Mass'Debater
Posts: 1,942 
Location: Atlantic Canada
Location: Atlantic Canada
March 24th, 2008, 03:03 PM
Gen Petraeus said he was
surprised how Sunnis turned
against al-Qaeda
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7311565.stm
You know, I bet if I was a capable arms dealer, I could get arms from someone in the US, Canada, Iran, China, Germany even..... that doesn't mean the government of those countries supplied me those weapons and gave me their blessings to use them.
Could they have been purchased by someone working within Iran but not directly in the government?
Could they have been purchased by the US from a middle man from Iran in order to carry these attacks out? I didn't hear of any US troops getting injured or killed in this attack, just everyone else around them, so they must have just been pretty damn lucky, or something else was going on.
And a massive attack on this scale shortly after US's top commander in the middle east, Fallon quit.... er... "Resigned".....
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/us...r-mideast.html
......over differences between himself and the rest of the Bush Admin on how to deal with Iran... not even two weeks ago (Similar to how many generals resigned prior to the Iraq invasion) ~ Is anybody seriously believing the Iran claim?
This sounds like a load of crap if you ask me, with the same recycled crap we're used to hearing:
"We have credible information that Iran is behind it."
"What credible information is that?"
"That's classified for national security."
"Blow it out yer arse Johnny! Either supply proof/evidence or *Fffffttthweerrpptt* Take Off Eh!"
Gen Petraeus said he was
surprised how Sunnis turned
against al-Qaeda
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7311565.stm
Quote:
And here it starts. Claims that Iran is behind the attacks because they're "Iranian Rockets" provided by Iran? The most senior US general in Iraq has said he has evidence that Iran was behind Sunday's bombardment of Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone.
Gen David Petraeus told the BBC he thought Tehran had trained, equipped and funded insurgents who fired the barrage of mortars and rockets.
He said Iran was adding what he described as "lethal accelerants" to a very combustible mix.
There has as yet been no response from Iran to the accusations.
In response to the news that 4,000 US military personnel have now been killed in Iraq, he said it showed how much the mission had cost but added that Americans were realistic about it.
He also said a great deal of progress had been made because of the "flipping" of communities - the decision by Sunni tribes to turn against al-Qaeda militants.
The extent of this had surprised even the US military, he said.
'Promises violated'
In an interview with BBC world affairs editor John Simpson, Gen Petraeus said violence in Iraq was being perpetuated by Iran's Quds Force, a branch of the Revolutionary Guards.
"The rockets that were launched at the Green Zone yesterday, for example... were Iranian-provided, Iranian-made rockets," he said, adding that the groups that fired them were funded and trained by the Quds Force.
"All of this in complete violation of promises made by President Ahmadinejad and the other most senior Iranian leaders to their Iraqi counterparts."
The barrage hit the Green Zone on Sunday morning. Some rockets missed their targets killing 15 Iraqi civilians.
Later in the day four US soldiers died when their patrol vehicle was blown up by a bomb in southern Baghdad, putting the total number of US fatalities above 4,000.
This and other bloodshed on Sunday came despite an overall reduction in violence since last June, when the US deployed an extra 30,000 troops for the surge.
Days earlier, Mr Bush marked the fifth anniversary of the invasion, saying that it had made the world a better place.
Gen David Petraeus told the BBC he thought Tehran had trained, equipped and funded insurgents who fired the barrage of mortars and rockets.
He said Iran was adding what he described as "lethal accelerants" to a very combustible mix.
There has as yet been no response from Iran to the accusations.
In response to the news that 4,000 US military personnel have now been killed in Iraq, he said it showed how much the mission had cost but added that Americans were realistic about it.
He also said a great deal of progress had been made because of the "flipping" of communities - the decision by Sunni tribes to turn against al-Qaeda militants.
The extent of this had surprised even the US military, he said.
'Promises violated'
In an interview with BBC world affairs editor John Simpson, Gen Petraeus said violence in Iraq was being perpetuated by Iran's Quds Force, a branch of the Revolutionary Guards.
"The rockets that were launched at the Green Zone yesterday, for example... were Iranian-provided, Iranian-made rockets," he said, adding that the groups that fired them were funded and trained by the Quds Force.
"All of this in complete violation of promises made by President Ahmadinejad and the other most senior Iranian leaders to their Iraqi counterparts."
The barrage hit the Green Zone on Sunday morning. Some rockets missed their targets killing 15 Iraqi civilians.
Later in the day four US soldiers died when their patrol vehicle was blown up by a bomb in southern Baghdad, putting the total number of US fatalities above 4,000.
This and other bloodshed on Sunday came despite an overall reduction in violence since last June, when the US deployed an extra 30,000 troops for the surge.
Days earlier, Mr Bush marked the fifth anniversary of the invasion, saying that it had made the world a better place.
You know, I bet if I was a capable arms dealer, I could get arms from someone in the US, Canada, Iran, China, Germany even..... that doesn't mean the government of those countries supplied me those weapons and gave me their blessings to use them.
Could they have been purchased by someone working within Iran but not directly in the government?
Could they have been purchased by the US from a middle man from Iran in order to carry these attacks out? I didn't hear of any US troops getting injured or killed in this attack, just everyone else around them, so they must have just been pretty damn lucky, or something else was going on.
And a massive attack on this scale shortly after US's top commander in the middle east, Fallon quit.... er... "Resigned".....
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/us...r-mideast.html
......over differences between himself and the rest of the Bush Admin on how to deal with Iran... not even two weeks ago (Similar to how many generals resigned prior to the Iraq invasion) ~ Is anybody seriously believing the Iran claim?
This sounds like a load of crap if you ask me, with the same recycled crap we're used to hearing:
"We have credible information that Iran is behind it."
"What credible information is that?"
"That's classified for national security."
"Blow it out yer arse Johnny! Either supply proof/evidence or *Fffffttthweerrpptt* Take Off Eh!"
Clever Clogs
Posts: 712
Location: Red Deer AB
Location: Red Deer AB
March 24th, 2008, 03:49 PM
How is 'thought' any kind of 'proof'?
It wouldn't be the first time they were doing what they accuse others of doing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/mar/24/defence
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...ticl eId=1094
How is 'thought' any kind of 'proof'?
It wouldn't be the first time they were doing what they accuse others of doing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/mar/24/defence
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...ticl eId=1094
Newbie
Posts: 39
March 24th, 2008, 05:35 PM
See the reason why this is so stupid is because we know how the U.S. are dying to get into Iran (just like Iraq) and will say anything to be justified in invading Iran (just like Iraq). But i'm wondering, just like you if they're going to go through the proper channels ie- investigating and supplying evidence or if they're just going to go in there because they want to (just like Iraq).
I think it's time that the U.S administration be investigated. This isn't funny anymore!!
Not that it ever was. But they're treating this all like it's a big joke and we're all supposed to be laughing on cue.
See the reason why this is so stupid is because we know how the U.S. are dying to get into Iran (just like Iraq) and will say anything to be justified in invading Iran (just like Iraq). But i'm wondering, just like you if they're going to go through the proper channels ie- investigating and supplying evidence or if they're just going to go in there because they want to (just like Iraq).
I think it's time that the U.S administration be investigated. This isn't funny anymore!!
Not that it ever was. But they're treating this all like it's a big joke and we're all supposed to be laughing on cue.
Member
Posts: 102
Location: Pennsylvania
Location: Pennsylvania
March 24th, 2008, 09:06 PM
No, you are mistaken, no one in AMerica wants to be invovled in another conflict, and part of the reason is that none of the countries that we considered our allies have stuck with us, the few who have such and Britain, AUstralia, and Poland, have stood strong but are not enough. If the Iranian gov't is manufacturing weapons being fired upon Us forces then the Iranian govt should be held accountable either for supplying the weapons or for a leak in their system
No, you are mistaken, no one in AMerica wants to be invovled in another conflict, and part of the reason is that none of the countries that we considered our allies have stuck with us, the few who have such and Britain, AUstralia, and Poland, have stood strong but are not enough. If the Iranian gov't is manufacturing weapons being fired upon Us forces then the Iranian govt should be held accountable either for supplying the weapons or for a leak in their system
Newbie
Posts: 39
March 24th, 2008, 10:53 PM
Who's mistaken?
Give me proof McCaulley other wise you're just talking out your a$$. Maybe when you grow up you can become one of Bushs' best friends. Heck, with your line of thinking Bush might consider hiring you right now.
I think YOU are mistaken. You say no one in America wants to be involved in another conflict and in the same breath you say it's because you don't have the numbers and that Iran should be held accountable for manufacturing weapons being fired upon US forces.
What do you think you beloved U.S gov has been doing over the past 5 YEARS?
Your statement is all at once hypocritical and loaded with irony!
Who's mistaken?
Give me proof McCaulley other wise you're just talking out your a$$. Maybe when you grow up you can become one of Bushs' best friends. Heck, with your line of thinking Bush might consider hiring you right now.
I think YOU are mistaken. You say no one in America wants to be involved in another conflict and in the same breath you say it's because you don't have the numbers and that Iran should be held accountable for manufacturing weapons being fired upon US forces.
What do you think you beloved U.S gov has been doing over the past 5 YEARS?
Your statement is all at once hypocritical and loaded with irony!
Member
Posts: 243
Location: Edmonton
Location: Edmonton
March 24th, 2008, 10:57 PM
McCaulley...dude, 1 million Iraqis have died since this war began along with 4000 of your own soldiers. And untold millions more injured. How is that freeing the oppressed? Perhaps you're going by that age old religious belief that only in death are you truly free.
McCaulley...dude, 1 million Iraqis have died since this war began along with 4000 of your own soldiers. And untold millions more injured. How is that freeing the oppressed? Perhaps you're going by that age old religious belief that only in death are you truly free.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,541
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
March 24th, 2008, 11:00 PM
The LAST thing the US wants is another war in the ME.......the US is run by POLITICIANS, you know, that like to get re-elected. The US WILL NOT go into Iran with any ground force FULL STOP.
Any action taken against Iran would only be after extreme provocation..........the US would MUCH rather Israel handle the Iranian kooks........
Quoting givpeaceachance
WRONG!
See the reason why this is so stupid is because we know how the U.S. are dying to get into Iran (just like Iraq) and will say anything to be justified in invading Iran (just like Iraq). But i'm wondering, just like you if they're going to go through the proper channels ie- investigating and supplying evidence or if they're just going to go in there because they want to (just like Iraq).
I think it's time that the U.S administration be investigated. This isn't funny anymore!!
Not that it ever was. But they're treating this all like it's a big joke and we're all supposed to be laughing on cue.
I think it's time that the U.S administration be investigated. This isn't funny anymore!!
Not that it ever was. But they're treating this all like it's a big joke and we're all supposed to be laughing on cue.
The LAST thing the US wants is another war in the ME.......the US is run by POLITICIANS, you know, that like to get re-elected. The US WILL NOT go into Iran with any ground force FULL STOP.
Any action taken against Iran would only be after extreme provocation..........the US would MUCH rather Israel handle the Iranian kooks........
Ponderous Intellect
Posts: 4,178
Location: Minnesota: Gopher State
Location: Minnesota: Gopher State
March 24th, 2008, 11:15 PM
The Bush regime has been saying for over a year that Iran has been doing this. So far, Bush has not presented a shred of evidence to prove this claim. In fact, I previously posted a recent photo of Ahmadinejad shaking hands with al-Maliki who is his supposed enemy (so called by Bush). If Iraq's leader thought that his people were being killed by the Iranian leader, why stand there and be so open about their well established friendship??
HEY BUSH - WHERE'S YOUR PROOF?
The Bush regime has been saying for over a year that Iran has been doing this. So far, Bush has not presented a shred of evidence to prove this claim. In fact, I previously posted a recent photo of Ahmadinejad shaking hands with al-Maliki who is his supposed enemy (so called by Bush). If Iraq's leader thought that his people were being killed by the Iranian leader, why stand there and be so open about their well established friendship??
HEY BUSH - WHERE'S YOUR PROOF?
Clever Clogs
Posts: 645
Location: BC
Location: BC
March 24th, 2008, 11:19 PM
Or do you mean held accountable in the court of US public opinion?
Quoting McCaulley
Do you mean held accountable like the USA has been for invading Iraq?
No, you are mistaken, no one in AMerica wants to be invovled in another conflict, and part of the reason is that none of the countries that we considered our allies have stuck with us, the few who have such and Britain, AUstralia, and Poland, have stood strong but are not enough. If the Iranian gov't is manufacturing weapons being fired upon Us forces then the Iranian govt should be held accountable either for supplying the weapons or for a leak in their system
Or do you mean held accountable in the court of US public opinion?
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,541
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
March 24th, 2008, 11:25 PM
A failed Presidency.
An economy in tatters
World opinion turned against them.....
I think the USA has been held accountable for what was an attack on a vicious dictatorship that HAD used WMDs on previous occassions............they were just finishing up Operation Desert Storm.....unfortunately, they were 11 years late......
Quoting Scott Free
4000 dead.
Do you mean held accountable like the USA has been for invading Iraq?
Or do you mean held accountable in the court of US public opinion?
Or do you mean held accountable in the court of US public opinion?
A failed Presidency.
An economy in tatters
World opinion turned against them.....
I think the USA has been held accountable for what was an attack on a vicious dictatorship that HAD used WMDs on previous occassions............they were just finishing up Operation Desert Storm.....unfortunately, they were 11 years late......
Newbie
Posts: 39
March 24th, 2008, 11:32 PM
Colpy, with all due respect, i see what you're saying about the U.S prefering Israel to handle Iran but when you say that the only way that the U.S would go into Iran is due to provocation i'm not sure where you are getting this logic?
How did Iraq provoke the U.S? They just went and bombed it and then invaded without any evidence and on top of it all went against everybody to do it. Looking at what you said one would think you were talking about some other country.
A spade is a spade. And the Bush admin have proven themselves a spade.
Colpy, with all due respect, i see what you're saying about the U.S prefering Israel to handle Iran but when you say that the only way that the U.S would go into Iran is due to provocation i'm not sure where you are getting this logic?
How did Iraq provoke the U.S? They just went and bombed it and then invaded without any evidence and on top of it all went against everybody to do it. Looking at what you said one would think you were talking about some other country.
A spade is a spade. And the Bush admin have proven themselves a spade.
Newbie
Posts: 39
March 24th, 2008, 11:36 PM
Do you see where i'm coming from? Since when did the global community decide that the United States should be the world police?
Quoting Colpy
Well with that logic the U.S should be taking care of allllll of the corrupted dictatorships in Africa then move onto China and then next maybe Russia and then after that . . . . . .
4000 dead.
A failed Presidency.
An economy in tatters
World opinion turned against them.....
I think the USA has been held accountable for what was an attack on a vicious dictatorship that HAD used WMDs on previous occassions............they were just finishing up Operation Desert Storm.....unfortunately, they were 11 years late......
A failed Presidency.
An economy in tatters
World opinion turned against them.....
I think the USA has been held accountable for what was an attack on a vicious dictatorship that HAD used WMDs on previous occassions............they were just finishing up Operation Desert Storm.....unfortunately, they were 11 years late......
Do you see where i'm coming from? Since when did the global community decide that the United States should be the world police?
Clever Clogs
Posts: 645
Location: BC
Location: BC
March 24th, 2008, 11:38 PM
Nothing the USA has suffered is punishment enough for their crimes against humanity. The ringleaders should be rounded up, tried in the Hague and executed. The USA should pay for restoring Iraq because it is a democracy and in a democracy everyone of voting age is responsible for their governments actions - that is one of the costs of freedom; you can't whine and snivel your way out of culpability.
Quoting Colpy
Yeah, sold to them by the USA. A sale the US congress tried to stop with the "No Genocide" bill which Reagan vetoed
I think the USA has been held accountable for what was an attack on a vicious dictatorship that HAD used WMDs on previous occassions
Nothing the USA has suffered is punishment enough for their crimes against humanity. The ringleaders should be rounded up, tried in the Hague and executed. The USA should pay for restoring Iraq because it is a democracy and in a democracy everyone of voting age is responsible for their governments actions - that is one of the costs of freedom; you can't whine and snivel your way out of culpability.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,541
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
March 24th, 2008, 11:39 PM
AND the US paused when they should have gone to Baghdad in 1992 because of the tender sensibilities of their Arab allies.........
Personally, I supported the invasion for the same niave, idealistic reasons the Americans pulled it off..........."Death to Tyrants" and the unfortunate belief that a people offered liberty and freedom from tyranny would be grateful and work towards that end.
I, and the US gov't, were wrong.
Quoting givpeaceachance
Saddam Hussein was a screaming looney.....he did his best to convince the world he had WMDs. most of the intelligence services of the world believed he did. He used WMDs against the Kurds. He also tried to assasinate George W's daddy.
Colpy, with all due respect, i see what you're saying about the U.S prefering Israel to handle Iran but when you say that the only way that the U.S would go into Iran is due to provocation i'm not sure where you are getting this logic?
How did Iraq provoke the U.S? They just went and bombed it and then invaded without any evidence and on top of it all went against everybody to do it. Looking at what you said one would think you were talking about some other country.
A spade is a spade. And the Bush admin have proven themselves a spade.
How did Iraq provoke the U.S? They just went and bombed it and then invaded without any evidence and on top of it all went against everybody to do it. Looking at what you said one would think you were talking about some other country.
A spade is a spade. And the Bush admin have proven themselves a spade.
AND the US paused when they should have gone to Baghdad in 1992 because of the tender sensibilities of their Arab allies.........
Personally, I supported the invasion for the same niave, idealistic reasons the Americans pulled it off..........."Death to Tyrants" and the unfortunate belief that a people offered liberty and freedom from tyranny would be grateful and work towards that end.
I, and the US gov't, were wrong.
Clever Clogs
Posts: 645
Location: BC
Location: BC
March 24th, 2008, 11:44 PM
Quoting MHz
They want to use their nukes.
If the US is having difficulties in a country that was basically without arms when they went in, that would seem to be a very good reason stay out of a much larger country that can make their own weapons.
Clever Clogs
Posts: 712
Location: Red Deer AB
Location: Red Deer AB
March 24th, 2008, 11:52 PM
Quoting Scott Free
Make them clean up the DU while Iraqis are living in a 'rented portion of Iran', say about a 60 year lease. By that time the 'mercains would have cleaned it up, irony being hekp is the best plant to heavy metal clean-up. Take the whole fed and all their families and ship them to the same trial. If you punish only a fery few the next Nation that has desires of conquest will do it. If a very lot of people are punished (in this case reduced to landscapers and builders) the next Nation will have the ones who would be at risk of punishment and they will 'control' the few who dream of power.
Yeah, sold to them by the USA. A sale the US congress tried to stop with the "No Genocide" bill which Reagan vetoed
Nothing the USA has suffered is punishment enough for their crimes against humanity. The ringleaders should be rounded up, tried in the Hague and executed. The USA should pay for restoring Iraq because it is a democracy and in a democracy everyone of voting age is responsible for their governments actions - that is one of the costs of freedom; you can't whine and snivel your way out of culpability.
Nothing the USA has suffered is punishment enough for their crimes against humanity. The ringleaders should be rounded up, tried in the Hague and executed. The USA should pay for restoring Iraq because it is a democracy and in a democracy everyone of voting age is responsible for their governments actions - that is one of the costs of freedom; you can't whine and snivel your way out of culpability.
Newbie
Posts: 39
March 24th, 2008, 11:56 PM
Many people think Bush is crazy. Should we all band together and just go in and invade with out any evidence and without any consideration of the American people at large just because of some idiot that everyone want to strangle?
Double Jeopardy! They already went in once and failed. To do it again, you would need some heavy proof that there is a threat. You would need to have a SOLID plan and means AND global support with LEGAL permission to do something like that. Otherwise you end up looking like the bad guy. if you go against all these things it's probably because you are.
You know what they say about assuming things, right?
Tyrants are everywhere. I'm sure almost everyone can name one in their family.
Quoting Colpy
You are right when you say that Hussein was crazy. However, there are plenty of crazy world leaders to go around but does it make it right to just go in and destroy the country?
Saddam Hussein was a screaming looney.....he did his best to convince the world he had WMDs. most of the intelligence services of the world believed he did. He used WMDs against the Kurds. He also tried to assasinate George W's daddy.
AND the US paused when they should have gone to Baghdad in 1992 because of the tender sensibilities of their Arab allies.........
Personally, I supported the invasion for the same niave, idealistic reasons the Americans pulled it off..........."Death to Tyrants" and the unfortunate belief that a people offered liberty and freedom from tyranny would be grateful and work towards that end.
I, and the US gov't, were wrong.
AND the US paused when they should have gone to Baghdad in 1992 because of the tender sensibilities of their Arab allies.........
Personally, I supported the invasion for the same niave, idealistic reasons the Americans pulled it off..........."Death to Tyrants" and the unfortunate belief that a people offered liberty and freedom from tyranny would be grateful and work towards that end.
I, and the US gov't, were wrong.
Many people think Bush is crazy. Should we all band together and just go in and invade with out any evidence and without any consideration of the American people at large just because of some idiot that everyone want to strangle?
Double Jeopardy! They already went in once and failed. To do it again, you would need some heavy proof that there is a threat. You would need to have a SOLID plan and means AND global support with LEGAL permission to do something like that. Otherwise you end up looking like the bad guy. if you go against all these things it's probably because you are.
You know what they say about assuming things, right?
Tyrants are everywhere. I'm sure almost everyone can name one in their family.
