07 Aug 2014 00:04:11
look at the land changes on a map, then you will realise why there are rockets being fired. STOP STEALING LAND.
xXJediXx’s profile
xXJediXx
Replies to these posts
Yes the same country that had to shut down as it ran out of money (sorry credit)c an afford to finance arms to these war criminals.
China very quiet on all this an Ukraine which I am not sure to be worried about or not!
Jonty
Read discussionChina very quiet on all this an Ukraine which I am not sure to be worried about or not!
Jonty
I read today that Barack Obama signed a bill granting $225 million to Israel for Iron Dome to counter short-range rocket threats.
Lest we be under any illusions about the outcome he wants from this.
Ryan.
Read discussionLest we be under any illusions about the outcome he wants from this.
Ryan.
Reply · 
HERBIE · 05 Aug 2014 13:43
HERBIE · 05 Aug 2014 13:43Good question
Usa/Britain are stood with them, its sickening how the world can see what's happening but have'nt got the baws to stand up against the powers that be.
It could well be the beginning of the end.
Read discussionUsa/Britain are stood with them, its sickening how the world can see what's happening but have'nt got the baws to stand up against the powers that be.
It could well be the beginning of the end.
04 Aug 2014 23:11:41
Of course its all mossad and the cia and nothing at all to do with the fact its an evil, vicious twisted death cult masquerading as a religion with brainwashed fools massacring people left and right based on 1400 year old fairy stories.
Read discussionOf course its all mossad and the cia and nothing at all to do with the fact its an evil, vicious twisted death cult masquerading as a religion with brainwashed fools massacring people left and right based on 1400 year old fairy stories.
Do think that perhaps Mossad are behind the regieme changes in the area for example the attempted one in syria. ?
Read discussionDidn't they already do that back in the '67 war when the gabbed the West Bank, Golan Heights, Gaza strip?
Mort
Read discussionMort
26 Jul 2014 20:41:15
Frankyscouser. that would be the clever way to go about it. There seems like nothing to be gained from the violence but everything to be gained from peace.
NIV.
Read discussionFrankyscouser. that would be the clever way to go about it. There seems like nothing to be gained from the violence but everything to be gained from peace.
NIV.
26 Jul 2014 13:45:24
I would suggest resources play a large part. Everything else is window dressing.
As for funding Hamas, its certainly a possibility. The Israeli secret services are one of the best at what they do. Via proxies and shell corporations. Maybe the funding comes from further afield?
Kim Philby
Read discussionI would suggest resources play a large part. Everything else is window dressing.
As for funding Hamas, its certainly a possibility. The Israeli secret services are one of the best at what they do. Via proxies and shell corporations. Maybe the funding comes from further afield?
Kim Philby
Reply · 
frankyscouser · 26 Jul 2014 10:15
frankyscouser · 26 Jul 2014 10:15I have heard hamas could be israeli funded and I am starting to think that now, let me run scenario this by you all.
i am a genuine hamas leader and I know my token bombs are not going to do anything but send my country back in the stone age with generations of families wiped out, I suddenly find out that we have resources that can make us all self sufficient and build a infrastructure for my people, so I decide to go down the peace route and sign a treaty, then I contact a nation that can help me get the oil out and give them a cut of any profits, like say venezuela (asking russia could be the start of ww3)then once the oil/money is rolling in I will build a port and do my own export and import deals, letting nato know everything.
thats what I would do anyway, I do not agree with any type of violence hamas or israel as it only plays into the zionists hands.
Read discussioni am a genuine hamas leader and I know my token bombs are not going to do anything but send my country back in the stone age with generations of families wiped out, I suddenly find out that we have resources that can make us all self sufficient and build a infrastructure for my people, so I decide to go down the peace route and sign a treaty, then I contact a nation that can help me get the oil out and give them a cut of any profits, like say venezuela (asking russia could be the start of ww3)then once the oil/money is rolling in I will build a port and do my own export and import deals, letting nato know everything.
thats what I would do anyway, I do not agree with any type of violence hamas or israel as it only plays into the zionists hands.
The gas is a side issue. With or without the gas, Israeli policy will be the same.
Ryan.
Read discussionRyan.
Reply · frankyscouser · 22 Jul 2014 17:13
frankyscouser · 22 Jul 2014 17:13Personally I like Ron Paul for the reason he never wanted to get involved at any time in the middle east, his haters claim he is against gay and black people, I am not sure if that's true , it could be part of a hate campaign because he is against the involvement in the middle east.
Read discussionThis has gone off-topic and originally started as a discussion on the conspiracy to go to war in Iraq again.
Let's be clear, the US and UK have enough military hardware in the region to take out a target in very little time: by manned-warplane or armed-drone.
And yet with the rise of ISIS (30 days and counting), all we've heard from Obama is statements aimed at buying time. 'my team are working around the clock'. 'we have moved an aircraft carrier to the region'. 'I am going to take a few days to consider my response'. 'we are sending 300 advisors to the region'.
Statements from Cameron & Co. 'they are a threat to us at home'. 'their threat justifies our surveillance laws'. 'so hardcore they got kicked out of Al Qaida'.
It's all BS.
The US handed over their military hardware to the Iraqi forces they'd trained, then (pretty much) left the country.
In Syria, the US (UK, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordan also involved) has been providing top-end anti-vehicle weaponry to the anti-Assad jihadists (of which there are several groups, some fighting each other). There's also training in Jordan, supply drops and other support - as allowed, with some rule bending, by the UN, for the protection of civilians.
And yet Assad remains strong - in the eyes of Iran he is winning back Syria from the Jihadists. This isn't what the West wants (destination Iran).
How else can you support the jihadists in Syria if you aren't able to arm them due to UN Security Council rules? What if, just across the border in Iraq, you had a huge amount hardware in the hands of Iraqi forces?
ISIS are the face of the US's best bet to topple Assad. The latest assistance we can provide anti-Assad forces is to delay any assistance to Iraq. That way we allow a transfer of US military hardware to forces in Syria.
The price of chaos in Iraq for the goal of Assad's head on a stick is one worth paying in the west's eyes.
As for Kim Philby; Saddam may have carried out some sickening acts including long and torturous deaths but the body count battle of Saddam versus Bushes Senior and Junior results in a first round knock out of Saddam. Don't forget that the US/UK were killing Iraqi throughout the 90s through UN sanctions (medicines) and constant bombing of infrastructure (water treatment plants, leading to disease and high infant mortality).
https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
But if your basis for judging 'world's worst maniac' comes down to method. Death by starving dogs versus decades of birth mutations from depleted uranium use. is a difficult call.
Pablo
Read discussionLet's be clear, the US and UK have enough military hardware in the region to take out a target in very little time: by manned-warplane or armed-drone.
And yet with the rise of ISIS (30 days and counting), all we've heard from Obama is statements aimed at buying time. 'my team are working around the clock'. 'we have moved an aircraft carrier to the region'. 'I am going to take a few days to consider my response'. 'we are sending 300 advisors to the region'.
Statements from Cameron & Co. 'they are a threat to us at home'. 'their threat justifies our surveillance laws'. 'so hardcore they got kicked out of Al Qaida'.
It's all BS.
The US handed over their military hardware to the Iraqi forces they'd trained, then (pretty much) left the country.
In Syria, the US (UK, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordan also involved) has been providing top-end anti-vehicle weaponry to the anti-Assad jihadists (of which there are several groups, some fighting each other). There's also training in Jordan, supply drops and other support - as allowed, with some rule bending, by the UN, for the protection of civilians.
And yet Assad remains strong - in the eyes of Iran he is winning back Syria from the Jihadists. This isn't what the West wants (destination Iran).
How else can you support the jihadists in Syria if you aren't able to arm them due to UN Security Council rules? What if, just across the border in Iraq, you had a huge amount hardware in the hands of Iraqi forces?
ISIS are the face of the US's best bet to topple Assad. The latest assistance we can provide anti-Assad forces is to delay any assistance to Iraq. That way we allow a transfer of US military hardware to forces in Syria.
The price of chaos in Iraq for the goal of Assad's head on a stick is one worth paying in the west's eyes.
As for Kim Philby; Saddam may have carried out some sickening acts including long and torturous deaths but the body count battle of Saddam versus Bushes Senior and Junior results in a first round knock out of Saddam. Don't forget that the US/UK were killing Iraqi throughout the 90s through UN sanctions (medicines) and constant bombing of infrastructure (water treatment plants, leading to disease and high infant mortality).
https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
But if your basis for judging 'world's worst maniac' comes down to method. Death by starving dogs versus decades of birth mutations from depleted uranium use. is a difficult call.
Pablo
20 Jun 2014 21:39:08
Did anyone see the one about the new fish eating species of spider that was discovered.
Read discussionDid anyone see the one about the new fish eating species of spider that was discovered.
20 Jun 2014 15:10:24
I knew a few Armenians, their not big fans of the Turks either. Understandable. Its amazing what some people get away with.
Kim Philby
Read discussionI knew a few Armenians, their not big fans of the Turks either. Understandable. Its amazing what some people get away with.
Kim Philby
20 Jun 2014 14:51:07
Indeed, political expediency seems to over rule the supposed ideals nato stands for. Its not like the Turks have a history of massacres or atrocities either. Yes my sarcasm head is on.
Kim Philby
Read discussionIndeed, political expediency seems to over rule the supposed ideals nato stands for. Its not like the Turks have a history of massacres or atrocities either. Yes my sarcasm head is on.
Kim Philby
20 Jun 2014 14:25:44
But they tried to take refuge to escape Hussein so is he not the catalyst for them attempting to take refuge and getting killed? If he had left them alone and not tested gas on them like at Halubja, then they wouldn't have tried to take refuge in turkey and wouldn't have gotten killed. So is it not fair to at least place some blame on him?
Kim Philby
Read discussionBut they tried to take refuge to escape Hussein so is he not the catalyst for them attempting to take refuge and getting killed? If he had left them alone and not tested gas on them like at Halubja, then they wouldn't have tried to take refuge in turkey and wouldn't have gotten killed. So is it not fair to at least place some blame on him?
Kim Philby
20 Jun 2014 00:34:49
Agreed, if you were to run foreign policy based on knocking over govts ran by nasty people you would be extremely busy.
Regards the figures, Bush killed a lot in a quick time. Hussein ruled Iraq since the 70s so there's internal opposition, kurds, the 8 year Iran - Iraq war, so a lot but more spread out.
Kim Philby
Read discussionAgreed, if you were to run foreign policy based on knocking over govts ran by nasty people you would be extremely busy.
Regards the figures, Bush killed a lot in a quick time. Hussein ruled Iraq since the 70s so there's internal opposition, kurds, the 8 year Iran - Iraq war, so a lot but more spread out.
Kim Philby
I understand Kim, no worries. My initial post was more in response to 'withasea's' point that his character was used as a justification fir the war. A dangerous call, in the wrong hands of course. Interesting view on the relative death tolls, may be worthy of further investigation on my part.
Harold
Read discussionHarold
19 Jun 2014 23:49:15
I was just pointing out that Hussein was one of the sickest individuals to ever run a country. i'd also wager that his number of victims compared to Bush, well its closer than you think.
Kim Philby
Read discussionI was just pointing out that Hussein was one of the sickest individuals to ever run a country. i'd also wager that his number of victims compared to Bush, well its closer than you think.
Kim Philby