

      When Iran or Syria launches ballistic missiles only to see all of them disintegrated before they even cross the border into enemy territory they will see their folly.

      We've had lasers that can take down heavy ballistic missiles for years now. The navy has these on some of their ships. They are very effective and only need to hit an inflight missile for a second or two and they are obliterated.

      My Best Sponsors MPl l Camsl CUMSHOTSl LESBIANSl FETISHl BJ RACESl TEEN BJl BSDMl VODl USE YOUR PC TO CURE CANCER

      Comment

      • Rochard
        Jägermeister Test Pilot
        • Dec 2001
        • 75733

        #4
        Wait a second, back the bus up. What exactly did Obama say?

        The president did not mention Iran by name in his brief on-camera appearance Tuesday, but the implications were clear.

        ?This is a limited, proportional step that will send a clear message not only to the Assad regime, but also to other countries that may be interested in testing some of these international norms, that there are consequences,? he said.

        Those ?other countries? clearly include Syria?s patron Iran, which has been locked in a tense standoff with the United States and other world powers over its suspect nuclear program.


        So clearly he didn't say "the end goal is Iran". He didn't even mention Iran by name. It was more of a blanket warning to "other countries". The "other countries" could also mean North Korea.

        People need to stop making shit up already. Between the article wanting to include Iran in there to the poster here on GFY making up "end game" statements, at this point you can't believe anything on line.
        Herschel Savage
        Brooklyn, NY

        Comment

        • wehateporn
          Promoting Debate on GFY
          • Apr 2007
          • 27176

          #5
          End game is Russia, after Iran

          Comment

          • BFT3K
            Too lazy to set a custom title
            • Dec 2005
            • 10764

            #6

            Comment

            • baddog
              So Fucking Banned
              • Apr 2001
              • 107089

              #7
              Originally posted by Rochard
              Wait a second, back the bus up. What exactly did Obama say?



              So clearly he didn't say "the end goal is Iran". He didn't even mention Iran by name. It was more of a blanket warning to "other countries". The "other countries" could also mean North Korea.

              People need to stop making shit up already. Between the article wanting to include Iran in there to the poster here on GFY making up "end game" statements, at this point you can't believe anything on line.
              Consider the source (onwebcam)

              Comment

              • Rochard
                Jägermeister Test Pilot
                • Dec 2001
                • 75733

                #8
                Originally posted by BFT3K
                Shhhhhh.

                During the original gulf war I was working for a restaurant called The Wall Street Cafe". The owner played the market, did well, invested the money into a cafe, etc... So he got me to invest into a company that make skin grafts, sort of a like a "fake skin". We all invested in this company and the second day of the war we pulled out - making a killing.

                I can see how war is big business.
                Herschel Savage
                Brooklyn, NY

                Comment

                • DWB
                  Registered User
                  • Jul 2003
                  • 31779

                  #9
                  Retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clark...

                  "US will attack 7 countries in 5 years"
                  Then he names them. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan... and Iran.



                  But I'm guessing GFY has more intel than he does, so it's probably not even worth a watch.

                  - Former Commanding General of U.S. European Command, which included all American military activities in the 89 countries and territories of Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.
                  - Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), which granted him overall command of NATO military forces in Europe 1997 - 2001.
                  - Awarded Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart for his service in Viet Nam and numerous subsequent medals and citations.
                  - Graduated valedictorian of his class at West Point.
                  Last edited by DWB; 09-03-2013, 01:44 PM.

                  Comment

                  • dyna mo
                    just a fucking jerk
                    • Dec 2008
                    • 68184

                    #10
                    sounds official

                    In Clark's book, Winning Modern Wars, published in 2003, he describes his conversation with a military officer in the Pentagon shortly after 9/11 regarding a plan to attack seven Middle Eastern countries in five years: "As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan."
                    hallway chat with an anon senior military staffwritten about in a book for sale is certainly official policy.

                    Comment

                    • pornmasta
                      Too lazy to set a custom title
                      • Jun 2006
                      • 20016

                      #11
                      the real goal is russia

                      Comment

                      • seeandsee
                        Check SIG!
                        • Mar 2006
                        • 50945

                        #12
                        I bet this is their test polygon, will Russia give them this?!
                        BUY MY SIG - 50$/Year

                        Contact here

                        Comment

                        • Rochard
                          Jägermeister Test Pilot
                          • Dec 2001
                          • 75733

                          #13
                          Originally posted by DWB
                          Retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clark...



                          Then he names them. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan... and Iran.



                          But I'm guessing GFY has more intel than he does, so it's probably not even worth a watch.

                          - Former Commanding General of U.S. European Command, which included all American military activities in the 89 countries and territories of Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.
                          - Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), which granted him overall command of NATO military forces in Europe 1997 - 2001.
                          - Awarded Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart for his service in Viet Nam and numerous subsequent medals and citations.
                          - Graduated valedictorian of his class at West Point.
                          The things that General Wesley Clark knows would most likely scare the piss out of all of us.

                          With that said, add in North Korea and that's the standard list of bad people these days. If he's right, we better pick up the pace.
                          Herschel Savage
                          Brooklyn, NY

                          Comment

                          • Rochard
                            Jägermeister Test Pilot
                            • Dec 2001
                            • 75733

                            #14
                            Originally posted by dyna mo
                            sounds official



                            hallway chat with an anon senior military staffwritten about in a book for sale is certainly official policy.
                            So he said this about a conversation in 2001? So it wasn't true then?
                            Herschel Savage
                            Brooklyn, NY

                            Comment

                            • notinmybackyard
                              Confirmed User
                              • Sep 2012
                              • 3230

                              #15
                              If it brought peace to this world. (Hell if it saves the life of even just one innocent child)
                              I personally will suck off Obama to get him thrown out of office. In fact I will suck off each and ever single tin pot democratic nation's dictator that comes along.

                              And I can leave my false teeth in or take them out as whatever they prefer. There comes a point in time when you are old that all you really to see is people getting along.
                              officially retired as of March 01 2018 but still fucking around and getting into shit.

                              Comment

                              • pornmasta
                                Too lazy to set a custom title
                                • Jun 2006
                                • 20016

                                #16
                                Originally posted by notinmybackyard
                                In fact I will suck off each and ever single tin pot democratic nation's dictator that comes along.
                                .

                                Comment

                                • dyna mo
                                  just a fucking jerk
                                  • Dec 2008
                                  • 68184

                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by Rochard
                                  So he said this about a conversation in 2001? So it wasn't true then?
                                  it's called hearsay or anecdotal evidence. it's reads good in a book and sounds good on the book tour but it's no way at all evidence of policy or even a fact the "chat" happened.

                                  Comment

                                  • Mutt
                                    Too lazy to set a custom title
                                    • Sep 2002
                                    • 34431

                                    #18
                                    It's way over 5 years since they invaded Iraq so that part is wrong.
                                    I moved my sites to Vacares Hosting. I've saved money, my hair is thicker, lost some weight too! Thanks Sly!

                                    Comment

                                    • Rochard
                                      Jägermeister Test Pilot
                                      • Dec 2001
                                      • 75733

                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by dyna mo
                                      it's called hearsay or anecdotal evidence. it's reads good in a book and sounds good on the book tour but it's no way at all evidence of policy or even a fact the "chat" happened.
                                      My point was not that he accepted this potential conversation as fact, but was instead about how 12 years later someone repeats it on a message board when it's obviously not true because we haven't attacked all of those countries.
                                      Herschel Savage
                                      Brooklyn, NY

                                      Comment

                                      • Jman
                                        Already an AI veteran
                                        • Sep 2003
                                        • 22838

                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by DWB
                                        Retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clark...



                                        Then he names them. Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan... and Iran.



                                        But I'm guessing GFY has more intel than he does, so it's probably not even worth a watch.

                                        - Former Commanding General of U.S. European Command, which included all American military activities in the 89 countries and territories of Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.
                                        - Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR), which granted him overall command of NATO military forces in Europe 1997 - 2001.
                                        - Awarded Bronze Star, Silver Star, and Purple Heart for his service in Viet Nam and numerous subsequent medals and citations.
                                        - Graduated valedictorian of his class at West Point.
                                        PHEW!!! Good thing Canuckstikan ain't on that list
                                        Orkestrait NSFW AI
                                        FantasyXXX.AI
                                        Email: [email protected] TG: @jman1216

                                        Comment

                                        • DWB
                                          Registered User
                                          • Jul 2003
                                          • 31779

                                          #21
                                          Originally posted by dyna mo
                                          it's called hearsay or anecdotal evidence. it's reads good in a book and sounds good on the book tour but it's no way at all evidence of policy or even a fact the "chat" happened.
                                          Yea... General Clark, who was probably the most powerful military commander in the world while he was serving, is probably just trying to sell books and made shit up. Because there is nothing else in his boring life he could have written about.

                                          If this came from Alex Jones, I'd agree with you.

                                          And considering NO ONE expected Iraq and Afghanistan to last as long as they did, it is very plausible they extended their time line. There is only so much money and military might, they can only do so much at once. Syria is up next. I guess we'll have to wait and see about the others. However, Iraq and Libya are done. France mostly did Libya, but the US helped arm the rebels. They are already talking about sending some troops to Somalia. So that will be 4 of 7. Only 3 more to go after Syria and Somalia, it just took longer than 5 years, which would be expected given the state of the other two drawn out wars and financial melt down. Had Iraq and Afghanistan went quick and smooth the way they thought it was going to go, they would have already moved on.

                                          Comment

                                          • baddog
                                            So Fucking Banned
                                            • Apr 2001
                                            • 107089

                                            #22
                                            Someone thought Afghanistan would be quick? hmmm . . . . they had to be complete idiots to think that.

                                            Comment

                                            • DWB
                                              Registered User
                                              • Jul 2003
                                              • 31779

                                              #23
                                              Originally posted by Jman
                                              PHEW!!! Good thing Canuckstikan ain't on that list
                                              Canuckstikan is coming next mutha fucka! The mic cut him off before he said it, but you could see it in his beady little eyes.

                                              Comment

                                              • DWB
                                                Registered User
                                                • Jul 2003
                                                • 31779

                                                #24
                                                Originally posted by baddog
                                                Someone thought Afghanistan would be quick? hmmm . . . . they had to be complete idiots to think that.
                                                Yea... well....

                                                Comment

                                                • Jman
                                                  Already an AI veteran
                                                  • Sep 2003
                                                  • 22838

                                                  #25
                                                  Originally posted by DWB
                                                  Canuckstikan is coming next mutha fucka! The mic cut him off before he said it, but you could see it in his beady little eyes.
                                                  Yeah... I can picture it now
                                                  Orkestrait NSFW AI
                                                  FantasyXXX.AI
                                                  Email: [email protected] TG: @jman1216

                                                  Comment

                                                  • winter_
                                                    So Fucking Banned
                                                    • Apr 2013
                                                    • 750

                                                    #26
                                                    Originally posted by pornmasta
                                                    the real goal is russia
                                                    and china. actually china could be, rather foolishly now, the target for the united states military to bring regime change in the end, as the grand finale.

                                                    what a big mistake for ahmadinejad to win another term in office not so long ago but it was a while, not sure when the next election there perhaps if he can be voted out or be the lucky one to be reasoned with democratically but before then prolong any heat of war before it bursts in to flame.

                                                    obama isn't a liberal or a democrat anymore going around doing and supporting this.

                                                    Comment

                                                    • noshit
                                                      Confirmed User
                                                      • Dec 2001
                                                      • 1582

                                                      #27
                                                      Originally posted by wehateporn
                                                      End game is Russia, after Iran
                                                      Yep. Maybe even before Iran.

                                                      How much you wanna bet they are moving warheads to the east coast right now, as us 'serfs' try to figure out what's going on.

                                                      This Syria thing needs to be stopped. SSSeriously Stopped...

                                                      Comment

                                                      • winter_
                                                        So Fucking Banned
                                                        • Apr 2013
                                                        • 750

                                                        #28
                                                        Originally posted by noshit
                                                        Yep. Maybe even before Iran.

                                                        How much you wanna bet they are moving warheads to the east coast right now, as us 'serfs' try to figure out what's going on.

                                                        This Syria thing needs to be stopped. SSSeriously Stopped...
                                                        you went for the alarmist tone, please don't.

                                                        but you are right, yes i can bet everyone's bases are on alert. but all is good here in my part of the world, perhaps considering coming down and knocking on my door, i have plenty of room for you.

                                                        Comment

                                                        • sarettah
                                                          see you later, I'm gone
                                                          • Oct 2002
                                                          • 14297

                                                          #29
                                                          Originally posted by pornmasta
                                                          All cookies cleared!

                                                          Comment

                                                          • Tom_PM
                                                            Porn Meister
                                                            • Feb 2005
                                                            • 16443

                                                            #30
                                                            I'm just curious what people would say if they saw with their own eyes the Syrian president load and fire chemical weapons against protestors? Are they still cool with that/ vote to not do anything about it?

                                                            My feeling is that 99% of the reason people say they don't want to do anything is because they think it's one conspiracy theory or another and it makes me sick.

                                                            Put another way, what WOULD it take? Forget someone else telling you anything, what would your eyes need to witness before you would use a remote weapon to bomb a site that fired the weapons you SAW kill babies with chemicals? Forget whatever the real situation is, would you want to take out a missile site that fired a weapon that you SAW kill babies with chemical agents or not?

                                                            I don't get people on this issue but really want to. Again, forget the reality and just pretend the president of Syria walked up to a baby carriage and sprayed poison into it. Would you say "no" to intervention? Do people really say "no" to intervening? Or "no" because they don't believe anyone anymore?

                                                            Again, 99% positive it's all conspiracy/false flag/ whack a mole conspiracy theory of the day reasoning behind polls like that, but would love to hear someone explain how it's fine with them if people use chemical weapons as long as it's not in their baby's face.
                                                            43-922-863 Shut up and play your guitar.

                                                            Comment

                                                            • winter_
                                                              So Fucking Banned
                                                              • Apr 2013
                                                              • 750

                                                              #31
                                                              Originally posted by Tom_PM
                                                              I'm just curious what people would say if they saw with their own eyes the Syrian president load and fire chemical weapons against protestors? Are they still cool with that/ vote to not do anything about it?

                                                              My feeling is that 99% of the reason people say they don't want to do anything is because they think it's one conspiracy theory or another and it makes me sick.

                                                              Put another way, what WOULD it take? Forget someone else telling you anything, what would your eyes need to witness before you would use a remote weapon to bomb a site that fired the weapons you SAW kill babies with chemicals? Forget whatever the real situation is, would you want to take out a missile site that fired a weapon that you SAW kill babies with chemical agents or not?

                                                              I don't get people on this issue but really want to. Again, forget the reality and just pretend the president of Syria walked up to a baby carriage and sprayed poison into it. Would you say "no" to intervention? Do people really say "no" to intervening? Or "no" because they don't believe anyone anymore?

                                                              Again, 99% positive it's all conspiracy/false flag/ whack a mole conspiracy theory of the day reasoning behind polls like that, but would love to hear someone explain how it's fine with them if people use chemical weapons as long as it's not in their baby's face.
                                                              toushae.

                                                              but when the united states does it it is okay.

                                                              Comment

                                                              • baddog
                                                                So Fucking Banned
                                                                • Apr 2001
                                                                • 107089

                                                                #32
                                                                I don't care who did it, none of our business. If you think it is that important, urge your government to go do something about it. Why should we?

                                                                Comment

                                                                • Rochard
                                                                  Jägermeister Test Pilot
                                                                  • Dec 2001
                                                                  • 75733

                                                                  #33
                                                                  Originally posted by Tom_PM
                                                                  I'm just curious what people would say if they saw with their own eyes the Syrian president load and fire chemical weapons against protestors? Are they still cool with that/ vote to not do anything about it?

                                                                  My feeling is that 99% of the reason people say they don't want to do anything is because they think it's one conspiracy theory or another and it makes me sick.

                                                                  Put another way, what WOULD it take? Forget someone else telling you anything, what would your eyes need to witness before you would use a remote weapon to bomb a site that fired the weapons you SAW kill babies with chemicals? Forget whatever the real situation is, would you want to take out a missile site that fired a weapon that you SAW kill babies with chemical agents or not?

                                                                  I don't get people on this issue but really want to. Again, forget the reality and just pretend the president of Syria walked up to a baby carriage and sprayed poison into it. Would you say "no" to intervention? Do people really say "no" to intervening? Or "no" because they don't believe anyone anymore?

                                                                  Again, 99% positive it's all conspiracy/false flag/ whack a mole conspiracy theory of the day reasoning behind polls like that, but would love to hear someone explain how it's fine with them if people use chemical weapons as long as it's not in their baby's face.
                                                                  Well, after eight years of Bush and lies about weapons, you can understand why.

                                                                  Even if I saw it happen with my own eyes, I still question if we should get involved. The US gets involved and we look like the bad guys. Fuck this. Let the UN decide, we'll pay the money, and someone else do the dirty work. France seems to be eager.
                                                                  Herschel Savage
                                                                  Brooklyn, NY

                                                                  Comment

                                                                  • dyna mo
                                                                    just a fucking jerk
                                                                    • Dec 2008
                                                                    • 68184

                                                                    #34
                                                                    Originally posted by DWB
                                                                    Yea... General Clark, who was probably the most powerful military commander in the world while he was serving, is probably just trying to sell books and made shit up. Because there is nothing else in his boring life he could have written about.

                                                                    If this came from Alex Jones, I'd agree with you.

                                                                    And considering NO ONE expected Iraq and Afghanistan to last as long as they did, it is very plausible they extended their time line. There is only so much money and military might, they can only do so much at once. Syria is up next. I guess we'll have to wait and see about the others. However, Iraq and Libya are done. France mostly did Libya, but the US helped arm the rebels. They are already talking about sending some troops to Somalia. So that will be 4 of 7. Only 3 more to go after Syria and Somalia, it just took longer than 5 years, which would be expected given the state of the other two drawn out wars and financial melt down. Had Iraq and Afghanistan went quick and smooth the way they thought it was going to go, they would have already moved on.
                                                                    why anyone would trust him just because he said it is beyond me. he's more trustworthy than other military? because he didn't keep the *secret*? instead revealing this chat in a book he was pitching.

                                                                    wesley clark was a political candidate and a book writer as well as being top military and i'm just supposed to go along with an anecdotal story about a hallway chitty chat outlining formal war policy that is embraced by 2 presidents from different parties and is still front & center plan 12 years later.

                                                                    no, i'm not going to just buy that line.

                                                                    moreover-

                                                                    no one is talking about sending troops to somalia or even bombing it

                                                                    no one is talking about attacking/bombing/sending troops to lebanon

                                                                    no one is talking about attacking/bombing/sending troops to the sudan
                                                                    Last edited by dyna mo; 09-03-2013, 09:26 PM.

                                                                    Comment

                                                                    • Rochard
                                                                      Jägermeister Test Pilot
                                                                      • Dec 2001
                                                                      • 75733

                                                                      #35
                                                                      Originally posted by DWB
                                                                      Yea... General Clark, who was probably the most powerful military commander in the world while he was serving, is probably just trying to sell books and made shit up. Because there is nothing else in his boring life he could have written about.
                                                                      Maybe. Or maybe he was just commenting on something someone told him at the Pentagon. Just because he heard it at the Pentagon, doesn't mean it's true. There are a lot of people who work at the Pentagon; I am guessing some of the totally crazy.

                                                                      Originally posted by DWB

                                                                      And considering NO ONE expected Iraq and Afghanistan to last as long as they did, it is very plausible they extended their time line. There is only so much money and military might, they can only do so much at once. Syria is up next. I guess we'll have to wait and see about the others. However, Iraq and Libya are done. France mostly did Libya, but the US helped arm the rebels. They are already talking about sending some troops to Somalia. So that will be 4 of 7. Only 3 more to go after Syria and Somalia, it just took longer than 5 years, which would be expected given the state of the other two drawn out wars and financial melt down. Had Iraq and Afghanistan went quick and smooth the way they thought it was going to go, they would have already moved on.
                                                                      So you are saying that because the US was "tied down" in Afghanistan and Iraq we were... Unable to do anything else? What was the entire Pacific Fleet doing during this time? And what forces did we have in Europe? Korea?
                                                                      Herschel Savage
                                                                      Brooklyn, NY

                                                                      Comment

                                                                      • Rochard
                                                                        Jägermeister Test Pilot
                                                                        • Dec 2001
                                                                        • 75733

                                                                        #36
                                                                        Originally posted by dyna mo

                                                                        no one is talking about sending troops to somalia or even bombing it

                                                                        no one is talking about attacking/bombing/sending troops to lebanon

                                                                        no one is talking about attacking/bombing/sending troops to the sudan
                                                                        I don't even understand how these three countries came up in discussion at all. Why would the US want to attack or invade any of these three? I can see Lebanon, but that's a far stretch of the imagination isn't it?
                                                                        Herschel Savage
                                                                        Brooklyn, NY

                                                                        Comment

                                                                        • winter_
                                                                          So Fucking Banned
                                                                          • Apr 2013
                                                                          • 750

                                                                          #37
                                                                          Originally posted by Rochard
                                                                          Well, after eight years of Bush and lies about weapons, you can understand why.

                                                                          Even if I saw it happen with my own eyes, I still question if we should get involved. The US gets involved and we look like the bad guys. Fuck this. Let the UN decide, we'll pay the money, and someone else do the dirty work. France seems to be eager.
                                                                          hell no. africans will be fighting many africans fight or keep the peace in the united nations force the black separatists won't be having it because they will be ultimately helping the united states even with a black president, but he is actually genetically a cross.

                                                                          Comment

                                                                          • mikesinner
                                                                            Confirmed User
                                                                            • Nov 2005
                                                                            • 5646

                                                                            #38
                                                                            Originally posted by notinmybackyard
                                                                            If it brought peace to this world. (Hell if it saves the life of even just one innocent child)
                                                                            I personally will suck off Obama to get him thrown out of office. In fact I will suck off each and ever single tin pot democratic nation's dictator that comes along.

                                                                            And I can leave my false teeth in or take them out as whatever they prefer. There comes a point in time when you are old that all you really to see is people getting along.
                                                                            The republican party as a whole i done for the next twenty years and good riddance to them.

                                                                            Syria could be a turning point if there is major intervention though. Still I see it as something that will be worse for republicans.

                                                                            My Best Sponsors MPl l Camsl CUMSHOTSl LESBIANSl FETISHl BJ RACESl TEEN BJl BSDMl VODl USE YOUR PC TO CURE CANCER

                                                                            Comment

                                                                            • PornoMonster
                                                                              Confirmed User
                                                                              • Mar 2003
                                                                              • 2257

                                                                              #39
                                                                              Originally posted by mikesinner
                                                                              The republican party as a whole i done for the next twenty years and good riddance to them.

                                                                              Syria could be a turning point if there is major intervention though. Still I see it as something that will be worse for republicans.
                                                                              Yeah Obama will Bomb Syria, because "there is Chemical Weapons"
                                                                              and BUSH will get Blamed...............
                                                                              $6 a Month 4 Blade Razors, 4 Cartridges, Includes shipping!

                                                                              Domains 4 Sale CashForVideos.com - Pussy.biz - FootPorn.com - SoloMovie.com - CollegeGirlCams.com - AmateurCamGirls.com - PR3 4 Letter Domain

                                                                              Comment

                                                                              • MovieMaster
                                                                                Confirmed User
                                                                                • Apr 2003
                                                                                • 897

                                                                                #40
                                                                                Wheres Cindy Sheehan and all the other libs? When they protest Obama like they did Bush I'll believe they are sincere in their beliefs. Still havent seen them during Egypt, Tunisha, Libya, and Now syria...

                                                                                Politicians will all most likely agree in private that they support it but they have to play their role and keep those in tight districts in office at the same time.... its all a game to fool the sheeple.
                                                                                100% Exclusive Program Babe-Bucks.com = HotModelClub.com | NextDoor-Models.com
                                                                                Payments by: CCBILL
                                                                                ICQ Three 02 Five 638 Five 6

                                                                                ReliableServers.com - NEED BANDWIDTH?

                                                                                Comment

                                                                                • DWB
                                                                                  Registered User
                                                                                  • Jul 2003
                                                                                  • 31779

                                                                                  #41
                                                                                  Originally posted by dyna mo
                                                                                  why anyone would trust him just because he said it is beyond me.
                                                                                  1) Because what he said is playing out. Just slower than expected.

                                                                                  2) Clark isn't a schmuck. It doesn't make sense for a retired four star general who had so much respect and trust to just make shit up for the sake of making it up and risk tarnishing his reputation. Men like him want to leave an legacy, and the quickest way for him to ruin his would be to start telling lies just so he could sell a few books.

                                                                                  Originally posted by dyna mo

                                                                                  no one is talking about sending troops to somalia or even bombing it
                                                                                  You don't have to bomb a place to attack it. And it often starts with the USA training their forces to fight "terrorists" and/or arming them.

                                                                                  US special forces are already there training them to fight against Al-Shabab, and Obama is going to send them weapons.

                                                                                  http://rt.com/usa/us-deploying-troops-order-749/
                                                                                  (US deploying troops to 35 African countries )

                                                                                  Additionally, the AP says that US troops will head specifically to Libya, Sudan, Algeria and Niger in order to prepare for any advances from al-Qaeda linked groups. Americans will also train and equip forces in Kenya and Somalia, reportedly, in order to stand up to al-Shabab militants.
                                                                                  http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/0...ns-to-somalia/

                                                                                  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1516943.html

                                                                                  Originally posted by dyna mo
                                                                                  no one is talking about attacking/bombing/sending troops to lebanon
                                                                                  http://rt.com/usa/us-military-lebanon-iraq-335/

                                                                                  http://www.armytimes.com/article/201...s-Lebanon-Iraq



                                                                                  Originally posted by dyna mo
                                                                                  no one is talking about attacking/bombing/sending troops to the sudan
                                                                                  http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-...troop-mission/

                                                                                  http://news.antiwar.com/2012/01/10/o...o-south-sudan/

                                                                                  And you forgot the first boogieman they created, Kony. Excellent creation to get our foot further in the door with full support.

                                                                                  http://cnsnews.com/news/article/send...lp-south-sudan


                                                                                  This is how it starts, with baby steps and making deals with the governments and war lords. Getting the pieces of the chess board into place.

                                                                                  Pay attention man, there are a lot of small but significant and strategic moves happening globally. Resources are being secured and the US is in a race with China and Russia to secure as much as Africa as possible. As soon as the middle east is on lock down, the boogieman fight will focus and shift to Africa. Count on it.

                                                                                  Comment

                                                                                  • just a punk
                                                                                    So fuckin' bored
                                                                                    • Jun 2003
                                                                                    • 32393

                                                                                    #42
                                                                                    Originally posted by mikesinner
                                                                                    When Iran or Syria launches ballistic missiles only to see all of them disintegrated before they even cross the border into enemy territory they will see their folly.
                                                                                    This is a fairytale. No one (the USA or any other country) is able to intercept the modern ballistic missiles. Because they (the missiles) are flying too high and too fast
                                                                                    Obey the Cowgod

                                                                                    Comment

                                                                                    • DWB
                                                                                      Registered User
                                                                                      • Jul 2003
                                                                                      • 31779

                                                                                      #43
                                                                                      Originally posted by Rochard
                                                                                      I don't even understand how these three countries came up in discussion at all. Why would the US want to attack or invade any of these three? I can see Lebanon, but that's a far stretch of the imagination isn't it?
                                                                                      The thing about being an empire is, you have to keep expanding. And you can't continue an expanding empire without resources.

                                                                                      Right now China and Russia are securing a lot of Africa while the USA plays with it's dick and gets sucked into war after war in the Middle East. Eventually the US Empire is going to want everything it can get in Africa, and needs to start securing it now or risk being shut out.

                                                                                      Comment

                                                                                      • DWB
                                                                                        Registered User
                                                                                        • Jul 2003
                                                                                        • 31779

                                                                                        #44
                                                                                        Originally posted by Rochard
                                                                                        I don't even understand how these three countries came up in discussion at all. Why would the US want to attack or invade any of these three? I can see Lebanon, but that's a far stretch of the imagination isn't it?
                                                                                        Sudan:
                                                                                        Natural resources: petroleum; small reserves of iron ore, copper, chromium ore, zinc, tungsten, mica, silver, gold; hydropower

                                                                                        Definition: This entry lists a country's mineral, petroleum, hydropower, and other resources of commercial importance.
                                                                                        Somalia:
                                                                                        Natural resources: uranium and largely unexploited reserves of iron ore, tin, gypsum, bauxite, copper, salt, natural gas, likely oil reserves

                                                                                        Definition: This entry lists a country's mineral, petroleum, hydropower, and other resources of commercial importance.
                                                                                        Lebanon:
                                                                                        Natural resources: limestone, iron ore, salt, water-surplus state in a water-deficit region, arable land

                                                                                        Definition: This entry lists a country's mineral, petroleum, hydropower, and other resources of commercial importance.
                                                                                        And so on.

                                                                                        Comment

                                                                                        • winter_
                                                                                          So Fucking Banned
                                                                                          • Apr 2013
                                                                                          • 750

                                                                                          #45
                                                                                          i still think the end game is china maybe a fall of communism repeat from 1991 in 2021. china is still marxist-leninist, and it is very difficult to get news out of that country.

                                                                                          Comment

                                                                                          • mineistaken
                                                                                            See signature :)
                                                                                            • Apr 2007
                                                                                            • 29656

                                                                                            #46
                                                                                            Originally posted by Tom_PM
                                                                                            I'm just curious what people would say if they saw with their own eyes the Syrian president load and fire chemical weapons against protestors? Are they still cool with that/ vote to not do anything about it?

                                                                                            My feeling is that 99% of the reason people say they don't want to do anything is because they think it's one conspiracy theory or another and it makes me sick.

                                                                                            Put another way, what WOULD it take? Forget someone else telling you anything, what would your eyes need to witness before you would use a remote weapon to bomb a site that fired the weapons you SAW kill babies with chemicals? Forget whatever the real situation is, would you want to take out a missile site that fired a weapon that you SAW kill babies with chemical agents or not?

                                                                                            I don't get people on this issue but really want to. Again, forget the reality and just pretend the president of Syria walked up to a baby carriage and sprayed poison into it. Would you say "no" to intervention? Do people really say "no" to intervening? Or "no" because they don't believe anyone anymore?

                                                                                            Again, 99% positive it's all conspiracy/false flag/ whack a mole conspiracy theory of the day reasoning behind polls like that, but would love to hear someone explain how it's fine with them if people use chemical weapons as long as it's not in their baby's face.
                                                                                            Its THEIR civil war, other countries has nothing to do with it.

                                                                                            Comment

                                                                                            • mikesinner
                                                                                              Confirmed User
                                                                                              • Nov 2005
                                                                                              • 5646

                                                                                              #47
                                                                                              Originally posted by PornoMonster
                                                                                              Yeah Obama will Bomb Syria, because "there is Chemical Weapons"
                                                                                              and BUSH will get Blamed...............
                                                                                              The Senate and Congress will take most of the blame but it will hurt Obama too. I just think it will be worse for the republicans but I suspect it won't make much difference for either party unless things go really bad in Syria.

                                                                                              As things stand now the republicans will lose the most in 2012 as they are doing absolutely nothing to help the economy move forward as Obama has been blocked at every turn.

                                                                                              My Best Sponsors MPl l Camsl CUMSHOTSl LESBIANSl FETISHl BJ RACESl TEEN BJl BSDMl VODl USE YOUR PC TO CURE CANCER

                                                                                              Comment

                                                                                              • DWB
                                                                                                Registered User
                                                                                                • Jul 2003
                                                                                                • 31779

                                                                                                #48
                                                                                                Originally posted by mineistaken
                                                                                                Its THEIR civil war, other countries has nothing to do with it.
                                                                                                Flip the script. The US breaks out in a civil war 10 years from now. Militias and civilians (labeled as "insurgents" or "rebels" to lessen the blow of killing them) go against the National Guard / Military and police. The "rebels" start to lose. China or Russia runs to the rebel's aid and arms them so they can better fight the US government.

                                                                                                Such a thing is unthinkable and would be seen as an act of war by the US gov. Yet, time and time again the west meddles into affairs it doesn't belong in.

                                                                                                That said, if the Syrian gov really did gas their own people, they need to have those chemical weapons taken from them or lose their ability to use them again. Even in war, among the civilized their are rules. But they have to be 100% sure who did it, and it needs to be a fast, well targeted military strike, and then it's over. Let the war continue and allow Syria's future to be decided by Syrians.

                                                                                                Comment

                                                                                                • dyna mo
                                                                                                  just a fucking jerk
                                                                                                  • Dec 2008
                                                                                                  • 68184

                                                                                                  #49
                                                                                                  Originally posted by DWB
                                                                                                  But I'm guessing GFY has more intel than he does, so it's probably not even worth a watch.
                                                                                                  for someone who chides everyone else for thinking they know wtf is up, you sure seem to think you know wtf is up.

                                                                                                  Comment

                                                                                                  • nico-t
                                                                                                    emperor of my world
                                                                                                    • Aug 2004
                                                                                                    • 29903

                                                                                                    #50
                                                                                                    3rd world country only making money with weapons = United States of Africa

                                                                                                    Comment

                                                                                                    Working...