'US has no excuse to attack Iran'

reply to post by NeutronAvenger


I never said Americans import Afghan drugs, I suggested they are addicted to drugs (hence the biggest consumers of drugs), metaphorically just related it to Afghan drugs which has been used tactically by the US to destroy countries from within..

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Great point tothetenth, [Good to see ya buddy]

Nice to see you as well, been taking some time off, perspective I think is good.

What does history tell us about Russia in Afghanistan or China in it's disastrous misadventure into Vietnam?

I expect if nothing else aid of some kind. Probably not as in the open as in Vietnam ( the geo-political landscape has changed drastically) but to some degree or another is my guess.

China owning a bulk of US debt is also a factor just from a diplomacy perspective IMO. Navigating around potentially screwing your debtors is a hell of a task.

~Keeper

[edit on 9/6/2010 by tothetenthpower]

reply to post by oozyism


I shouldn't even be responding to this, but obviously you lack in the ability to understand your own posts...

Then again, according to your ideology, the whole middle east should be nuked right to submission like Japan right? Then what would happen after that? The oil that you guys are so desperately addicted to, not to mention the beautiful Afghan drugs

That clearly suggest to me you implying that the United States is a consumer of Afghan drugs, whereas if you look at my post on the last page you will see neighboring countries including Iran are the highest consumers...

And, if you look at my second link you will see a list of the United States most consumed narcotics, non of which come from the middle east..

reply to post by NeutronAvenger


I have no doubt that the people of Iran will eventually revolt and become the great nation it has the potential to be.

It's just a matter of when they will do it, and whether or not it will be too late.

I hardly expect any of Iran's enemies to realize that in order to truly usher in peace and stability (democratically speaking) is to allow the people of Iran, and help establish something good.

Not the CIA overthrow/puppet government kind of help either.

~Keeper

reply to post by NeutronAvenger


Perhaps he meant the drug money that's funding the CIA black ops and that sort of thing.

It's no secret we've carried out wars over drugs too, and certainly encouraged it's growth in countries that were not the US.

~Keeper

reply to post by NeutronAvenger


Yo NeutronAvenger, I will be gangsta about this hahahaha, you are arguing with me about what I wrote, and saying what I meant is not what I mean?

See the place where you highlighted? Read the little part before it, it says the oil that you guys are so addicted to, hence you guys are also addicted to drugs, not specifically Afghan drugs, hence you guys are the world's biggest consumer of drugs..

You guys invaded Afghanistan then let the poppies grow, that is a warfare tactic used to destroy the moral of your enemies, when people do drugs their mentality is really F'd and the fabric of sciety is destroyed therefore will slowly and painfully destroy the whole society. Where do the drugs go? Pakistan and Iran and Russia, who know maybe even China, not to mention India.

So have a think, what is the purpose? All these countries are rising powers, what is the US trying to achieve by jumping right in the middle of them and allowing drugs to flourish in 100% production rate??

And please don't tell me what I think I said, I know what I said, because I was the one who wrote it.

reply to post by tothetenthpower


The best thing I heard all day.

The US/West should just stay clear of attacking Iran and let the Regime implode. Simple as that. The mullahs can't stand the way their country is going anyway. The tighter they grip the more the Iranian people themselves will push back.

In the End the US should stay clear of any sort of attack on Iran

That's how I feel ooz.
Did you read this?!?!

reply to post by oozyism

Yo NeutronAvenger, I will be gangsta about this hahahaha, you are arguing with me about what I wrote, and saying what I meant is not what I mean?

Please don't, we do not need any more immaturity around here...

See the place where you highlighted? Read the little part before it, it says the oil that you guys are so addicted to, hence you guys are also addicted to drugs, not specifically Afghan drugs, hence you guys are the world's biggest consumer of drugs..

But you were wrong on both occasions and failed to back your statements up with proof.. by the way, "you guys" doesn't cut it for me. I am not addicted to drugs

You guys invaded Afghanistan then let the poppies grow

Growing opium is a means of livelihood for some of these people. Afghanistan has the ability to produce tonnes of minerals, but because of extremists and kidnappings, it is too dangerous to deploy work and training to Afghanistan.



[edit on 6-9-2010 by NeutronAvenger]

reply to post by CanadianDream420

He's not correct about the latter statement...

Can you flesh that out a bit? I'm curious as to why you think so.
I'm not taking a stance against your statement, I'm asking a question.

As for USA not having an excuse? When has that ever stopped them before?

peace

reply to post by NeutronAvenger

'You also have corruption, you consume the drugs, you're the biggest drug consumer in the world,'" said Jose Luis Pineyro, a sociologist at Mexico's Autonomous Metropolitan University.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

There is a war down south of ?US between drug cartels and the corrupt Mexican government. You don't know why? Because US is the biggest consumer of drugs. That is both legal and illegal drugs lol..

This is so off topic, on topic the US won't attack Iran, it just can't, it doesn't the capability to obtain its objectives after the attacks, it will loose more than it will gain.

Just because you are the world's strongest man/woman, doesn't mean you have the capability to do anything you want. Yes you can beat the sh1t out of a lawyer, but then that lawyer can lock you up.

That is the scenario US is in, although it is the most powerful nation, it is in no position to achieve any of its objectives by attacking Iran.

A second attack on Iran will completely Unite the Iranian people (if you don't remember the first attack, it was Iran/Iraq war).. All Iranians know the US was behind the BS war..

[edit on 6-9-2010 by oozyism]

reply to post by TheSam

'US has no excuse to attack Iran'

As a student of 20th century history and one who has relatives buried in WW2 cemeteries, I am not hesitant to call this duck a duck.

Iran and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are repeats of Germany and Adolph Hitler. The similarities are beyond denial... not ignoring that their propaganda machine works every bit as well as that of Joseph Goebbels.

Historically, Nazi Germany survived to become a danger because they succeeded in buffaloing the European nations, and America, into thinking they were far stronger than they were in the early days. By the time that 1 September 1939 arrived, most of the opportunity to stop Hitler and Fascism was gone. By early 1942, it was beyond repair.

Just as Germany succeeded in casting the guilt on Poland and France, Iran has the world focused on the US and Israel.

And just as it was so many years ago, there are no perfect nations, no knights of truth. The US has all but painted itself into a corner and Israel has ignored opportunities to settle the Palestinian issue several times since Yassar Arafat blew up the Clinton peace project.

There are no good guys here... and Iran takes full advantage of that lack of moral leadership.

No. The US has no excuse to attack Iran. but war will come because it is the intent of the Persians to recreate their own empire, starting with Jerusalem. Then, the Palestinians will have a new master.

[edit on 6-9-2010 by redoubt]

reply to post by redoubt


If you are a student of history you should know who played the big role in the European civil war lol..

Europe owned almost all of Africa and most of Middle East (so who ever took over Europe, would inherit resource rich Africa and Middle East), Europe was the strongest powers in the world.. USSR and USA had their little plan, to use the Zionists in starting a divide and conquer mission.

That is what lead to the European civil war, that is why the US came late, and easily took over, and USSR pushed from the other side, and they back stabbed each other leading to the cold war where Europe was divided..

Who was at fault in WWII? Last I remember victors write the history, you as a historian, or student of history should know that by now..

reply to post by oozyism


I think you need to stop learning your world history from the Imam down the street.....

Its funny you throw the Zionist word around all the time, yet fail to realize you are the exact mirror image on the other side of the coin, for your religion.....

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by oozyism

 

I think you need to stop learning your world history from the Imam down the street.....

Its funny you throw the Zionist word around all the time, yet fail to realize you are the exact mirror image on the other side of the coin, for your religion.....

Care to refute any of my historical point, or do you want us to talk about towel heads next lol..

I'm curious, I like discussing issues, but also like insults being thrown around, if you like me to..

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by redoubt

 

If you are a student of history you should know who played the big role in the European civil war lol..

Europe had a civil war? Ok this is going to be good. Do you by any chance mean WWII?

Europe owned almost all of Africa and most of Middle East (so who ever took over Europe, would inherit resource rich Africa and Middle East),

Yes, Yes we know all about European imperialism your point is?

Europe was the strongest powers in the world.. USSR and USA had their little plan, to use the Zionists in starting a divide and conquer mission.

And the Cheetos we found attached to the bottom of the seat cushion was very suspicious.

That is what lead to the European civil war, that is why the US came late, and easily took over,

I'm sure there will be some of our fellow European ATS cousins who will be coming along shortly to straighten you out about how "Easily the US took over."

If you mean when the allies landed and fought NAZI Germany during the "Civil War" as you call it, then yes you are right in your assumption that the US took part in those actions which helped the Allies to liberate Western Europe.

and USSR pushed from the other side, and they back stabbed each other leading to the cold war where Europe was divided..

It was a global cold war between to different ideologies in which two sides squared off on the world stage to see which side would become the dominant power. On one side you had the USSR, Warsaw Pact countries and Red China and on the other The US and Western powers.

I'll give you a hint on which side won. The USSR and Warsaw pact countries are gone and China is now capitalists.

Who was at fault in WWII? Last I remember victors write the history, you as a historian, or student of history should know that by now..

Well at this point ANY history book would do you some good. I'd start by actually opening it!

[edit on 6-9-2010 by SLAYER69]

The US Government don't need a reason to do anything they have in mind. The US has a military full of sheep who would go to war for what ever reason that is given to them. "Legal reasons or not".

The people of the United states will blindly believe what ever they are told. And the people will blame their president for the actions they do for him. The people think they are not guilty if they believe or do what they are told. All they have to do is blame the president or the current government. Its what stupid sheep do.

If Obama orders a attack on Iran. There will be a attack on Iran. Only after the attack will we ask question. After our blindfolds are taken of.







[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Haha You know something funny, I clicked on recent posts and this thread was directly below one titled: "Iran pays $1,000 for each U.S. soldier killed by the Taliban!"

If that is the case then yea we have an excuse..... LOL

But I think that article is a bunch of bologna.

Originally posted by SLAYER69



Europe had a civil war?

Ok this is going to be good. Do you by any chance mean WWII?

The starting point was Europe, Europeans VS Europeans.

Yes, Yes we know all about European imperialism your point is?

The point: Who ever invaded Europe would inherit Africa and Middle East.

And the Cheetos we found attached to the bottom of the seat cushion was very suspicious.

I said refute my points not make fun of them, you can refute it and make fun it, that way your post has at least something to offer rather then the same old bogus Americans were injected with after WWII. The old Generation ideology of Communist bad, Democracy good lol

I'm sure there will be some of our fellow European ATS cousins who will be coming along shortly to straighten you out about how "Easily the US took over."

Yeah Europe was devastated with war, that is when the US came and took over, I think you need to read history books and think, not just read lol

If you mean when the allies landed and fought NAZI Germany during the "Civil War" as you call it, then yes you are right in your assumption that the US took part in those actions which helped the Allies to liberate Western Europe.

LOL, the victorious history wonderfully written by the victor US. Europe wasn't liberated, Europe was invaded from two sides. It is called divide and conquer, the oldest warfare trick in the book.

It was a global cold war between to different ideologies in which two sides squared off on the world stage to see which side would become the dominant power. On one side you had the USSR, Warsaw Pact countries and Red China and on the other The US and Western powers.

It was empire fighting each other not ideology lol, ideology is not a person, nor a country. It was USSR vs USA in Europe and Middle East, Even in Korea, then again you know that right, since USA defeated Japan, America inherited Korea (Korea was under Japan), but shared it with USSR to show trust.

I'll give you a hint on which side won. The USSR and Warsaw pact countries are gone and China is now capitalists.

Yeah USSR got hammered in Afghanistan, I should know that more than you, do you think that was ideologies fighting each other or two empires playing proxy games lol..

Well at this point ANY history book would do you some good. I'd start by actually opening it!

[edit on 6-9-2010 by SLAYER69]

I think reading and not thinking is no good, bad boy..

Why would the United States invade Iran, I ask? Wait... America is being threatened by Iran, is it? Who's the next threat? Portugal? France? Japan? Monaco? Iceland?

I think it's funny americans think they're the #, that their arsenal is awesome, etc... I mean, you mess with Iran and you'll be messing with nuclear. And if muslims crash two jets against your country, I wonder what they will do with nukes. As I asked before and yet I have never received an answer: why don't you attack North Korea, for instance? I mean, they're EXACTLY the kind of country your government sees as "nocive" for your so called free life style, so why not attack them? Simple: because you don't # up with guys that HAVE nukes, that announce in public they're not afraid to use them and that they WILL use them if you try anything as smart as pissing on their lawn. Don't come talking about propaganda, I'm quite sure that if you don't stop being megalomaniac and obtuse, you'll suffer far more, to a point where 9/11 will look like a walk in the park. Peace.

reply to post by BirdManOfAlcatraz


the people of the U.S. have had more years to right their governments wrongs but have done nothing about it. its called brainwashing.

sure the U.S. is capable of attacking iran but the cost will be prohibitive in men and machinery. expect several ships to go down at least. you'll be up against the inventors of chess. no pushover like irak, although the US has not won there yet.