Gen. Wesley Clark reveals Bush has 5 yr plan to attack 7 Muslim countries

[DarkJedi]

Excerpts from his upcoming book.

Page 130: A revelation:

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. ? He said it with reproach ? with disbelief, almost ? at the breadth of the vision. I moved the conversation away, for this was not something I wanted to hear. And it was not something I wanted to see moving forward, either.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/974509.asp?0cv=OB10

[donnie]

Originally posted by DarkJedi
Excerpts from his upcoming book.

Page 130: A revelation:

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. ? He said it with reproach ? with disbelief, almost ? at the breadth of the vision. I moved the conversation away, for this was not something I wanted to hear. And it was not something I wanted to see moving forward, either.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/974509.asp?0cv=OB10

They can't even win in Iraq!! The land that has been weakend by 10 years of UN sanctions is kicking their ass!! And they wan't to attack Iran? 10 years ago they got tehir ass kicked in Somalia. Do they wan't to try agian?

[JamesK]

fuckers.

[nap]

this fuck cannot win the upcoming election

[lEricPl]

Originally posted by nap
this fuck cannot win the upcoming election

Who? and Why?

[Mike AI]

Looks like a solid plan on Bush part to me!

I would vote for him just for that. If he came out and said we are going to clean up the middle east.... I would be all for it!!

I am sure many people here on GFY love the governents in Iran, Syria, Somilia, etc... You guys love the idea of dictators, opression, terrorism, mass murder of civilians, etc...

[LadyMischief]

That shit is scary. I knew Bush was a fucking mentalcase, but WEEKS after 9/11 he was busy using it as an excuse for "preventative wars" with these other countries? WTF WHAT ABOUT THE REAL FUCKING TERRORISTS!? Holy shit..

[H. Rap Brown]

Originally posted by Mike AI
Looks like a solid plan on Bush part to me!

I would vote for him just for that. If he came out and said we are going to clean up the middle east.... I would be all for it!!

I am sure many people here on GFY love the governents in Iran, Syria, Somilia, etc... You guys love the idea of dictators, opression, terrorism, mass murder of civilians, etc...

I think you left out a country...the one that bombed a U.S. Naval Ship

[Mike AI]

Cleaning up the hornets nest....

Exanding freedom, democracy, open markets, destroying terrorism.... I could go on and on. Funny how so many people are pulling for countries that are dictatorships, that surpress and abuse women, who advocate mass murder, ehtnic cleansing, etc.. etc...


Time to shine the light on the dark corners of the world....

And for those who want to say I love Bush - I think Bush has done a SUCKY job domesticly... but foreign policy wise, I think he has been wonderful.

[BlackCrayon]

Originally posted by Mike AI
Looks like a solid plan on Bush part to me!

I would vote for him just for that. If he came out and said we are going to clean up the middle east.... I would be all for it!!

I am sure many people here on GFY love the governents in Iran, Syria, Somilia, etc... You guys love the idea of dictators, opression, terrorism, mass murder of civilians, etc...

there are dictatorships all over the world, not just in the middle east. is bush gonna take care of those too? doubtful since its not profitable. the US is not the world police! like or hate what these countries do the states have no more right to tell them how to run things than they have the right to tell the US how to run things.does bush actually think he can fuck with all those countries and not expect a serious backlash? its like asking for another 911.

[wonton]

Originally posted by DarkJedi
Excerpts from his upcoming book.

Page 130: A revelation:

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. ? He said it with reproach ? with disbelief, almost ? at the breadth of the vision. I moved the conversation away, for this was not something I wanted to hear. And it was not something I wanted to see moving forward, either.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/974509.asp?0cv=OB10

What Wonton has been saying for quite some time. That wars are planned by the Pentagon (not necessarily Bush) YEARS in advance. When they are ready to start a war, the CIA, through its media shills, starts months of propaganda through Fox, CNN and ABC to whip the American people into a war frenzy. Cable news endlessly throws eggs at some "Evil Dictator" who was previously a US ally or even installed into leadership by the CIA. Then the war is implemented, civilians killed, natural resources plundered and the "Evil Dictator" toppled and replaced with some puppet government.

The grand design continues....

[Mike AI]

Originally posted by BlackCrayon

there are dictatorships all over the world, not just in the middle east. is bush gonna take care of those too? doubtful since its not profitable. the US is not the world police! like or hate what these countries do the states have no more right to tell them how to run things than they have the right to tell the US how to run things.does bush actually think he can fuck with all those countries and not expect a serious backlash? its like asking for another 911.

No kidding, but the middle east has been the hotspot in the world for the past 25 years.

Just as the US Military stabilzied Europe after decades of wars and strife.... so we should do the same to the middle east.

If there were no oil, and if they were not exporting their terrorism it would not be a necessity.... but that is not the case.

Do no the people of Syria, Ira, Saudi Arabia, et al not deserve freedom? Liberal democracy? Able to live their lives like YOU live your lives?

[wonton]

Originally posted by Mike AI
Cleaning up the hornets nest....

Exanding freedom, democracy, open markets, destroying terrorism.... I could go on and on. Funny how so many people are pulling for countries that are dictatorships, that surpress and abuse women, who advocate mass murder, ehtnic cleansing, etc.. etc...

You mean Pakistan and Saudi Arabia? Two of our biggest muslim "Allies"?

The US does not give a shit about stopping Dictators, ethinic cleansing, abuse of women or mass murder. The history of US foreign policy indicates the EXACT OPPOSITE.

The only reason we are now moving against all these other targets in the middle east is to secure oil reserves, oil pipelines and oil shipping routes. See my other recent posts about the truth of Peak Oil and the unprecedented problems it is creating.

[wonton]

Originally posted by wonton


You mean Pakistan and Saudi Arabia? Two of our biggest muslim "Allies"?

The US does not give a shit about stopping Dictators, ethinic cleansing, abuse of women or mass murder. The history of US foreign policy indicates the EXACT OPPOSITE.

The only reason we are now moving against all these other targets in the middle east is to secure oil reserves, oil pipelines and oil shipping routes. See my other recent posts about the truth of Peak Oil and the unprecedented problems it is creating.

Also see my other posts about US government foreknowledge on 911. The so-called 911 terrorists were funded, trained and shepareded by branches of US intelligence. The sole purpose of taking down the twin towers was a Pentagon-driven goal of an aggressive foreign policy against the middle east. We are running both sides of this equation.

Can anyone say Weapons of Mass Distraction?

[stocktrader23]

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[cluck]

One guy with a plastic knife willing to die to complete an attack is more powerful than a whole army trying to preserve their own live and the lives of the innocent Going to war with other countries will just piss off more muslims and create more terrorists.

As far as dictators, there's plenty of innocent people living essentially as slave laborers in third world countries because of US and international policy on unrestricted foreign labor. I don't see many people caring about them, could it be because they're not posing a threat to homeland security?

Lots of Americans say they want to "liberate" these countries, but when it comes to countries that don't pose a threat noone gives a rats ass.

[Biggy2]

normal politics --

Wesley Clark is running for president, of course he is going to bash Bush. You are all just pawns in their game if you listen to all this bullshit.

[goBigtime]

Who was it that won the US Revolution again?

[LadyMischief]

Originally posted by Mike AI


No kidding, but the middle east has been the hotspot in the world for the past 25 years.

Just as the US Military stabilzied Europe after decades of wars and strife.... so we should do the same to the middle east.

If there were no oil, and if they were not exporting their terrorism it would not be a necessity.... but that is not the case.

Do no the people of Syria, Ira, Saudi Arabia, et al not deserve freedom? Liberal democracy? Able to live their lives like YOU live your lives?

The middle east has been a hotspot for THOUSANDS of years. Nothing has changed that so far, and Bush will attempt at his peril, and the peril of the American people. Overlooking Osama and the threat of Al Quada in favor of being a "savior of the middle east" is going to blow up in his face. Those people DO NOT WANT HIM THERE. Their way of life is ingrained, part of their culture and religion, and even though we may not agree with it, using force to change it really isn't much better, is it?

[LadyMischief]

Originally posted by cluck
One guy with a plastic knife willing to die to complete an attack is more powerful than a whole army trying to preserve their own live and the lives of the innocent Going to war with other countries will just piss off more muslims and create more terrorists.

As far as dictators, there's plenty of innocent people living essentially as slave laborers in third world countries because of US and international policy on unrestricted foreign labor. I don't see many people caring about them, could it be because they're not posing a threat to homeland security?

Lots of Americans say they want to "liberate" these countries, but when it comes to countries that don't pose a threat noone gives a rats ass.

Well it's true what they say. One man defending his homeland is worth 100 hired soldiers. Making a "sweep" of the middle east is only going to justify the actions of Osama and others in the hearts and minds of the arab people. The "Western Infidels" will be PROVING OSAMA RIGHT, in essence, and there will NEVER be peace there. They will fight covertly if they have to, but they won't stop fighting. The Palestinians should be proof of that...

Get real.

[galleryseek]

so what if the US is doing it for only oil. they're cleaning up shitty governments / dictators in the process, we might as well get the award of oil reserves. its kinda like a pay off for doing the dirty work no one else wants.

gb4life

[Lane]

Originally posted by cluck
One guy with a plastic knife willing to die to complete an attack is more powerful than a whole army trying to preserve their own live and the lives of the innocent Going to war with other countries will just piss off more muslims and create more terrorists.

As far as dictators, there's plenty of innocent people living essentially as slave laborers in third world countries because of US and international policy on unrestricted foreign labor. I don't see many people caring about them, could it be because they're not posing a threat to homeland security?

Lots of Americans say they want to "liberate" these countries, but when it comes to countries that don't pose a threat noone gives a rats ass.

dont you see the pattern?
in the past decades, people elected leaders have been replaced. these countries have been pushed into wars, and weapons have been sold to both sides. the people have been weakened to the point of being worse than 3rd world country slaves. now they will only be thankful when their dictators are removed back in the name of 'liberation' and they are given work to do in the modern form of slavery.
USA can't use China forever, they only get stronger, and war isnt an option against a country of 2 billion people. they need the middle east now.
Imagine what would happen if China stopped all exports to USA tomorrow. The shit would go down here.

[Adorno]

Originally posted by galleryseek
so what if the US is doing it for only oil. they're cleaning up shitty governments / dictators in the process, we might as well get the award of oil reserves. its kinda like a pay off for doing the dirty work no one else wants.

gb4life

Were you not the guy who could not decide whether or not to follow a 16 year old girl?

Yeah, we want your foreign policy opinion.

[galleryseek]

Originally posted by Adorno


Were you not the guy who could not decide whether or not to follow a 16 year old girl?

Yeah, we want your foreign policy opinion.

hehe, you mad cause you can't counter it? upsetting, isn't it.

gb4life

[Adorno]

Originally posted by Mike AI


No kidding, but the middle east has been the hotspot in the world for the past 25 years.

Just as the US Military stabilzied Europe after decades of wars and strife.... so we should do the same to the middle east.

If there were no oil, and if they were not exporting their terrorism it would not be a necessity.... but that is not the case.

Do no the people of Syria, Ira, Saudi Arabia, et al not deserve freedom? Liberal democracy? Able to live their lives like YOU live your lives?

+



=

you

[H. Rap Brown]

Originally posted by galleryseek
so what if the US is doing it for only oil. they're cleaning up shitty governments / dictators in the process, we might as well get the award of oil reserves. its kinda like a pay off for doing the dirty work no one else wants.

gb4life

Oh wise one has these governments eva bombed a u.s. target..ala a Naval Ship..I may be wrong but out of all the countries in the m.e. only one country has ever attack the u.s.

If i'm wrong please correct me

[galleryseek]

c'mon Adorno, we're all sheep, educate us!! the US is bad, its greedy, and it hates all other nations.. tell us why, give us some good dirty facts with detail. i wanna hear it from adorno.

or is he just another sheep himself except w/ the herd against the us.

[Adorno]

Originally posted by H. Rap Brown


Oh wise one has these governments eva bombed a u.s. target..ala a Naval Ship..I may be wrong but out of all the countries in the m.e. only one country has ever attack the u.s.

If i'm wrong please correct me

You do realize you are attempting to debate a teenage kid in Ohio right?

[cluck]

Originally posted by Lane


dont you see the pattern?
in the past decades, people elected leaders have been replaced. these countries have been pushed into wars, and weapons have been sold to both sides. the people have been weakened to the point of being worse than 3rd world country slaves. now they will only be thankful when their dictators are removed back in the name of 'liberation' and they are given work to do in the modern form of slavery.
USA can't use China forever, they only get stronger, and war isnt an option against a country of 2 billion people. they need the middle east now.
Imagine what would happen if China stopped all exports to USA tomorrow. The shit would go down here.

Not to mention the increased unity of third world sweatshop countries against the richer nations at the WTO meetings in Cancun. Our economy depends on these third world country and we're screwed without them so we had better find more quick. Well, that or create more domestic jobs but that's just plain silly! That would mean a good quality of life for people who aren't "rich"!

[H. Rap Brown]

Originally posted by Adorno


You do realize you are attempting to debate a teenage kid in Ohio right?

oh shit

[galleryseek]

Originally posted by H. Rap Brown


Oh wise one has these governments eva bombed a u.s. target..ala a Naval Ship..I may be wrong but out of all the countries in the m.e. only one country has ever attack the u.s.

If i'm wrong please correct me

i never said any of them ever did anything to the us, but hell i think if the governments are making life miserable for their people then someone should have the balls and step up... and even if the US only did it for oil, they accomplished something good outta it and helped civilian life.

[galleryseek]

Originally posted by Adorno


You do realize you are attempting to debate a teenage kid in Ohio right?

20 yrs old bud ;) and hey, i called you out.. you're still hiding. answer the question boy.

[cluck]

Originally posted by galleryseek
so what if the US is doing it for only oil. they're cleaning up shitty governments / dictators in the process, we might as well get the award of oil reserves. its kinda like a pay off for doing the dirty work no one else wants.

gb4life

At least someone who's pro-war is admitting that it's about personal gain/safety and not "liberation".

[Adorno]

Originally posted by galleryseek


20 yrs old bud ;) and hey, i called you out.. you're still hiding. answer the question boy.

So you are a grown man with relationship problems with a 16 year old girl?

[galleryseek]

Originally posted by cluck


At least someone who's pro-war is admitting that it's about personal gain/safety and not "liberation".

so basically what you're saying... is just because this country owned by a shithead dictator happens to have a ton of oil, no one should step up and take care of him BECAUSE they don't want to look greedy?

no one else would done anything about it correct? so the US shouldn't even bother because they'd be labeled greedy, and just allow civilians to live in a crazy government under saddam.

[galleryseek]

Originally posted by Adorno


So you are a grown man with relationship problems with a 16 year old girl?

she's 17 yrs old bud ;) and there was never, ever any relationship problems. and i've been gifted an ability to pick out really awesome (unique) girls (only 2, both long relationships) one ended cause she had to move.. but this one, now she doesn't have to move and everything is still goin strong as ever.

what about you?

i'm ownin ya up man, you can do better.

Does anyone here actually think that attacking more Middle Eastern countries will reduce terrorism?

[galleryseek]

Originally posted by evildick
Does anyone here actually think that attacking more Middle Eastern countries will reduce terrorism?

do you really think that the US is that simple minded to not have thought about that before drafting up complex plans to do what they have done?

there'll always be terrorism no matter what happens.

[Big Monkie]

Originally posted by galleryseek
so what if the US is doing it for only oil. they're cleaning up shitty governments / dictators in the process

You fool, theyre not cleaning up anything. The shitty saddam govt is just going to be replaced by a shitty puppet govt controlled by foreigners. There isnt going to be any democracy there. Bush and co will never allow the religiously fanatic shiites, who are 2/3 of the population, to rule. Wake up.

[NetRodent]

Originally posted by Lane

Imagine what would happen if China stopped all exports to USA tomorrow. The shit would go down here.

The shit would go down there as well.

The shit would also go down in every other country that depends on US/China trade.

Originally posted by galleryseek


do you really think that the US is that simple minded to not have thought about that before drafting up complex plans to do what they have done?

there'll always be terrorism no matter what happens.

Expect a large increase in it if Bush is elected again.

[galleryseek]

Originally posted by Big Monkie

You fool, theyre not cleaning up anything. The shitty saddam govt is just going to be replaced by a shitty puppet govt controlled by foreigners. There isnt going to be any democracy there. Bush and co will never allow the religiously fanatic shiites, who are 2/3 of the population, to rule. Wake up.

wow, where did you obtain this info from? please, tell me where you got this info from? if that is an assumption, you seem a bit too sure of yourself and you're retarded.

you honestly think the US would allow iraq to get as bad as it was when saddam was in power? i don't think the us would be that stupid.

[Adorno]

Dear Statutory Rapist,

You make me laugh. I like you.

Love,

Adorno

[BigFish]

Originally posted by evildick
Does anyone here actually think that attacking more Middle Eastern countries will reduce terrorism?

It's a start! We refrained from touching the Middle East for years until osama yo mama attacked the U.S. That was the last straw; now instead of sitting back and letting Middle East leaders solve the problem that?s been going on for YEARS, we're coming to them. Good will not come without change, action, and sacrifice. Look at Germany, Japan, & South Korea.

[galleryseek]

Originally posted by Adorno
Dear Statutory Rapist,

You make me laugh. I like you.

Love,

Adorno

typical response from someone who has just been owned.

[TheSaint]

Er, ah, not to throw cold water on conspiracy theorists, but I wouldn't pay too much attention to General Kook.

He also believes in Time travel:

http://www.doctor-horsefeathers.com/archives/000300.php

[Adorno]

Originally posted by BigFish
[B]

It's a start! We refrained from touching the Middle East for years until osama yo mama attacked the U.S.

Hmmm I seem to recall Desert Storm prior to Osama. And funding Zionist aggression in the Middle East is just as good as sewing an American flag on Zionazi uniform.

One of Osama's big problems was our presence in Saudi Arabia. We sure liked Saddam and Osama when they were killing Iranians and Russians. We have a long history of supporting the right side. Had we not supported Saddam during the Iran / Iraq war the people of Iraq would not have lived under the oppression you smacktards are bleating about. Nor would have Afghanistan fallen into the hands of the Taliban had we just let the Russians control it.

Look at Germany, Japan, & South Korea.

Therein lies your problem. You cannot compare the reconstruction of single nations with the entire Middle East. We cant even stabilize that shithole Iraq and you think we could somehow conform the rest of the Middle East. You naive women.

The US will never be able to take the entire Middle East so its pointless even whining about it.

[Adorno]

Originally posted by galleryseek


typical response from someone who has just been owned.

yeah, you owned me good. That will teach me to ever debate you. Congrats bad ass, I bow before your leetness.

[BigFish]

Originally posted by Adorno


Therein lies your problem. You cannot compare the reconstruction of single nations with the entire Middle East. We cant even stabilize that shithole Iraq and you think we could somehow conform the rest of the Middle East. You naive women.

The US will never be able to take the entire Middle East so its pointless even whining about it.

It's only been 5 months!! You need to stop watching the news HEADLINES and start using your logic. Countries don't stabilize INSTANTLY when war is over.

Japan: occupation of Japan by the Allied Powers started in August 1945

Japan's constitution went into effect in 1947

peace treaty went into effect in 1952

the occupation ended after Japan's Self Defence Force was established in 1954

I can't believe you expected IRAQ to completely stable in 5 months.

[cluck]

Originally posted by galleryseek


so basically what you're saying... is just because this country owned by a shithead dictator happens to have a ton of oil, no one should step up and take care of him BECAUSE they don't want to look greedy?

no one else would done anything about it correct? so the US shouldn't even bother because they'd be labeled greedy, and just allow civilians to live in a crazy government under saddam.

It's not about looking greedy, it's about double standards. The US supports governments just as bad as Saddams but the difference is we get along with the south american countries(well until recently) and we don't get along with Iraq.

I'd like to say I'm confident a puppet government that's just as bad but USA friendly won't be put in place, but historical precedents suggest otherwise.