'US, Israel planned Middle East war'

Open

monkey spanker wrote:

wow, so the country that had been getting attacked by missles had a plan to fight back. what assholes.

You're missing the point; it's not to defend themselves, it was preparation to attack yet another country. For this, all those women and children were killed or have we already forgotten them?

Edit: Same concept of attacking Iraq to make the US safer...complete BS.

jsand

Open wrote:

You're missing the point; it's not to defend themselves, it was preparation to attack yet another country. For this, all those women and children were killed or have we already forgotten them?

Edit: Same concept of attacking Iraq to make the US safer...complete BS.

Yup. Complete BS. There were no rockets aimed at Israeli cities. There was no terrorist organization sitting right on Israel's northern border whose stated goal is the destruction of Israel. Shall I keep on posting lies to bolster your point?

El_Kabong

jsand wrote:

Yup. Complete BS. There were no rockets aimed at Israeli cities. There was no terrorist organization sitting right on Israel's northern border whose stated goal is the destruction of Israel. Shall I keep on posting lies to bolster your point?

are there any israeli rockets pointed at anyone?

even flow?

BleacherSlushie wrote:

The media should never be believed. They are never impartial as they would like you to believe. The only thing worse than a muslim is a reporter. They ignore the whole mideast to bring us the Jon Benet Ramsey case over and over and over and over and over and over again. Who really cares anymore? Murder happens in everywhere all over the world and the media focuses in on this one 10 years after the fact. Sounds like the media is not reporting on something significant that is happening. Wait how can anyone be against bombing Iran. If they develop a nuclear bomb they will use it! Israel will be the first to get hit then us.

To sound like people from the countries you just mentioned. Who fucking cares if they get hit, it ain't me. And I am much more important than you!

MrBrian

OutOfBreath wrote:

I dont think Yugoslavia is a good example. There the US was pretty reluctant to interfere from the outset. It did step in, because european nations asked very nicely if it wouldn't, as they were nervous about such a conflict so close to home. Now if you consider US and EU two sides of the same coin, then I guess. But remember that Yugoslavia was definitely an agressor, and was taking steps towards ethnic cleansing. Lucky for the albanians, that Europe won't sit idly by when it happens literally on their doorstep. But had this happened in Africa, they wouldn't have given a fuck about it, make no mistake.

But actually, Yugoslavia and Somalia in the 90s, are two attempts, as I see it, at more genuine peace-keeping missions, as none of them were directly related to US interests in any way. After Somalia, it seems the americans won't bother to do that again, unless there's something in it for them.

The US are behind a lot of bad, but not all the bad.


Peace
Dan

not sure about yugoslavia, but somalia was just under the guise of "peace keeping", america had no intention to help the situation. I'll do a search for the info on that.

I know you like to take the middle ground, that's fine, but it's very hard to find any good the US has done, mainly because they hardly have ever done any, that's just simple fact.

What america does is, stab you, then pull the blade out a few inches and calls it "helping".

Kat

Discuss the issue and not each other.................

Do not go down that path again please.

Admin

ledvedderman

Am I the only one who thinks this whole kidnapped soldier bit is a lot like past CIA opperations to force countries into war so that we can get involved. Plans like this happened in the Gulf of Tonkin to get us into Vietnam, and got us to overthrow Irans democratically elected government of the early 80's

OutOfBreath

MrBrian wrote:

not sure about yugoslavia, but somalia was just under the guise of "peace keeping", america had no intention to help the situation. I'll do a search for the info on that.

I know you like to take the middle ground, that's fine, but it's very hard to find any good the US has done, mainly because they hardly have ever done any, that's just simple fact.

What america does is, stab you, then pull the blade out a few inches and calls it "helping".

Well, that's one perspective. The US does do a lot of shitty things, but not evrything they do is. I feel those two cases were the US trying to do the right thing somewhat without there being a direct gain for their own interests. That Somalia blew up in their faces, and it didn't work, is another matter.

I feel Yugoslavia was justified somewhat. Not all of their targets I feel was legitimate, like bombing tv-networks and so on. But their intention was fair enough, and invited by european nations that wanted to contain this on their doorstep. And it ended ok enough, from a shitty situation to start with.

Peace
Dan

Open

PaperPlates wrote:

so, the Iraq citizens being killed by Iranian trained soldiers as well is okay, or its Bush's fault? Anything not Bush's fault? They really have you guys trained well, focus on blaming bush, so you don't notice whats really coming at you. GG>

Are u seriously kidding me???? You really think the Iraqi civilian deaths everyday is not our fault? Trained?? It doesnt take training to see the truth; it takes acceptance of ones own faults. Think about that real hard. Do you really think there were 30-70 civilians a day being killed before we went in? To even taKe it further, the Bush admin boasts about lets fight them there, instead of here. What do u think that means? It has nothing to do w/ car bombs going off here; if we had stayed in Afghanistan and gotten to bin ladin and spent the money we used in Iraq, to protect our borders we would be SAFE and innocent Iraqi's would be ALIVE. Think about that too.