• @cystic:

    @Zooey72:

    @cystic:

    @Zooey72:

    Funny you quoted him, many liberals like the quotes of a man sentenced to death telling his captors pretty much anything they wanted to hear.

    I had no idea you had such great respect for high ranking National Socialist and their views on politics!  Are you a practicing member?  Him “seeing the light” before he was executed makes great quotes for people like you… never mind the other things he did (I know, he killed himself).  Yes, we should all look at the US as the next Nazi Germany with Cheney being the new Goering or some other such nonsense.

    Yep, pick and chose your quotes.  At least your hypocrisy is not limited to religious text.

    If you could shoot the way that you could pick out the point in a post, then you couldn’t hit the f**king ground!
    I have no respect for the evil that these people have wrought - just comparing their agendas and methods to the man you worship in Washington.

    You missed the point, when he said those things he was about to die.  You take what he says as being his agenda and not that he was trying to aviod being hung.  WW2 magazine had an article on his surrender this month, the man is a pompous a** who would do anything to save his own neck.  But since he said something that you agree with than he is comepletely right?

    again you missed the point.  You are really terrible with this.  It is not that i agree with him or that he is completely right, but rather i am seeing GW acting as though inspired by this bit of “wisdom”. 
    And if you ever judge me as being sympathetic to a Nazi again simply because i use a quote from him to decry a pointless war, i’m ignoring you.  This b.s. personal insult thing that you do in order to try to discredit my position is really tiresome.

    The fear angle?  If there is such a thing both sides play it.  Falk is talking about a “conservative think tank” that controlled wheter we went to war or not, like it is the illumanti or something.  The evil men in Washington are puppeteers pulling our strings, always lying…  so don’t trust them… trust us!

    it’s just when you see them lying, manipulating information etc. it is easy to consider it difficult to trust them - especially when their lies have the kinds of consequences that we are seeing Americans suffer.

    Ok CC, I thought you could see the sarcasm in what I said.  I thought it was blatant, but I guess not.  So here it is, I don’t think you are at all sympathetic to the Nazis or their leadership.  MY POINT is that goering told his captors what they wanted to hear.  Much like good ole tookie was probably doing for the last couple of decades trying to avoid being killed.  Just because what he said strikes some kind of wisdom in your heart when it applies to GWB does not excuse the fact that those things were said under the circumstance of him being put to death.  He said a lot of crap to get out of being killed, “Hitler did it all” etc etc.  You picked the show boat of the Nazi party to claim this revelation.  He had what I would call a “parade” of vehicles come in with him when he surrendered (you should get WW2 mag.  great stuff in that).  Why pick these quotes at this time?  Because it backs what you believe?  That is being selective as hell as far as “the intelegence” you want to look at (I put it that way because of the accusations against Bush being selective).

    You took what you wanted from the quote, and ignored everything else.  This is an A&A board, I know you know how goering was (as do most of the posters here).  Don’t you think it “propaganda” that you posted his quotes w/o telling all the facts?

    I do apolagize if you took it as me calling you a Nazi sympathizer.  I thought the sarcasm of my post was very straight forward.  I have an opinion of you CC, and not all of it is nice, but one thing I don’t for one second believe is that you are a Nazi sypathizer.  If anything, you are the opposite.  My criticism is that your post was meant to be “a revelation” into the sick mind of GWB (and btw, being an American I do take offense that you compare our leaders to the Nazis… but I guess that is ok since it is GWB).

    And Mein Kamp falk… well, I don’t remember GWB trying to mount a coup (god, please don’t bring up the elections of 2000) or spending prison time and writing an auto biography detailing his plans to invade Iraq.  A “think tank”?  I am sure that we have plans somewhere to invade the arctic, that does not make those plans our policy.


  • I repeat myself and advise you to follow point ©.


  • First i must apologize to everyone…

    i started this thread to perhaps get some info into what some people think about why we are at war…
    i gave the three reasons that i thought we were at war when it all started and i got a few links of info which i checked out here and there… (even contimplated jumping back in earlier than now, but i just got CIV 5 and its been sucking my soul.)
    one from NCS oh hell let me just quote him…
    @ncscswitch:

    Initial story here http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/07/07/iraq.nuclear/

    and i checked that story, but alas low grade uranium isn’t a WMD, it has to be refined in facilities like the ones that Korea wants to build… err I haven’t kept up on them recently… but i do know they wanna, not sure if they have for certain… But i do know that no one wants them to have those facilities…

    Also, NCS I never realized that 43 had a hit on him? but sounds like a personal grudge hell i know the bush family has ties and money… shouldn’t they beable to take revenge without taking the nation to war?

    secondly i got a link from f_alk… Can we bring up the view finder (Patton looks towards his tech crew and grimaces for the delay) ahh here it comes…
    @F_alk:

    http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

    and well i read that along time ago… and while i agree it is a very strategic position… so is moscow… but hey … you gotta have a reason to occupy the region… but on that note…

    I just want you guys to remember that when this war started It was projected as a short term goal… 1.2 billion dollar goal ( this is what i remember, i lived through this and disagreed from the beginning, if you want i will go out and bring back a link)… and well the oil was suppose to take care of the rest… i do believe that was in the projection of spending… ahh anyway currently were at *100 that original goal (that would be 1.2b *100 = 120b) anyway i am just saying we were totally mislead… for others gains… and who got a unchecked bid to rebuild? please ahh anyone i leave that to you to research come back with a link please.(ahh another gimme… good ol burton)

    Lastly since i was schooled… i would just like point one two and three answered so i can learn point one was…
    Iraq = 9/11 ??? i thought it would be the Saudi royal family since they all share the same last name, and the fact that he is there son? ahh oh well … just a thought? yeah yeah i know some guy getting torture said it was connected to Iraq, but he also said later he said it to keep from getting zapped again… ahh wee torture works to get the info you wanna hear…

    point two … ahh well that was a gimme … yeah he is a bad man… just why was that finally important???(did anyone think about that?) we have had a war that was sanctioned in the past after he did the dirty deed of gassing, we didn’t take care of it then… and on a side note when he did it we didn’t really care, he was an ally then… (humm thinking back maybe baby bush doesn’t have the ties I thought he did, and has to take us to war for his own personal vengance… ahh just a thought don’t take it for more than it is.)

    point three… WMD none to be found… hell the weapon inspectors told us that … ahh yeah… its true that conspiracy theories riddle this question… but as a fact none are found, nor probably ever will be…

    and please, "FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY "quit answering my questions like this
    http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_player/play.jhtml?itemId=35712


  • In addition to the nuclear material, there have also been a number of chemical weapons artillery shells and missile warheads found within the past year; some of which had traces of Sarin in them (be sure to check your stories carefully if you search this online, there were empty warheads found, some found that were reported to be filled with Sarin but were not, and then the ones that had traces of Sarin in them… they had them, the shells had been filled with Sarin at one time, now the Sarin is missing…)

    May not be “vast quantities”, but it does prove that he HAD them, just like the UN, both Bush admins and the Clinton Admin. and the French and the Germans and the Russians, ad infinitum, ad nauseum, said he did.

    The question of course is WHERE are they now?  Are they in Syria as has been floated?  Or did they go to Iran along with all of Iraq’s jets?  And if so, could this additional material be the reason Iran is now so much closer to developing a nuclear weapon AND why they have become so much more beligerant lately?


  • It is doubtful that Saddam would have sent any materials to the Iranians.  He did fight a war with them after all.  An Israeli general recently said that Iraq sent their weapons to Syria, but there hasn’t been any corroborating statements.  Also, remember that Iran doesn’t need Iraq for chemical weapons when it’s looking at nuclear ones.  One thing about states, they don’t trade military-grade nuclear technology with their enemies, and usually not their neighbors either.


  • It is doubtful that Saddam would have sent any materials to the Iranians

    I totally disagree with this statement. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”

    Before the gulf war he send his air forces to Iran for safekeeping, however they kept the planes in 1991. They may be enemies but they both dispise Isreal and the USA.


  • I totally disagree with this statement. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”

    That’s fine, but you’re wrong.  :-)

    Saddam didn’t send his planes to Iran for safekeeping, he sent them because it was the easiest location to avoid coalition forces.  Everyone thought Saddam would go with Jordan, and the US set up patrols there.  Syria was a better bet, but too far away, so Iran it was.  Of course, Iran never gave those planes back, and indeed, most were recommissioned within the Iranian airforce.  That pissed Saddam off.  Why then would Saddam want to send even more materials to Iran, which has shown Iraq even less conciliation since 1991?  In addition, given that the US this time was coming from the southeast and was denied use of the Turkish airbases, that makes Syria a more likely escape zone, along with the fact that Syria has interests more in line with Iraq anyway (Ba’ath party legacies and all that).  This is why that Israeli general could make a credible argument, although, as I said, it has been double checked.

    Check out:

    http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0071.shtml

    for more information.  Incidentally, I believe this is the third time you’ve said you disagree with my statement.  The first two were covers for not having information of your own, and you were disagreeing with a fact I was proposing.  You could have countered with another fact, but chose to look at my points as opinions, which they weren’t.  This one you’re doing better on, as this point is clearly one of analysis, not a factual assertion.  But you should probably think through your contentions more:  the “enemy of my enemy” argument is pretty poor when the country you’re dealing with screwed you over last time.


  • Saddam didn’t send his planes to Iran for safekeeping

    It is doubtful that Saddam would have sent any materials to the Iranians.

    During Operation Desert Storm the Iraqi Air Force did not seek to challenge Coalition air forces, and nearly half the Iraqi Air Force fled to Iran to escape destruction. Why the IQAF fled to Iran is not precisely known, and the answer may never be fully known. In any case, Iraqi fighters and support aircraft fled for the border – more than 120 left. Over 200 aircraft were destroyed on Iraqi airfields, and hardened laser-guided bombs devastated Iraq’s hardened aircraft shelters. Eventually day-and-night air strikes destroyed or seriously damaged 375 shelters out of a total of 594.

    According to the US Department of Defense, Iraq lost 90 aircraft of all types [including helicopters] to coalition air forces during Operation Desert Storm. Of these, 39 were shot down in air-to-air combat [the details remain somewhat obscure, since a total of as many as 42 aircraft were claimed to have been destroyed in action]. Another six were lost in accidents and 16 were captured or destroyed by coalition ground forces. Additionally, another 122-137 were flown to Iran [estimates range from 115 to 140], bringing the total confirmed loss to at least 234 aircraft.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/air-force-equipment-intro.htm

    Your correct Chendora… Saddam didnt fly his planes to Iran to protect them… he ordered his pilots to do that… my bad! sorry

    “It is doubtful that Saddam would have sent any materials to the Iranians”

    This is the first time i disagreed with this point FYI.With that being said again i state that on one occasion (1991) he flew his air planes to iran , which were stolen after he was in no position to get them back. But since then untill we took out Iraq again Sadam has been in bed with Iran on a number of levels because they both hate us. Dont worry my other point will be proven soon enough after the next war starts in the middle east.


  • As i recall, US intelligence agents had come to the conclusion that Iraq did not have WMD’s, but the reason why SH was holding out on demonstrating this adequately was because he wanted Iran to believe that he had WMD’s.  His fears were that if it was revealled that he was relatively powerless in this regard, then Iran would take him out.  He was not nearly as focussed on the US as was believed.  This all came out before the summer AFAIR. 
    Why then, would he send nuclear material to Iran if he felt they were a constant threat?


  • http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/09/26/wiran26.xml

    Well to safeguard Iraqs best A- bomb makers they also arranged to send them to Iran untill “sadamm comes back” yea right…


  • @cystic:

    Why then, would he send nuclear material to Iran if he felt they were a constant threat?

    The Iran/Iraq war was 20 years ago.  To put that in perspective, 20 years after US and UK went at it hot and heavy, they became allies, and have been ever since.  Same language, similar culture, similar religion, etc.  All those same factors tie Iraq and Iran together far more closely than either nation has ever been tied to any outside power.

    Add in that there is a large area of Shite control in Iraq, a nation run by Shite (I keep wanting to leave the e off that…) and you have all the reason you need for any materials in the southern part of Iraq to have made their way to Iran.  About the only area where materials would NOT have been transported to another nation from was northern Iraq, since the Kurds then (and perhaps still are) after an independent state, and they figured they would hold on to anything in their area for themselves.  Lastly, it was pretty obvious, especialy with the attempt on George H.W. Bush’s life that Saddam ordered in 1993 in Kuwait that George Jr. was not going to leave Saddam in power, no matter what.  So it was not a matter of “saving” it for Saddam’s return.  Saddam knew it was a one-way ride, just like it was with the aircraft that went to Iran in 1991.  But he sent MORE anyway, knowing they would never be reuturned.

    The IAEA is the body that has detailed the materials Saddam had, and has also detailed the “missing” materials since the war resumed.  Now, you tell ME where they went and we’ll both know.  But the odds of them being sent to Jordan or Syria are pretty slim.  And we know for CERTAIN that military (and other?) equipment went to Iran.  Those Mirage’s are NOT stealth aircraft, they obviously took off from Iraq and landed in Iran.  We had radar, and later we Al Jezira images of those planes.

    What else was on board besides pilots…  And what crossed the border by truck, car, camel, cart, foot…


  • good points and a few i didnt think of…

    When the Shites get the majority, they will be even more alligned to iran than before. Those religious ties are strong. IN 1945 we were sworn enemies of Germany and in 1946 we were buddies. History has many lessons of quick turnabouts, You cant use this thread of argument " gee they fought against each other 25 years ago… they must they still hate each other so thats why dont exchange military hardware". Thats a short sided view of the matter.


  • @Imperious:

    gee they fought against each other 25 years ago… they must they still hate each other so thats why dont exchange military hardware". Thats a short sided view of the matter.

    And how many examples of this have we seen just as the US in the past several decades???

    Here is a REALLY good example:  Iran…
    Prior to 1979, they were OUR ally.  EDS ran their Dept of Health computers, F-14 Tomcats formed their air-combat forces…
    In 1979 they were the ultimate evil (Mickey waving an American flag and flipping them off, Charlie Daniels doing songs against them)
    In the mid 80’s, we were selling them weapons so that they would work to free the hostages held by Hezbola and others, and using the cash to finance the Contras.
    In the 90’s, they were a force to contain Saddam on his Eastern border.
    Now, in 2005, they are the bad guys again.

    Other examples of flip-flopping allies and enemies:
    France, China, Russia, Egypt, Saudi, The Mujahadeen in Afghanistan… need I go on?


  • Other examples of flip-flopping allies and enemies……France

    LOL. Yea where are those French invasion plans? I want to be the second to land and march my troops under the “Arc de Triomphe”  :mrgreen:


  • @Imperious:

    LOL. Yea where are those French invasion plans? I want to be the second to land and march my troops under the “Arc de Triomphe”  :mrgreen:

    As many are aware, the French government recently announced a raise in its terror alert level from “Run” to “Hide”. The normal level is “General Arrogance”, and the only two higher levels in France are “Surrender” and “Collaborate”. The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France’s white flag factory, effectively paralysing the country’s military capability


  • @Imperious:

    good points and a few i didnt think of…

    When the Shites get the majority, they will be even more alligned to iran than before. Those religious ties are strong. IN 1945 we were sworn enemies of Germany and in 1946 we were buddies. History has many lessons of quick turnabouts, You cant use this thread of argument " gee they fought against each other 25 years ago… they must they still hate each other so thats why dont exchange military hardware". Thats a short sided view of the matter.

    Of course thanks to US actions, the nation of Iraq is soon to be run by Shites - which i understand to be significantly more (militantly?) Islamic than the Sunnis under Saddam.  Does this mean that the US will then be united with Iran as they recognise their new ally-by-proxy?


  • Ahh another good point! I think everything will be great untill we leave… then the shite hits the fan.


  • @F_alk:

    You are at war because a conservative think tank made plans, 9-11 allowed to strike one country, and the people behind GWB used the impetus. …
    So, both the “keep them scared” and the “Iraq is a strategic position” are right.
    If you don’ t believe it, look at this:
    http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

    Of course, invading a strategic position for no other reason than it being a strategic position is an offensive war and should be heavily sanctioned, as it is illegal by international laws and contracts that even the USA signed.
    I think, next time i wait for a train or something like that, i will look out for a strategic position and kill the person that stands on it. After all, it is a strategic position.

    Falk,

    I have been reading: http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf off and on for a couple of days.  It is long, and I have christmas shopping to do, so sue me.  I am about 1/2 way done.  It is interesting as hell, I will give you that.  So far as what I have read, I think the plan they had was a sound one.

    One thing though, where did you get this from?  I would hope that our politicians would not need pictures to get the point?  Go ahead, slam Bush… I know you want to. lol

    The whole idea of it seems is to keep the US on top by providing a stable global enviorment.  SH was an evil man (and unpopular), I think we all agree on that.  We get our bases, the Iraqis get their freedom.  Seems like a “win win” to me.  As far as the war is concerned, we are fighting radicals that are for the most part not even Iraqi.

    The threat that a US presence in Iraq has to Iraq’s neighbors is reason enough for me to believe the war is well worth it.  Even just the show of force got Libya to repent their ways, and Libya is not even close to Iraq.


  • @ncscswitch:

    In addition to the nuclear material,…

    In addition to zero ….

    @ncscswitch:

    The Iran/Iraq war was 20 years ago.  To put that in perspective, 20 years after US and UK went at it hot and heavy, they became allies, and have been ever since.  Same language, similar culture, similar religion, etc.  All those same factors tie Iraq and Iran together far more closely than either nation has ever been tied to any outside power.

    Farsi NOT Arabic
    Persian NOT Arabian
    Sunni (SH) NOT Shiite

    Add in that there is a large area of Shite control in Iraq, a nation run by Shite (I keep wanting to leave the e off that…) and you have all the reason you need for any materials in the southern part of Iraq to have made their way to Iran.

    That would be after the fall of SH… then it would be the US and UKs fault.


  • @Zooey72:

    One thing though, where did you get this from?

    EVIL liberal media.

    We get our bases, the Iraqis get their freedom.  Seems like a “win win” to me.

    Only international rules, laws and safety lose.

Suggested Topics

Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

25

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts