U.S. troops raided a factory in Baghdad and found propane tanks and other chemicals that these freedom fighters use to make their car bombs. This one day after a truck exploded that was full of chlorine canisters killing five and sending more than fifty to the hospital.
This was only chlorine. Now imagine what'll happen when Iran is finished with their "peaceful nuclear power" plan and these cold blooded killers get their hands on nuclear weapons.
Story
Categories:
Middle East,
United States Military,
War On Terror
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
I wish we would just pull everyone worth a damm out and blow the entire country to dust and pebbles.
Let them start over because the Iraqis are never going to be rid of the criminal element within Islam that an improper plan and mission strategy has allowed in.Get out and Nuke it all.
Sorry John, I thought you didn't want to kill everyone?
I've recently heard various U.S. officials complaining how America is having to add troops to Iraq, while other allies are withdrawing troops, notably the English. The problem is that Afganistan is still trouble, and getting worse, and the English are having move their troops to deal with that.
If the US are 'making noises' they want to attack Iran, there is a chance for far greater trouble than has been seen yet, or anyone can imagine.
It's far from the first time that the US have opened a battle, and left their allies to 'fight it out' with the enemy they made initial engagement with, to go and attack new and more interesting targets.
Sorry, the above is in the context of Chris and others are mentioning the re-occuring 'let's go get Iran' thing than comes-up everytime there's a slight lull in fighting in Iraq
(+ that and some americans seem to think the rest of the world should be doing more to clean up after American military action).
Za; If and when I get word that my idea might actually come to pass; I will be sure to send you a first class airline ticket to any city in Iraq provided you stay right there for the plan to take place.
I'll even pick up the hotel bill.
I really love ya man...
"For the "Millionth time"; I will state I don't want People to die"
"I can only hope for the day that my people will play this war on a personal scale the way Muslims play it now. When that starts to happen; the war on Islam will be over. Over for them because they will quickly cease to exist. I long for that day."
(You're not seeing a psychiatrist for a 'split-personality' dissociative disorder are you John?)
"No Thank You. One cannot prove something that did not happen or was not meant"
"I wish we would just pull everyone worth a damm out and blow the entire country to dust and pebbles... Za... I will be sure to send you a first class airline ticket to any city in Iraq provided you stay right there for the plan to take place"
John, you change your attitude on genocide more often than I change my underwear. Or is it just that the attitude stays the same, but you don't always feel comfortable standing-by a policy that would have you up there with: Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong?
John, you don't think there is something hypocritical about your 'GENOCIDE without death' policy?
Chris got it right with the title of the post " But Israel Is Still A Bigger Threat".
Israel already have nukes, and an unquenchable thirst for blood. If there was a realistic chance of Iran getting nukes any time soon, Israel would blow them off the map
As I've said a lot of times, it's not in Iran's interest to get nukes - they'd never be able to use them without being utterly destroyed themselves. It's much more in their interest to not make the investment and just be hazy about it so that they can threaten and posteur... which if anyone here knew anything about the way Arab nations do their negotiations, is exactly in line with the way they act normally.
If you look into the history of Arab nations, they're very good at yelling, insulting and threatening, but it's not very often that they get past that stage. European nations have a worse history by comparison.
I'am totally for the genocide of Jihadists. What part of the word do you not seem to understand? Oh thats right! You both are about as willfully clueless about Islam and the meaning of words I use that no matter what I say or how I say it you will get the idea wrong. Not my problem.
But both of you seem to be about the most ignorant people I have ever come in cotact with. Glad its only online.
Look! I can make up a screenname and still be the same person just like Za and Murphy!!
Wow, the conspiracy theories never end. Well Murphy's from Melbourne and I'm from Canberra... we have different IP addresses. I'm sure Chris could tell you, but that might involve checking the facts and I know how loathe you are to do that.
I think you two are twins seperated at birth if you are not the same person.Ypu both even use the same database for my past quotes it seems. Why all the trouble unless you two are really really scared of me.
"Why all the trouble unless you two are really really scared of me."
... not scared of you, but scared of the possibility that your opinions are representative of more than a small handful of genocide-advocating psycho's with the power to vote-in a genocide-advocating psycho.
"I think you two are twins seperated at birth"
what, because we both know how to quote with integrity of process?
... or is it that both Za (don't mean to put words in your mouth) and myself both see a massive contradiction with you advocating genocide, and claiming that you don't want anyone killed?
"Ypu both even use the same database for my past quotes it seems"
I just 'cut and paste' some choice quotes from this blog over the last two weeks (all can be found in RWRM-February), no great mystery or conspiracy there.
Finally, as Za pointed out I'm from Melbourne, he's from Canberra, there's about 800-900km between those 2 cities, and I can say with certainty that, to the best of my knowledge, I have never met Za (nor are we the same person, although I'll take the claim that we are as a compliment as he seems pretty astute).
I think what's really happening is that John tars all opposing opinions with the same brush (it was only a day or so ago that hollywood-types=liberals=academics).
Not that you two are being painted with the same brush as so much of what you both say is EXACTLY the same thing.
And; How simple it is of you to keep leaving the word Jihadist or Terrorist's out of my support for that specific genocide. Trying to paint me with a certain kind of brush? Doesnt matter in the least.
"How simple it is of you to keep leaving the word Jihadist or Terrorist's out of my support for that specific genocide"(?)
It's simple. You always use the words 'Islam' or 'Muslim', and I quote you directly.... and you don't normally use the word 'Jihadist' or 'terrorist' because you are too busy trying to include all of Islam.
It's only that so few people take you seriously that you don't get MORE people making EXACTLY the same criticisms of you.
I would be willing to bet more people take me seriously than yourself and Za. Because I'am right on the issues. Why do not we commission a poll to run for the readers? Thats should put a stop to your immature speculation. Up for the challenge?
"Why do not we commission a poll"
Now let me see, you're going to be choosing the venue, writing the questions...
what is this process supposed to demonstrate (other than your unfailing ability to reduce me to fits of laughter).
If you understood the first thing about 'research design', you'd realise that what you are suggesting regarding a poll is almost as absurd as your 'deathless genocide' policy.
"Thats should put a stop to your immature speculation."
The only 'immature speculation' on here lately is you, John, insisting that Za and myself are the same person, simply because we have both been unable to avoid the glaring contradiction that is your policy of 'the genocide of Islam', that somehow will happen without death.
I'd love to hear some of your ideas for poll questions (I could do with a good laugh!)
Most of the laughing you hear is comming from me reading your rubuttal to my challenge; since it was you who asserted that so few people take me seriously.
Danke Murphy, I had a rough few days looking after my mother, going to a funeral and so on... sorry you had to tackle this on your own.
John - do you seriously want to do a poll prove that more people take you seriously?
Then (a) we're going to have to put both options in emotionally neutral terms (something I doubt you're able to do), (b) actually get your position straight, since you flip-flop so horribly on it that it's just nuts and (c) we're going to have to put the poll somewhere with either lots of access from many, many people, or not use the internet (because like-minded groups of people cluster - a well known fact).
Hence Murphy's point on research design.
Whatever. Thats all you got?
BTW: Sorry for the deaths in your family. The same types of things have hapened here with my family also and I have had to support my Mother as well; since the last remaining member of her immediate family has passed away last Monday.
My condolence to your Mother.
Not a whatever. If you want it to be valid, then you've got to make it valid - something you would never do.
And it's not a death in my family. My step-mother is still fairly alive. It was a friend's brother. He would have been twenty two days ago.
Ok. So using the phrase "few people take you seriously" has diverted John's from the real problem. John, you frequently make statements that are contradictory, and could be paraphrased thus: "Islam is the cause of terrorism and must die/I don't want anyone to be killed." (sorry if I got the spirit of either message wrong, but I've read enough variations on the themes to be confident that's about it)
So when I've said "so few people take you seriously" it's because it hard to understand/trust/relate to someone who's truth changes every second day.
I try to take a person on their word, but yours changes drastically, and frequently.
I believe you when you say you want to "Nuke it all"(refering to Iraq). It's just when anyone challenges your genocidal streak. you claim "I don't want People to die"
I find it easier to believe that an advocate for genocide will; from time to time, deny their beliefs (advocating wholesale murder of men, women and children isn't something that too many people are proud of), than a peaceful person suddenly spouting xenophobic tirades... but hey, I've been wrong before...
... as for your poll, all I can do is recommend an orifice (or two) in which you should jam it
As it's been explained in a variety of ways that:
1) Any survey you might devise would be an abomination against good 'study design' (it is actually an exact science, not something that any nimrod can cook-up and hope to get meaningful results... but hell, you must already know that, you've a president that got fewer votes than his opponent)
2) You can't really measure the credibity of someone who refuses to have a fixed opinion: Do you want the genocidal demise of Islam or not, John? It's a straight-forward question
Post a Comment