BRITAIN: 71% of 27,000 People Support President Putin's Bombing Campaign

[Christie Brinkley]

A poll set up by the British Express newspaper (http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/611495/Vladimir-Putin-bombing-campaign-poll-support-syria-middle-east) found of over 27,000 who voted in an online poll 71% of those asked said they supported Vladimir Putins actions in the middle east.

Which generally correlates with Vladimir Putins current approval ratings which reached a peak of 89% this year back in June.

Just shows you people want strong leadership and charisma.

[Noir]

The poll results should be viewed within the context of there setting -

More than 27,000 people have voted in our Express.co.uk poll

The poll itself was hosted on the Express website
So is the poll show a repressive expression of British citizens...or a representative expression of Daily Express online readers?

[Christie Brinkley]

The poll results should be viewed within the context of there setting -


The poll itself was hosted on the Express website
So is the poll show a repressive expression of British citizens...or a representative expression of Daily Express online readers?
Still 27,000 people who were most likely British.

[NightTrain]

Well, someone has to take the bull by the horns and start eliminating the hordes of terrorists running around over there.

Leadership certainly isn't going to come from this side of the pond for over another year.

I really don't think Putin has anyone's interest at heart other than his own with his actions, but since he is bombing terrorists aggressively, I'm all for it. Besides, there's really no one to tell him he can't do it, anyway. President Weaksauce has wagged a stern finger and made weak accusations, but really, that's all anyone expects from him anymore. He's a major embarrassment to many millions of Americans.

Putin's going to do what he wants, and all any of us can do is watch and hope he doesn't muck things up worse than they already are.

[Christie Brinkley]

Well, someone has to take the bull by the horns and start eliminating the hordes of terrorists running around over there.

Leadership certainly isn't going to come from this side of the pond for over another year.

I really don't think Putin has anyone's interest at heart other than his own with his actions, but since he is bombing terrorists aggressively, I'm all for it. Besides, there's really no one to tell him he can't do it, anyway. President Weaksauce has wagged a stern finger and made weak accusations, but really, that's all anyone expects from him anymore. He's a major embarrassment to many millions of Americans.

Putin's going to do what he wants, and all any of us can do is watch and hope he doesn't muck things up worse than they already are.
Obama and his stooges have been caught with their pants down. Putin has just exposed them in pretending to fight islamic state and exposing them in the wests narrative on 'moderate rebels'. The only sizable legitimate and moderate force in Syria is the Syrian government itself.

[Noir]

Still 27,000 people who were most likely British.

:laugh:
Hey, i'll give ya that, the people were British and the poll was loaded.
A+

[Christie Brinkley]

:laugh:
Hey, i'll give ya that, the people were British and the poll was loaded.
A+
So in your expert opinion if a professional poll was taken by a polling agency then what support do you think Putin would garner?


I would say 55-65%.

[Noir]

So in your expert opinion if a professional poll was taken by a polling agency then what support do you think Putin would garner?


I would say 55-65%.

So without skipping a beat we are now onto a 'just make up whatever number you want' discussion?
Poor effort.
C-

[Christie Brinkley]

So without skipping a beat we are now onto a 'just make up whatever number you want' discussion?
Poor effort.
C-
It is a discussion forum, you can speculate.

[NightTrain]

Don't you guys have independent polling outfits over there?


I think the results, while not unbiased or scientific, gives me hope that there are still Brits who favor strong leaders and aggressive actions when it's called for. I was beginning to lose the faith in you guys.

The courage and indomitable fighting spirit displayed by you in WWII under Churchill is legendary... I haven't seen much of that lately in your media.

[Christie Brinkley]

Don't you guys have independent polling outfits over there?


I think the results, while not unbiased or scientific, gives me hope that there are still Brits who favor strong leaders and aggressive actions when it's called for. I was beginning to lose the faith in you guys.

The courage and indomitable fighting spirit displayed by you in WWII under Churchill is legendary... I haven't seen much of that lately in your media.
Yes we do but none have been taken that I know of.

[Noir]

It is a discussion forum, you can speculate.

yeah, lets just "discuss" made up statistics :cool:


Don't you guys have independent polling outfits over there

We do, the ex-princess decided instead to run their own, and then make the result front page "shocking" news :laugh:
Some folk lap that up.

[Christie Brinkley]

yeah, lets just "discuss" made up statistics :cool:



We do, the ex-princess decided instead to run their own, and then make the result front page "shocking" news :laugh:
Some folk lap that up.
Acting arrogant like you are is impressing no one. The point of the thread is to discuss and yet you dislike discussion but instead want to pull people down to act like you know everything. It's not working mate and it never will. Have you finished making a fool of yourself or do you want to continue? If so then please PM me as your posts on this thread are not useful or constructive.

[Noir]

Acting arrogant like you are is impressing no one. The point of the thread is to discuss and yet you dislike discussion but instead want to pull people down to act like you know everything. It's not working mate and it never will. Have you finished making a fool of yourself or do you want to continue? If so then please PM me as your posts on this thread are not useful or constructive.

You missed the part were we discussed the context in which the poll results were generated, and found them wanting.
You may not consider it useful to gauge the context surrounding a poll, but if anything, it is the most important aspect. - Consider that my constructive advice for you.

[jimnyc]

I'm all for someone going head to head with ISIS. Yes, I'm aware that other things are in play here, but so long as ISIS members are dying as well, I'm happy with that part. I think a lot of folks are underestimating ISIS and their growth. Luckily, we have a leader that cut the cord and ran. :rolleyes:

I think ALL of the world powers should be putting things aside in order to eradicate this group.

[Drummond]

The poll results should be viewed within the context of there setting -


The poll itself was hosted on the Express website
So is the poll show a repressive expression of British citizens...or a representative expression of Daily Express online readers?:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Noir ... really ... are you telling me that if the Leftie Guardian, or the Daily Mirror (or how about the Morning Star, eh ?) had run their own poll ... that you'd have been as critical of THEIRS ??

[Noir]

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh: Noir ... really ... are you telling me that if the Leftie Guardian, or the Daily Mirror (or how about the Morning Star, eh ?) had run their own poll ... that you'd have been as critical of THEIRS ??

Yes.

[LongTermGuy]

I'm all for someone going head to head with ISIS. Yes, I'm aware that other things are in play here, but so long as ISIS members are dying as well, I'm happy with that part. I think a lot of folks are underestimating ISIS and their growth. Luckily, we have a leader that cut the cord and ran. :rolleyes:




I think ALL of the world powers should be putting things aside in order to eradicate this group.



****************
...Yup agree...and the rest of them read the same koran (book of peace)...they are called moderates I do believe....(you know...the ones who don't want to assimilate).....IMO...islam is a cult..which has Never done anything good or positive for the World....I feel they are all Cacaroaches using " Liberal / socialist" western world "PC" Laws against civilized people....for gain and a chance to infest and breed...

*Most intelligent people know and understand what happens....when a civilized country is overrun with Mosques and infested with muslims...


http://dexteramericus.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/moderate_radical-islam.jpg?w=584

[Drummond]

Yes.:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

It's the way you tell 'em .. it's a cracker !!! :laugh:

[gabosaurus]

The only problem is that Putin is not targeting terrorists. Russian bombs have yet to hit a terrorist target.
Putin is going after opponents of the Syrian government, which it openly supports.

[NightTrain]

The only problem is that Putin is not targeting terrorists. Russian bombs have yet to hit a terrorist target.
Putin is going after opponents of the Syrian government, which it openly supports.


And you know that how?

[fj1200]

I'm all for someone going head to head with ISIS.

I don't think they're going after ISIS.


And you know that how?

Russian Airstrike in Syria Targeted CIA-Backed Rebels, U.S. Officials Say (http://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-airstrike-in-syria-targeted-cia-backed-rebels-u-s-officials-say-1443663993)

One area hit was location primarily held by rebels receiving funding, arms, training from CIA and allies
Russia launched airstrikes in Syria on Wednesday, catching U.S. and Western officials off guard and drawing new condemnation as evidence suggested Moscow wasn’t targeting extremist group Islamic State, but rather other opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
One of the airstrikes hit an area primarily held by rebels backed by the Central Intelligence Agency and allied spy services, U.S. officials said, catapulting the Syrian crisis to a new level of danger and uncertainty. Moscow’s entry means the world’s most powerful militaries—including the U.S., Britain and France—now are flying uncoordinated combat missions, heightening the risk of conflict in the skies over Syria.
U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Russia’s approach to the Syrian war—defending Mr. Assad while ostensibly targeting extremists—was tantamount to “pouring gasoline on the fire.”

...

[jimnyc]

I don't think they're going after ISIS

I can't say for what else in addition, but I've seen ISIS caravans and hideouts and such get bombed. The strike in Raqqa was widely distributed. I also couldn't give any type of body count, comparisons or anything like that. Luckily, outside of just governments, we have a lot of citizen reporting of what takes place on the ground. Similar to what you just posted about rebels, I've read/saw a lot about ISIS as well.

[jimnyc]

Btw, I've read and seen photos, and the accusation is that ISIS is following the lead of Hamas, and they are using human shields and hiding munitions in mosques and similar.

[fj1200]

I can't say for what else in addition, but I've seen ISIS caravans and hideouts and such get bombed. The strike in Raqqa was widely distributed. I also couldn't give any type of body count, comparisons or anything like that. Luckily, outside of just governments, we have a lot of citizen reporting of what takes place on the ground. Similar to what you just posted about rebels, I've read/saw a lot about ISIS as well.

Not to say that they aren't hitting ISIS at all, it's just that's not their focus.


A large majority of Russia’s military strikes in Syria have not been aimed at theIslamic State (http://www.theguardian.com/world/isis) group or jihadists tied to al-Qaida, and have instead targeted the moderate Syrian opposition, the US State Department said on Wednesday.
“Greater than 90% of the strikes that we’ve seen them take to date have not been against Isil or al-Qaida-affiliated terrorists,” said spokesman John Kirby.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/07/russia-airstrikes-syria-not-targetting-isis

[NightTrain]

I don't think they're going after ISIS.



Russian Airstrike in Syria Targeted CIA-Backed Rebels, U.S. Officials Say (http://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-airstrike-in-syria-targeted-cia-backed-rebels-u-s-officials-say-1443663993)



There's one airstrike.

My question posed to Gabby was regarding her assertion that the Russians have bombed no ISIS targets. Possibly the CIA can answer that question, but it's irritating to see her make these kinds of statements with no knowledge whatsoever of the targets or weaponry used.

[fj1200]

There's one airstrike.

My question posed to Gabby was regarding her assertion that the Russians have bombed no ISIS targets. Possibly the CIA can answer that question, but it's irritating to see her make these kinds of statements with no knowledge whatsoever of the targets or weaponry used.

Damn those absolutist statements. :shakesfist:

[Christie Brinkley]

The only problem is that Putin is not targeting terrorists. Russian bombs have yet to hit a terrorist target.
Putin is going after opponents of the Syrian government, which it openly supports.
Please know what is really going on. They are hitting ISIS and other islamic extremists.

http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=7772&stc=1

[Christie Brinkley]

I don't think they're going after ISIS.



Russian Airstrike in Syria Targeted CIA-Backed Rebels, U.S. Officials Say (http://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-airstrike-in-syria-targeted-cia-backed-rebels-u-s-officials-say-1443663993)


As well as ISIS.

Btw CIA Rebels=Al nusra/islamic front/ other Wahhabi groups.

As well as "US officials say". They can say what they want, does not make it true.

[jimnyc]

Not to say that they aren't hitting ISIS at all, it's just that's not their focus.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/07/russia-airstrikes-syria-not-targetting-isis

I can't argue that or back it up. But I have read about MORE isis hits than the US is making it sound like. Reading the news from other countries shows that they are in fact hitting ISIS, but no hard figures. Sounds like they are hitting both, if you are to believe most accounts. But who knows, if Russia is in town, and they are friendly with Assad - are any of the rebels going after Russia? And if so, that could explain other targets. But honestly, and while I should, I just don't care much, let them all kill one another. I'm just happy that SOMEONE is actively going after ISIS as well.

Not that it would ever even happen in dream world - but now the USA, Japan, China, Germany and others should be there, all working together, and maybe crush these scumbags within a month.

[jimnyc]

There's one airstrike.

My question posed to Gabby was regarding her assertion that the Russians have bombed no ISIS targets. Possibly the CIA can answer that question, but it's irritating to see her make these kinds of statements with no knowledge whatsoever of the targets or weaponry used.

I had not seen that quote earlier - "Russian bombs have yet to hit a terrorist target."

And that's VERY false and VERY easily refuted, both with video, eyewitness accounts and other leading countries accounts. I don't know how anyone can make such a statement when it's so blatantly incorrect. Sure, they are probably hitting rebels too, but to claim they aren't hitting terrorists at all, is laughable.

3 little words can make life so much easier!! - http://lmgtfy.com/?q=russia+strike+isis

[DLT]

A poll set up by the British Express newspaper (http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/611495/Vladimir-Putin-bombing-campaign-poll-support-syria-middle-east) found of over 27,000 who voted in an online poll 71% of those asked said they supported Vladimir Putins actions in the middle east.

Which generally correlates with Vladimir Putins current approval ratings which reached a peak of 89% this year back in June.

Just shows you people want strong leadership and charisma.

It's pretty sad and a sorry state of affairs when....

an ex-KGB criminal and tyrant like Putin receives that much approval merely for doing what needs to be done... because nobody ELSE is willing to do it. Of course, Putin has his own ME-related motivations, aspirations and reasons for why he is doing it.

But nevertheless...he is the only one stepping up and stopping ISIS...or even really trying. Which shows a glaring comparison to the world between him and the metrosexual wussy representing the United States currently. A fact that must, no doubt, tick off and outrage Obama to no end. That's another reason, in fact, that Putin is getting such approval....at least from Americans. Americans that have had a belly-full of the pretenda-president and usurper.

[Christie Brinkley]

It's pretty sad and a sorry state of affairs when....

an ex-KGB criminal and tyrant like Putin receives that much approval merely for doing what needs to be done... because nobody ELSE is willing to do it. Of course, Putin has his own ME-related motivations, aspirations and reasons for why he is doing it.

But nevertheless...he is the only one stepping up and stopping ISIS...or even really trying. Which shows a glaring comparison to the world between him and the metrosexual wussy representing the United States currently. A fact that must, no doubt, tick off and outrage Obama to no end. That's another reason, in fact, that Putin is getting such approval....at least from Americans. Americans that have had a belly-full of the pretenda-president and usurper.
I know, comes to something when you support the leader of Russia (ex KGB) more than you do your own leaders. I hear friends in the states telling me they are seeing bumper stickers with "putin for president" on it.

[DLT]

:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Noir ... really ... are you telling me that if the Leftie Guardian, or the Daily Mirror (or how about the Morning Star, eh ?) had run their own poll ... that you'd have been as critical of THEIRS ??


That is all they have at their disposal these days. Dissing the source...lol. All of their leftist policies have failed and are still failing...dismally.

What else can they do but try to discount the source of any news that doesn't further their agenda?

[Christie Brinkley]

That is all they have at their disposal these days. Dissing the source...lol. All of their leftist policies have failed and are still failing...dismally.

What else can they do but try to discount the source of any news that doesn't further their agenda?
Anything that proves them to be wrong they attack the source or the person. Noir did both.

They don't have intelligent debate, all they have is attacks/insults.

[NightTrain]

Damn those absolutist statements. :shakesfist:


Statements like that really rustle my jimmies.

[Christie Brinkley]

Looks so terrible living under Assad
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=046_1444752742

Look! women in the middle east under a secular government where women choose whether to wear religious clothing or not.

[Perianne]

It's pretty sad and a sorry state of affairs when....

an ex-KGB criminal and tyrant like Putin receives that much approval merely for doing what needs to be done... because nobody ELSE is willing to do it. Of course, Putin has his own ME-related motivations, aspirations and reasons for why he is doing it.

But nevertheless...he is the only one stepping up and stopping ISIS...or even really trying. Which shows a glaring comparison to the world between him and the metrosexual wussy representing the United States currently. A fact that must, no doubt, tick off and outrage Obama to no end. That's another reason, in fact, that Putin is getting such approval....at least from Americans. Americans that have had a belly-full of the pretenda-president and usurper.

I wonder if that is really the case. I have worked with people who prefer not to do particular things and they have no embarrassment at letting others do the job for them.

[Christie Brinkley]

I wonder if that is really the case. I have worked with people who prefer not to do particular things and they have no embarrassment at letting others do the job for them.
If you want someone to do a job then they don't assist in making that persons job even harder with the announcement from Obama that he has dropped tonnes of equipment to 'moderate rebels' and you also would not wage an information and propaganda attack against that country if they are doing what you like.

Fact is Putin has caught Obama and his stooges with their pants down on their narrative which is crumbling. Now Obama is defending Al Nusra/Islamic front and other extremist groups.

[Gunny]

So without skipping a beat we are now onto a 'just make up whatever number you want' discussion?
Poor effort.
C-

You're a damned panty-waist. Polls are polls. Add in the give or take factor of 10% and you're STILL a wuss. It's sad Putin is punking out the President of the US, but at least he's doing something while this little bitch we got just vacillates.

There's a problem and you don't want to fix it. Might want to read up on Chamberlain, Hitler and the 30s. You sit around kissing ass and end up fighting a hydra instead of killing a snake from the start.

[Black Diamond]

You're a damned panty-waist. Polls are polls. Add in the give or take factor of 10% and you're STILL a wuss. It's sad Putin is punking out the President of the US, but at least he's doing something while this little bitch we got just vacillates.

There's a problem and you don't want to fix it. Might want to read up on Chamberlain, Hitler and the 30s. You sit around kissing ass and end up fighting a hydra instead of killing a snake from the start.
No one wants to fight. America has forgotten 9/11 and Pearl. Brits have forgotten the blitz and munich. The poll saying 70% of Brits are happy with someone else doing their dirty work doesn't surprise me and it would probably poll similarly here.

[fj1200]

Please know what is really going on. They are hitting ISIS and other islamic extremists.

But not exclusively.


As well as ISIS.

Btw CIA Rebels=Al nusra/islamic front/ other Wahhabi groups.

As well as "US officials say". They can say what they want, does not make it true.

Of course. But it's folly to expect that Russia's interests line up perfectly with ours.


I can't argue that or back it up. But I have read about MORE isis hits than the US is making it sound like. Reading the news from other countries shows that they are in fact hitting ISIS, but no hard figures. Sounds like they are hitting both, if you are to believe most accounts. But who knows, if Russia is in town, and they are friendly with Assad - are any of the rebels going after Russia? And if so, that could explain other targets. But honestly, and while I should, I just don't care much, let them all kill one another. I'm just happy that SOMEONE is actively going after ISIS as well.

Not that it would ever even happen in dream world - but now the USA, Japan, China, Germany and others should be there, all working together, and maybe crush these scumbags within a month.

I don't think we should be in a position to of trusting Russia at this point.

[fj1200]

Polls are polls. Add in the give or take factor of 10% and you're STILL a wuss.

Polls are polls but on-line polls are not polls; they're toys.

[Gunny]

No one wants to fight. America has forgotten 9/11 and Pearl. Brits have forgotten the blitz and munich. The poll saying 70% of Brits are happy with someone else doing their dirty work doesn't surprise me and it would probably poll similarly here.

It's a mistake. Putin is Stalin Jr. Russia has always supported Syria far as I know. Turning a blind eye to their crap is going to do what?

Let Russia have the Middle East. They can be the new enemy of Islam. Either we go in and stomp ass or get out. We have more oil here than they do. Oh yeah, we can't drill for it but the Russians can.

Somebody needs to grow TF up around here (and I don't mean you personally).

[Christie Brinkley]

But not exclusively.



Of course. But it's folly to expect that Russia's interests line up perfectly with ours.



I don't think we should be in a position to of trusting Russia at this point.
You trust your government more than Russia? After everything?

After government lied about WMD's (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-iraq-war)
After the failure (purposely or by accident) of middle eastern policy (http://news.yahoo.com/iraq-starts-bombing-help-intelligence-center-includes-russia-123443654.html)
After the bombing of Libya which reduced Libya into a jihadi warlord cesspit full of government factions and criminal gangs? (http://www.globalresearch.ca/libya-from-africas-richest-state-under-gaddafi-to-failed-state-after-nato-intervention/5408740)
After the continued supporters of Saudi Arabia (full their oil) had a part in 9/11? (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/september-11-attacks/11653706/US-report-claiming-Saudi-Arabia-financed-911-attack-redacted-by-Bush.html)
After the government funded and supplied 'moderate rebels' who were really Al Nusra and other islamic extremists? (http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/12/politics/syria-rebel-groups-ammunition-50-tons/)
After over a year of the strongest military powers in the world supposedly fighting ISIS still ISIS is growing? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American-led_intervention_in_Syria)
After the government not opposing Turkey bombing the Kurds and hardly bombing ISIS, Kurds who are currently fighting ISIS to create their own state? (http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/594352/war-on-ISIS-US-supports-Kurdish-forcesTurkey-BOMBS-them)
After the airdrops directly to ISIS which were 'accidentally dropped' (https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=14&v=idba-EN_5QM)
After the Toyota trucks (http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/10/the-u-s-government-supplied-isis-iconic-pickup-trucks.html)

I could go on but I have other fish to fry. Where have you been the past 10 years?

[Black Diamond]

It's a mistake. Putin is Stalin Jr. Russia has always supported Syria far as I know. Turning a blind eye to their crap is going to do what?

Let Russia have the Middle East. They can be the new enemy of Islam. Either we go in and stomp ass or get out. We have more oil here than they do. Oh yeah, we can't drill for it but the Russians can.

Somebody needs to grow TF up around here (and I don't mean you personally).

Agreed. But it may be too late to grow up in January 2017

[jimnyc]

I don't think we should be in a position to of trusting Russia at this point.

I trust them more than ISIS.

[fj1200]

You trust your government more than Russia? After everything?

...

I could go on but I have other fish to fry. Where have you been the past 10 years?

That's a deflection. It doesn't mean I need to trust Russia more. FWIW if it involves BO I fully expect him to muff it.

[fj1200]

I trust them more than ISIS.

It's not a matter of trust. I know what ISIS wants, who knows what Russia wants?

[Christie Brinkley]

It's a mistake. Putin is Stalin Jr. Russia has always supported Syria far as I know. Turning a blind eye to their crap is going to do what?

Let Russia have the Middle East. They can be the new enemy of Islam. Either we go in and stomp ass or get out. We have more oil here than they do. Oh yeah, we can't drill for it but the Russians can.

Somebody needs to grow TF up around here (and I don't mean you personally).
You must know the anglo-american elite will not give up on maintaining power over the region and crushing anyone that is not a vassal state?

The powers that be Dems/rebs and the people above them don't care who dies or who gets killed whether that be american soldiers or foreign soldiers and civilians. All they want is power/control/money which is what the world is really ran upon.

The only thing the establishment cares about is maintaining the domestic lies that we are 'the god guys'. Putin is smashing the last thing they have left- their lies.

[Christie Brinkley]

That's a deflection. It doesn't mean I need to trust Russia more. FWIW if it involves BO I fully expect him to muff it.
Trust no one 100%. Sad fact is the Russian government is more trustworthy than the american government and has been proven so on many occasions.

To blindly trust your government just because you think they are your government really is playing into the occupational forces hands.

[Black Diamond]

It's not a matter of trust. I know what ISIS wants, who knows what Russia wants?

Hegemony over European natural gas market for one. That explains Russia's initial interest in Syria a year or two ago and possibly now.

[Gunny]

You must know the anglo-american elite will not give up on maintaining power over the region and crushing anyone that is not a vassal state?

The powers that be Dems/rebs and the people above them don't care who dies or who gets killed whether that be american soldiers or foreign soldiers and civilians. All they want is power/control/money which is what the world is really ran upon.

The only thing the establishment cares about is maintaining the domestic lies that we are 'the god guys'. Putin is smashing the last thing they have left- their lies.

Geez .. you sound like ME. Do I have a diabolical twin somewhere? :laugh:

[Christie Brinkley]

It's not a matter of trust. I know what ISIS wants, who knows what Russia wants?
Russia wants to defeat ISIS and other jihadist groups. That is why they are launching hundreds of airstrikes on active targets killing upwards of two thousand terrorist scum bags in less than two weeks since they have stepped in.

They want to maintain the Syrian government and their naval base as well as humiliating the United States and its allies.

[fj1200]

Trust no one 100%. Sad fact is the Russian government is more trustworthy than the american government and has been proven so on many occasions.

To blindly trust your government just because you think they are your government really is playing into the occupational forces hands.

Yeah, OK.


Hegemony over European natural gas market for one. That explains Russia's initial interest in Syria a year or two ago and possibly now.

Which means ISIS is not their number 1 goal.

[jimnyc]

It's not a matter of trust. I know what ISIS wants, who knows what Russia wants?

Right now, so long as ISIS is being hit, that's a positive. I'm not even stating either way on other intentions of theirs, just that their bombing of ISIS is a welcome thing.

[Gunny]

Russia wants to defeat ISIS and other jihadist groups. That is why they are launching hundreds of airstrikes on active targets killing upwards of two thousand terrorist scum bags in less than two weeks since they have stepped in.

They want to maintain the Syrian government and their naval base as well as humiliating the United States and its allies.

I DO have a diabolical twin. :laugh:

[Black Diamond]

Russia wants to defeat ISIS and other jihadist groups. That is why they are launching hundreds of airstrikes on active targets killing upwards of two thousand terrorist scum bags in less than two weeks since they have stepped in.

They want to maintain the Syrian government and their naval base as well as humiliating the United States and its allies.

I think destroying Isis is a secondary goal of Putin. Secondary by a mile.

[Christie Brinkley]

Hegemony over European natural gas market for one. That explains Russia's initial interest in Syria a year or two ago and possibly now.
They virtually already have great control over the natural gas market in Europe. Maintaining the Syrian government would allow Iran to move ahead with the proposed friendship pipeline which would be to a huge benefit to Iran.

[Black Diamond]

Yeah, OK.



Which means ISIS is not their number 1 goal.

I agree with your response to me 100%

[jimnyc]

I think destroying Isis is a secondary goal of Putin. Secondary by a mile.

And sadly, his secondary actions against ISIS are larger than Obama's weak responses and actions towards ISIS.

[fj1200]

Russia wants to defeat ISIS and other jihadist groups. That is why they are launching hundreds of airstrikes on active targets killing upwards of two thousand terrorist scum bags in less than two weeks since they have stepped in.

They want to maintain the Syrian government and their naval base as well as humiliating the United States and its allies.

I don't think the former affirms the latter. They want to keep Assad in power but they only care about the rebels and ISIS as far as they go.

[Christie Brinkley]

Yeah, OK.



Which means ISIS is not their number 1 goal.
Killing ISIS and other terrorists is part of their goal to secure other goals.

[Black Diamond]

They virtually already have great control over the natural gas market in Europe. Maintaining the Syrian government would allow Iran to move ahead with the proposed friendship pipeline which would be to a huge benefit to Iran.

They do currently. But if Assad had been overthrown, that hegemony would have been threatened.

[jimnyc]

Killing ISIS and other terrorists is part of their goal to secure other goals.

That's how I see it too. No doubt they have other goals, but I'm cool for now so long as they are taking the lead against ISIS. I think we also need more time to assess their fight against the scumbags as well.

[Christie Brinkley]

I don't think the former affirms the latter. They want to keep Assad in power but they only care about the rebels and ISIS as far as they go.
They see them as the same. As Lavrov said about ISIS and the other groups- Al Nusra/islamic front

"if it looks like a terrorist, if it acts like a terrorist, if it walks like a terrorist then it is a terrorist'.

[fj1200]

Killing ISIS and other terrorists is part of their goal to secure other goals.

I disagree killing ISIS is a goal. It may be a means but it's not an end.

[Black Diamond]

And sadly, his secondary actions against ISIS are larger than Obama's weak responses and actions towards ISIS.

Yes. It's hard to imagine a more passive leader than osamabama.

[Christie Brinkley]

They do currently. But if Assad had been overthrown, that hegemony would have been threatened.
That does not involve funding terrorists to wage war and behead people ruining and killing countless hundreds of thousands of peoples lives.

[Christie Brinkley]

I disagree killing ISIS is a goal. It may be a means but it's not an end.
So please explain why Russia want ISIS around? I know why the United States and its arab allies don't want them gone but why do you think Russia wants them around?

[Black Diamond]

That does not involve funding terrorists to wage war and behead people ruining and killing countless hundreds of thousands of peoples lives.

I don't know how strong Isis was in Syria two years ago. When Putin put his foot down, his hegemony was the reason.

[fj1200]

They see them as the same. As Lavrov said about ISIS and the other groups- Al Nusra/islamic front

"if it looks like a terrorist, if it acts like a terrorist, if it walks like a terrorist then it is a terrorist'.

Unless it's a freedom fighter. ;) Besides, there are governments as terrorists too.

[fj1200]

So please explain why Russia want ISIS around? I know why the United States and its arab allies don't want them gone but why do you think Russia wants them around?

I didn't say that Russia wanted them around.

[Christie Brinkley]

Yes. It's hard to imagine a more passive leader than osamabama.
Funder of terrorism and master of proxy wars. Don't underestimate Obama, he is much more of a slime ball than Bush was when it comes to foreign policy. At least with Bush the narrative was still strong and alive of america 'fighting terrorism' by invading countries who had little to do with the attacks on 9/11 (Iraq).

[Christie Brinkley]

I don't know how strong Isis was in Syria two years ago. When Putin put his foot down, his hegemony was the reason.
Their strength was less than what it is now. ISIS was not officially told to the masses right from the start, only when they gave the go ahead to start taking parts of Iraq. They could not risk the freedom fighting rebels being exposed as islamic extremists which is who they really are.

[jimnyc]

Funder of terrorism and master of proxy wars. Don't underestimate Obama, he is much more of a slime ball than Bush was when it comes to foreign policy. At least with Bush the narrative was still strong and alive of america 'fighting terrorism' by invading countries who had little to do with the attacks on 9/11 (Iraq).

Another thread of course... 12 years of refusal to follow UN agreements, they were in material breach... The US went into Afghanistan in 2001, not Iraq. Iraq was 2003. Many see it as connected to 9/11, but it simply wasn't. The invasion would have and should have taken place regardless, and that path was set and well on it's way since 1998.

[Christie Brinkley]

I didn't say that Russia wanted them around.
You claim they are not bombing them but bombing 'rebels'.

Well they dropped bombs on training camps and facilities surrounding the ISIS capital of Al Raqqa (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3257288/Two-children-killed-latest-Russian-airstrikes-U-S-general-accuses-Moscow-dropping-CLUSTER-BOMBS-obliterate-areas-size-football-fields-civilians.html) just a few days ago.


But still you insist America wants to destroy ISIS?

[Christie Brinkley]

Another thread of course... 12 years of refusal to follow UN agreements, they were in material breach... The US went into Afghanistan in 2001, not Iraq. Iraq was 2003. Many see it as connected to 9/11, but it simply wasn't. The invasion would have and should have taken place regardless, and that path was set and well on it's way since 1998.
All invasions in the middle east/north africa are in response to what happened on 9/11 after 2001. It was the start of 'the war on terror' when international law started to become irrelevant.

[jimnyc]

All invasions in the middle east/north africa are in response to what happened on 9/11 after 2001. It was the start of 'the war on terror' when international law started to become irrelevant.

So this plan was hatched starting in 1998, long prior to 9/11? And the failed negotiations and material breaches and such, all done for future knowledge of 9/11? Hell, they should have fully invaded in 1998. And if it was in fact due to 9/11, why did they wait a few years to respond then?

Iraq and the endless failed resolutions is what brought forth that war. It was happening anyway.

[Christie Brinkley]

So this plan was hatched starting in 1998, long prior to 9/11? And the failed negotiations and material breaches and such, all done for future knowledge of 9/11? Hell, they should have fully invaded in 1998. And if it was in fact due to 9/11, why did they wait a few years to respond then?

Iraq and the endless failed resolutions is what brought forth that war. It was happening anyway.
They had to create fear at home and therefore fear=support for war. They knew it had to be big for what they had planned.

They could not political afford the costs of toppling the government instead they tried to make the government fall by using the CIA.

[Black Diamond]

So this plan was hatched starting in 1998, long prior to 9/11? And the failed negotiations and material breaches and such, all done for future knowledge of 9/11? Hell, they should have fully invaded in 1998. And if it was in fact due to 9/11, why did they wait a few years to respond then?

Iraq and the endless failed resolutions is what brought forth that war. It was happening anyway.

I think it was easier to sell ameica on Iraq after we were attacked.

[Christie Brinkley]

I think it was easier to sell ameica on Iraq after we were attacked.
That is the line that they had to cross in american public opinion.

Make the public support a ground invasion, if a terror attack is needed then it is needed.

Looking at terror assisted or entirely committed by a state upon its own people is common, especially at times of political instability and at times of elections just like we have seen in Turkey the bombings were meant to galvanize Turkish nationalism.

Looking at more historical examples we can look at the Reichstag firebombing in 1933 meant to shock the German public in accepting that communism was going to destroy Germany and it needed a strong government which destroyed freedoms to take charge.


Although we know communism and now muslim extremism are real threats they are used by governments to further their political agenda.

[Gunny]

Another thread of course... 12 years of refusal to follow UN agreements, they were in material breach... The US went into Afghanistan in 2001, not Iraq. Iraq was 2003. Many see it as connected to 9/11, but it simply wasn't. The invasion would have and should have taken place regardless, and that path was set and well on it's way since 1998.

Have to disagree. We should have left Iraq alone. FIRST and most obvious is the power vacuum we have created. Second. it was none of our business.

It was about oil. You don't see us rushing into Africa or SE Asia because of despotic regimes. There's no money in it. And why haven't we lit Iran's ass up? NO, we go in and take out the one regime that stood between the Shia and Sunni and create ISIS. Brilliant.

Then we get wuss boy for president.

Russia already used Syria as a means of oil and money. You don't think those MIGs and T-32a just magically appeared? Russia is protecting an asset. If WE don't do something, they are going to expand that asset.

[jimnyc]

They had to create fear at home and therefore fear=support for war. They knew it had to be big for what they had planned.

They could not political afford the costs of toppling the government instead they tried to make the government fall by using the CIA.

Fear as in how? Are you stating that our government had anything to do with 9/11?


I think it was easier to sell ameica on Iraq after we were attacked.

I would agree with that, but I don't think our government had anything to do with 9/11. And there were more than enough facts there to support action, action that was prefaced in UN resolutions for quite some time. Perhaps lots of fuck-ups along the way, no doubt about that. But I don't think 9/11 was a conspiracy of any sort, and in reality the Iraq invasion wasn't about 9/11, even if some of the public made such a connection and that that's what it was entirely about.

[Christie Brinkley]

Have to disagree. We should have left Iraq alone. FIRST and most obvious is the power vacuum we have created. Second. it was none of our business.

It was about oil. You don't see us rushing into Africa or SE Asia because of despotic regimes. There's no money in it. And why haven't we lit Iran's ass up? NO, we go in and take out the one regime that stood between the Shia and Sunni and create ISIS. Brilliant.

Then we get wuss boy for president.

Russia already used Syria as a means of oil and money. You don't think those MIGs and T-32a just magically appeared? Russia is protecting an asset. If WE don't do something, they are going to expand that asset.
Russia is maintaining the friends it already had, we saw this in Ukraine as well. The only people going on the offensive are the anglo-american establishment who are hellbent on destroying any resistance to their dominance in the middle east.

[Black Diamond]

Fear as in how? Are you stating that our government had anything to do with 9/11?



I would agree with that, but I don't think our government had anything to do with 9/11. And there were more than enough facts there to support action, action that was prefaced in UN resolutions for quite some time. Perhaps lots of fuck-ups along the way, no doubt about that. But I don't think 9/11 was a conspiracy of any sort, and in reality the Iraq invasion wasn't about 9/11, even if some of the public made such a connection and that that's what it was entirely about.

No I don't think the govt was behind the attacks. The attacks made the public and Bush more ready to go after any threat. Including Iraq.

[Christie Brinkley]

Fear as in how? Are you stating that our government had anything to do with 9/11?



I would agree with that, but I don't think our government had anything to do with 9/11. And there were more than enough facts there to support action, action that was prefaced in UN resolutions for quite some time. Perhaps lots of fuck-ups along the way, no doubt about that. But I don't think 9/11 was a conspiracy of any sort, and in reality the Iraq invasion wasn't about 9/11, even if some of the public made such a connection and that that's what it was entirely about.
Fear as in america coming under attack. Thousands dead, smoke, fire, mangled steel, the homeland under attack. The anger they needed was created, the anger which was needed to support invasion of any country in the middle east irrelevant of its role in the attack was achieved.

I am sure many you heard after the attacks said "just bomb them" or "flatten them in the middle east". The public don't understand the world 100%. All the establishment requires is their passive support.

As to whether the united states government assisted in the attacks or let it happen is another issue, but why would they not want it to happen? To save lives? They don't care about lives.

[Black Diamond]

That is the line that they had to cross in american public opinion.

Make the public support a ground invasion, if a terror attack is needed then it is needed.

Looking at terror assisted or entirely committed by a state upon its own people is common, especially at times of political instability and at times of elections just like we have seen in Turkey the bombings were meant to galvanize Turkish nationalism.

Looking at more historical examples we can look at the Reichstag firebombing in 1933 meant to shock the German public in accepting that communism was going to destroy Germany and it needed a strong government which destroyed freedoms to take charge.


Although we know communism and now muslim extremism are real threats they are used by governments to further their political agenda.

Yes although no one has ever proved who burned the Reichstag. People just assume the Nazis did it

[Christie Brinkley]

No I don't think the govt was behind the attacks. The attacks made the public and Bush more ready to go after any threat. Including Iraq.
I don't think people are saying that the American government was 100% behind the attacks but certain elements at the higher levels had a lot to gain from the attacks taking place. If any involvement criminals in your government had in the attacks probably was the co-operation in training and supplying the terrorists with other nations like Saudi Arabia as well as the reaction which was non existent.

[Christie Brinkley]

Yes although no one has ever proved who burned the Reichstag. People just assume the Nazis did it
By picking up a mentally retarded hospital patient and throwing him in the street naked with fire starters claiming he was a communist just so they had a face in the papers and a person to execute.

I wonder if in 100 years time we will think the same about 9/11?

[jimnyc]

As to whether the united states government assisted in the attacks or let it happen is another issue, but why would they not want it to happen? To save lives? They don't care about lives.

I don't go for conspiracy theories much myself, at least not with some sort of irrefutable proof, which would of course then take it out of the theory department. To each their own, I suppose.

For all we know then, the nitwits in the UK government helped the acts happen, and they gained from them, and got involved as a result.

[Christie Brinkley]

I don't go for conspiracy theories much myself, at least not with some sort of irrefutable proof, which would of course then take it out of the theory department. To each their own, I suppose.

For all we know then, the nitwits in the UK government helped the acts happen, and they gained from them, and got involved as a result.
If irrefutable proof means the government admits it then that will never happen. 'My government' has its hands dirty as well with 7/7.

[jimnyc]

If irrefutable proof means the government admits it then that will never happen. 'My government' has its hands dirty as well with 7/7.

How about ANY direct proof of government involvement on 9/11? Not admitting from the government - just simple direct proof. With thousands and thousands of tons of evidence, and what would likely have been hundreds and hundreds needed to pull off - surely there is at least one wire, or one person, or one piece of paper that is solid proof?

There's not.

But anyway, I don't want to get this too far off topic. I simply disagree 100% and find conspiracy theories a little wacky. We have an entire forum for just that though, and this subject has been discussed endlessly, and never has any proof been brought forth. You're welcome to be the first! :)

[Gunny]

Russia is maintaining the friends it already had, we saw this in Ukraine as well. The only people going on the offensive are the anglo-american establishment who are hellbent on destroying any resistance to their dominance in the middle east.

Got to disagree with that as well. They have attacked us. Their doctrine IS to attack us. What I don't get is the backward chess game. We're allies with the Saudi's who do nothing and both al Qieda and ISIS are Sunni. But we are at war with ISIS while O-blah-blah gives Iran a handjob a country openly hostile to us. That isn't even politics. It's stupidity.

Radical Islam exists because of unemployment. You get 3 hots and cot if you're a member. Can blame the misuse of the religion, but the fact is, if these guys couldn't make a living off of war, they'd be tending sheep. Lot easier to claim something in the name of religion and get funded for it. I think Obama just perked up their bank account.

The West didn't start this. Charles Martel stopped the first Islamic incursion in France centuries ago. Leonidas stopped the Persians at Thermopylae. Wasn't us going out looking. We were too busy not opening our windows or bathing and dying of the plague.

[Christie Brinkley]

Got to disagree with that as well. They have attacked us. Their doctrine IS to attack us. What I don't get is the backward chess game. We're allies with the Saudi's who do nothing and both al Qieda and ISIS are Sunni. But we are at war with ISIS while O-blah-blah gives Iran a handjob a country openly hostile to us. That isn't even politics. It's stupidity.

Radical Islam exists because of unemployment. You get 3 hots and cot if you're a member. Can blame the misuse of the religion, but the fact is, if these guys couldn't make a living off of war, they'd be tending sheep. Lot easier to claim something in the name of religion and get funded for it. I think Obama just perked up their bank account.

The West didn't start this. Charles Martel stopped the first Islamic incursion in France centuries ago. Leonidas stopped the Persians at Thermopylae. Wasn't us going out looking. We were too busy not opening our windows or bathing and dying of the plague.
To the establishment radical Islam is the best thing since communism, a controllable enemy used to install fear in populations to justify war and further deterioration of fundamental rights.

[Christie Brinkley]

How about ANY direct proof of government involvement on 9/11? Not admitting from the government - just simple direct proof. With thousands and thousands of tons of evidence, and what would likely have been hundreds and hundreds needed to pull off - surely there is at least one wire, or one person, or one piece of paper that is solid proof?

There's not.

But anyway, I don't want to get this too far off topic. I simply disagree 100% and find conspiracy theories a little wacky. We have an entire forum for just that though, and this subject has been discussed endlessly, and never has any proof been brought forth. You're welcome to be the first! :)
Just a little nugget of what really happened, I ask the question- why did norad stand down?

[jimnyc]

Just a little nugget of what really happened, I ask the question- why did norad stand down?

These were the typical conspiracy theorist things that were brought up WAY back when, and were ALL debunked, MANY years ago.

No Stand-Down Order

Claim: No fighter jets were scrambled from any of the 28 Air Force bases within close range of the four hijacked flights. "On 11 September Andrews had two squadrons of fighter jets with the job of protecting the skies over Washington D.C.," says the Web site emperors-clothes.com. "They failed to do their job." "There is only one explanation for this," writes Mark R. Elsis of StandDown.net. "Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9/11."

FACT: On 9/11 there were only 14 fighter jets on alert in the contiguous 48 states. No computer network or alarm automatically alerted the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) of missing planes. "They [civilian Air Traffic Control, or ATC] had to pick up the phone and literally dial us," says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. Boston Center, one of 22 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regional ATC facilities, called NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) three times: at 8:37 am EST to inform NEADS that Flight 11 was hijacked; at 9:21 am to inform the agency, mistakenly, that Flight 11 was headed for Washington (the plane had hit the North Tower 35 minutes earlier); and at 9:41 am to (erroneously) identify Delta Air Lines Flight 1989 from Boston as a possible hijacking. The New York ATC called NEADS at 9:03 am to report that United Flight 175 had been hijacked—the same time the plane slammed into the South Tower. Within minutes of that first call from Boston Center, NEADS scrambled two F-15s from Otis Air Force Base in Falmouth, Mass., and three F-16s from Langley Air National Guard Base in Hampton, Va. None of the fighters got anywhere near the pirated planes.

Why couldn't ATC find the hijacked flights? When the hijackers turned off the planes' transponders, which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing some of the country's busiest air corridors. And NORAD's sophisticated radar? It ringed the continent, looking outward for threats, not inward. "It was like a doughnut," Martin says. "There was no coverage in the middle." Pre-9/11, flights originating in the States were not seen as threats and NORAD wasn't prepared to track them.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5654/debunking-911-myths-planes/

[Gunny]

To the establishment radical Islam is the best thing since communism, a controllable enemy used to install fear in populations to justify war and further deterioration of fundamental rights.

Interesting theory. I would agree except for the fact Islam has been around since the 7th century, at least. Supposedly based on a second son, right? The NAZIs and Communists didn't last long. And I'm not ignorant about Islam and know the difference between a Sunni and Shia.

I also know the only way we've ever stopped their conquest for world domination is to kick their butts. They've been doing this crap forever. I'm all for everyone knocking their crap off and going home but that ain't how it is. Everyone's trying to force their will and desires on everyone else.

[DLT]

I know, comes to something when you support the leader of Russia (ex KGB) more than you do your own leaders. I hear friends in the states telling me they are seeing bumper stickers with "putin for president" on it.

It truly is a surreal world that we live in now, eh? That is what you will always get after seven years, (nine actually, if you count the two years that Democrats had control of both houses of Congress during Bush's last 2 years in office), of leftist rule and control. And guess what? It's going to get even more surreal over this next year. A LOT more, in fact.

[Black Diamond]

It truly is a surreal world that we live in now, eh? That is what you will always get after seven years, (nine actually, if you count the two years that Democrats had control of both houses of Congress during Bush's last 2 years in office), of leftist rule and control. And guess what? It's going to get even more surreal over this next year. A LOT more, in fact.

That's what us frightening. A lot can happen in 16 months.

[DLT]

I wonder if that is really the case. I have worked with people who prefer not to do particular things and they have no embarrassment at letting others do the job for them.

What are you saying? That Obama wants Putin to step up and do the dirty work?

I don't believe that for a minute. If Obama really had wanted the job done, he would have done it and taken credit for it....which is the only thing he's good at other than lying....and taking credit for what others did (See: Obama grabs credit for Iraq success BEFORE Obama turned it into failure and defeat).

Nah, Putin is making Obama look, by comparison like the weakling clown that he is. Obama's radical leftist ideology automatically makes him into that clown, since anyone with half a remaining working brain cell knows that socialism (communism with a smiley face) doesn't work and in fact is failing around the globe as we speak.

[Christie Brinkley]

These were the typical conspiracy theorist things that were brought up WAY back when, and were ALL debunked, MANY years ago.

No Stand-Down Order

Claim: No fighter jets were scrambled from any of the 28 Air Force bases within close range of the four hijacked flights. "On 11 September Andrews had two squadrons of fighter jets with the job of protecting the skies over Washington D.C.," says the Web site emperors-clothes.com. "They failed to do their job." "There is only one explanation for this," writes Mark R. Elsis of StandDown.net. "Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9/11."

FACT: On 9/11 there were only 14 fighter jets on alert in the contiguous 48 states. No computer network or alarm automatically alerted the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) of missing planes. "They [civilian Air Traffic Control, or ATC] had to pick up the phone and literally dial us," says Maj. Douglas Martin, public affairs officer for NORAD. Boston Center, one of 22 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regional ATC facilities, called NORAD's Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) three times: at 8:37 am EST to inform NEADS that Flight 11 was hijacked; at 9:21 am to inform the agency, mistakenly, that Flight 11 was headed for Washington (the plane had hit the North Tower 35 minutes earlier); and at 9:41 am to (erroneously) identify Delta Air Lines Flight 1989 from Boston as a possible hijacking. The New York ATC called NEADS at 9:03 am to report that United Flight 175 had been hijacked—the same time the plane slammed into the South Tower. Within minutes of that first call from Boston Center, NEADS scrambled two F-15s from Otis Air Force Base in Falmouth, Mass., and three F-16s from Langley Air National Guard Base in Hampton, Va. None of the fighters got anywhere near the pirated planes.

Why couldn't ATC find the hijacked flights? When the hijackers turned off the planes' transponders, which broadcast identifying signals, ATC had to search 4500 identical radar blips crisscrossing some of the country's busiest air corridors. And NORAD's sophisticated radar? It ringed the continent, looking outward for threats, not inward. "It was like a doughnut," Martin says. "There was no coverage in the middle." Pre-9/11, flights originating in the States were not seen as threats and NORAD wasn't prepared to track them.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a5654/debunking-911-myths-planes/
Bit strange drills always seem to be taking place when terror attacks happen

CIA officer assigned as chief of NRO's strategic gaming division, the announcement says, "On the morning of September 11th 2001, Mr. Fulton and his team ... were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way that day."

Read (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-08-22-sept-11-plane-drill-_x.htm)

In violation with federal law FAA managers destroyed 9/11 tape

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/05/07/faa_managers_destroyed_911_tape/

[DLT]

That's what us frightening. A lot can happen in 16 months.

A lot can happen in just a few months, too. I will consider it a miracle if we make it through the rest of this year without something else happening to further and push the leftist agenda.

And if not this year, definitely expect an "October surprise" next year. You know the kind I'm talking about.

[Black Diamond]

What are you saying? That Obama wants Putin to step up and do the dirty work?

I don't believe that for a minute. If Obama really had wanted the job done, he would have done it and taken credit for it....which is the only thing he's good at other than lying....and taking credit for what others did (See: Obama grabs credit for Iraq success BEFORE Obama turned it into failure and defeat).

Nah, Putin is making Obama look, by comparison like the weakling clown that he is. Obama's radical leftist ideology automatically makes him into that clown, since anyone with half a remaining working brain cell knows that socialism (communism with a smiley face) doesn't work and in fact is failing around the globe as we speak.
Obama doesn't need Putins help in showing the world what a pussy he is.

[jimnyc]

Bit strange drills always seem to be taking place when terror attacks happen

CIA officer assigned as chief of NRO's strategic gaming division, the announcement says, "On the morning of September 11th 2001, Mr. Fulton and his team ... were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way that day."

Read (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-08-22-sept-11-plane-drill-_x.htm)

Moving the goal posts? I thought the question was about a stand down order? There was in fact no order.

But with all due respect, I don't want to start going down the line now with every myth/accusation that took place. I must have invested hundreds of hours debating this stuff in the past. Not that I'm pushing you away, just that it feels like something I've answered 30x already.

[DLT]

Anything that proves them to be wrong they attack the source or the person. Noir did both.

They don't have intelligent debate, all they have is attacks/insults.

Of course. It's been that way for as long as I can remember....and as long as I've been posting on the net.

My first month on the fray felt like I was swimming with sharks. I was. Leftie ones.

[Christie Brinkley]

Moving the goal posts? I thought the question was about a stand down order? There was in fact no order.

But with all due respect, I don't want to start going down the line now with every myth/accusation that took place. I must have invested hundreds of hours debating this stuff in the past. Not that I'm pushing you away, just that it feels like something I've answered 30x already.
Things don't add up, some can be answered and some bits can't be answered. You must agree in your analysis of what happened that the official story is very unlikely. Fact still stands that terrorists amazingly operated in the united states without being seen as a terror threat by the american government (that is if you believe in the official story) amazingly successfully hijacking planes and amazingly gaining the training needed to fly the planes all on their own? You know how ridiculous that sounds?

Have we seen anything like that before 9/11 or since?

[Black Diamond]

Things don't add up, some can be answered and some bits can't be answered. You must agree in your analysis of what happened that the official story is very unlikely. Fact still stands that terrorists amazingly operated in the united states without being seen as a terror threat by the american government (that is if you believe in the official story) amazingly successfully hijacking planes and amazingly gaining the training needed to fly the planes all on their own? You know how ridiculous that sounds?

Have we seen anything like that before 9/11 or since?

Patriot act reversed some actions Clinton took. For example, one of the terrorists was pulled over in Maryland for speeding. Had patriot act been in place (or this portion of it), he would have been detained for other activities, and God knows what would have been uncovered.

[jimnyc]

Things don't add up, some can be answered and some bits can't be answered. You must agree in your analysis of what happened that the official story is very unlikely. Fact still stands that terrorists amazingly operated in the united states without being seen as a terror threat by the american government (that is if you believe in the official story) amazingly successfully hijacking planes and amazingly gaining the training needed to fly the planes all on their own? You know how ridiculous that sounds?

Have we seen anything like that before 9/11 or since?

I don't see too many issues with the official story. I think there's some fucked up things, perhaps things unanswered or unexplained, but we haven't had too many planes go full speed into skyscrapers prior to this to compare with either. And I wouldn't say they "amazingly operated". It was 19 guys, and we didn't have crazy terror watches going on like we do today. It's not difficult for some guys to receive training to fly planes. I don't think it's all as "amazing" as you claim several times. And no, I don't see it as ridiculous. MANY people before you have claimed similarly to MANY folks who are MUCH MUCH smarter than I am (not that it takes much!)... and yet when physics experts, analysts and everyone else gets involved, it seems to be all explained. Is it all perfectly explained? Of course not, and I wouldn't expect it to be.

And yes, folks have in fact tried to setup and/or commit terror attacks since then, here in the states and in other countries. Hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of attacks have been stifled since 9/11.

But if you find it that amazing and ridiculous, then we can just agree to disagree. The amount of time and hours I placed into this didn't leave me with the impression that the official story and commission were anything but ridiculous.

[Black Diamond]

Things don't add up, some can be answered and some bits can't be answered. You must agree in your analysis of what happened that the official story is very unlikely. Fact still stands that terrorists amazingly operated in the united states without being seen as a terror threat by the american government (that is if you believe in the official story) amazingly successfully hijacking planes and amazingly gaining the training needed to fly the planes all on their own? You know how ridiculous that sounds?

Have we seen anything like that before 9/11 or since?

Hindsight is 20:20. Stalin looked pretty stupid in 1941 and his intelligence agencies told him Hitler would attack. Or do you think he wanted the Soviet Union destroyed?

[Christie Brinkley]

Hindsight is 20:20. Stalin looked pretty stupid in 1941 and his intelligence agencies told him Hitler would attack. Or do you think he wanted the Soviet Union destroyed?
He thought Hitler would not be so stupid as to fight on two fronts. Stalin was a manipulative tyrant not a sophisticated organisation of bankers/private interests/psychologists/sociologists/politicians and economists.

[Black Diamond]

He thought Hitler would not be so stupid as to fight on two fronts. Stalin was a manipulative tyrant not a sophisticated organisation of bankers/private interests/psychologists/sociologists/politicians and economists.

His intelligence apparatus said otherwise

[Christie Brinkley]

I don't see too many issues with the official story. I think there's some fucked up things, perhaps things unanswered or unexplained, but we haven't had too many planes go full speed into skyscrapers prior to this to compare with either. And I wouldn't say they "amazingly operated". It was 19 guys, and we didn't have crazy terror watches going on like we do today. It's not difficult for some guys to receive training to fly planes. I don't think it's all as "amazing" as you claim several times. And no, I don't see it as ridiculous. MANY people before you have claimed similarly to MANY folks who are MUCH MUCH smarter than I am (not that it takes much!)... and yet when physics experts, analysts and everyone else gets involved, it seems to be all explained. Is it all perfectly explained? Of course not, and I wouldn't expect it to be.

And yes, folks have in fact tried to setup and/or commit terror attacks since then, here in the states and in other countries. Hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of attacks have been stifled since 9/11.

But if you find it that amazing and ridiculous, then we can just agree to disagree. The amount of time and hours I placed into this didn't leave me with the impression that the official story and commission were anything but ridiculous.
We also have not had skyscrapers collapse due to fire before 9/11 or since I believe but on 1 day 3 fell.

Hundreds and hundreds attacks less sophisticated with less people keep getting caught, there was no success for the 'security' agencies with 9/11. In such a large plot I simply cannot believe such is possible.

[Christie Brinkley]

His intelligence apparatus said otherwise
He was arrogant and calculative but Hitler was unpredictable which he did not count on.

Stalin locked himself in his room for days when the invasion was taking place because he was humiliated in front of his generals. His confidence was at rock bottom.

[Christie Brinkley]

Some how talking about British support for Putins actions in Syria has developed into a debate about what really happened on 9/11 and the invasion of the soviet union during ww2 and Stalins reaction!?:eek:

[Black Diamond]

He was arrogant and calculative but Hitler was unpredictable which he did not count on.

Stalin locked himself in his room for days when the invasion was taking place because he was humiliated in front of his generals. His confidence was at rock bottom.

That and he thought he was going to be arrested

[Black Diamond]

Some how talking about British support for Putins actions in Syria has developed into a debate about what really happened on 9/11 and the invasion of the soviet union during ww2 and Stalins reaction!?:eek:

Natural flow of conversation.

[Gunny]

Some how talking about British support for Putins actions in Syria has developed into a debate about what really happened on 9/11 and the invasion of the soviet union during ww2 and Stalins reaction!?:eek:

we can devolve ANYTHING here. :)

[Christie Brinkley]

That and he thought he was going to be arrested
By his generals who could possibly seize power? Well they did nothing, some historians say that Stalin was testing their loyalty but I doubt that.

[Black Diamond]

We also have not had skyscrapers collapse due to fire before 9/11 or since I believe but on 1 day 3 fell.

Hundreds and hundreds attacks less sophisticated with less people keep getting caught, there was no success for the 'security' agencies with 9/11. In such a large plot I simply cannot believe such is possible.

In a controlled experiment things happen that are unexplained. 9 11 wasn't even a controlled experiment. Bin laden didn't even think buildings would collapse. His goal was to take out a few floors, which explains why the planes flew on an angle. Take out as many floors as possible.

[Christie Brinkley]

In a controlled experiment things happen that are unexplained. 9 11 wasn't even a controlled experiment. Bin laden didn't even think buildings would collapse. His goal was to take out a few floors, which explains why the planes flew on an angle. Take out as many floors as possible.
Depends on if you believe Bin Laden was the only mastermind behind the plot, fire proofing of the towers in the previous years raises suspicions for me.

[jimnyc]

We also have not had skyscrapers collapse due to fire before 9/11 or since I believe but on 1 day 3 fell.

How many previously were hit by airplanes filled with jet fuel?

[jimnyc]

Some are going to believe that our government was somehow involved no matter what. Been down that route. Mountains and mountains and mountains of factual evidence to backup the official story, and some would rather believe conspiracies that lack any facts at all. :dunno:

[Black Diamond]

Some are going to believe that our government was somehow involved no matter what. Been down that route. Mountains and mountains and mountains of factual evidence to backup the official story, and some would rather believe conspiracies that lack any facts at all. :dunno:

It is comforting. Do we really want to beleive that 19 jerkoffs could pull that off? Grieving is a process.

[Christie Brinkley]

How many previously were hit by airplanes filled with jet fuel?
In the official report it said the buildings came down because of fire. So are you telling me all of a sudden an entire floor/s steel beams reached melting point at the exact same time to ensure a building collapse in such an orderly fashion.

[Black Diamond]

In the official report it said the buildings came down because of fire. So are you telling me all of a sudden an entire floor/s steel beams reached melting point at the exact same time to ensure a building collapse in such an orderly fashion.

Jet fuel burns at how many thousands of degrees?

Steel weakens at how many thousands of degrees?

[jimnyc]

In the official report it said the buildings came down because of fire. So are you telling me all of a sudden an entire floor/s steel beams reached melting point at the exact same time to ensure a building collapse in such an orderly fashion.

Yes, it's been explained time and time again by some of the best physicists in the world.

[Christie Brinkley]

Some are going to believe that our government was somehow involved no matter what. Been down that route. Mountains and mountains and mountains of factual evidence to backup the official story, and some would rather believe conspiracies that lack any facts at all. :dunno:
There is evidence to back up the fact the building was damaged, there is evidence to back up the melting point of steel and the tempurature at which jet fuel burns. There is evidence for the official story of course, the whole report is not going to be a complete lie is it?

[Christie Brinkley]

Yes, it's been explained time and time again by some of the best physicists in the world.
So you are seriously saying an entire floor/s at the same time the steel beams reached melting point to collapse in such a way at a free fall speed?

[Black Diamond]

There is evidence to back up the fact the building was damaged, there is evidence to back up the melting point of steel and the tempurature at which jet fuel burns. There is evidence for the official story of course, the whole report is not going to be a complete lie is it?

Steel didn't have to melt for collapse. It had to weaken.

[Christie Brinkley]

Steel didn't have to melt for collapse. It had to weaken.
Partially melt/weaken but all beams on an entire level had to give way at almost the exact time to fall in a certain way.

[jimnyc]

There is evidence to back up the fact the building was damaged, there is evidence to back up the melting point of steel and the tempurature at which jet fuel burns. There is evidence for the official story of course, the whole report is not going to be a complete lie is it?

As opposed to the 'theorists' various versions of what happened, none of which contain really any evidence whatsoever?

Seriously though, this time I'm really out! :) Every single one of these questions and such have been answered and likely on this board. I know it's probably different for you, Christie, not being American and having debated this many times (or maybe you have?), but I'm too tired to go over these things again. When and if new evidence should ever come out, that's different, but I'm satisfied with the official reports and other detailed explanations.

[Black Diamond]

Partially melt/weaken but all beams on an entire level had to give way at almost the exact time to fall in a certain way.

Well the burning of all the beams began at the exact same time. Upon impact of jet crash.

[Christie Brinkley]

As opposed to the 'theorists' various versions of what happened, none of which contain really any evidence whatsoever?

Seriously though, this time I'm really out! :) Every single one of these questions and such have been answered and likely on this board. I know it's probably different for you, Christie, not being American and having debated this many times (or maybe you have?), but I'm too tired to go over these things again. When and if new evidence should ever come out, that's different, but I'm satisfied with the official reports and other detailed explanations.
What actually happened on 9/11 put aside you could see how people would benefit from the attack taking place?

[Christie Brinkley]

Well the burning of all the beams began at the exact same time. Upon impact of jet crash.
There are different quantities of jet fuel in different locations, it was not evenly spread so more beams got melted and weakened faster than others.

[Black Diamond]

What actually happened on 9/11 put aside you could see how people would benefit from the attack taking place?

Absolutely. And people did.

[jimnyc]

What actually happened on 9/11 put aside you could see how people would benefit from the attack taking place?

In the most general of terms, I will say yes, and folks worldwide can often, and unfortunately, benefit from negative things.

[Christie Brinkley]

In the most general of terms, I will say yes, and folks worldwide can often, and unfortunately, benefit from negative things.
But you won't go as far to say the type of people who benefit from destroying the lives of others for their gain are capable of allowing the attacks to happen and will go as far as to even assist the terrorists willing to commit terror?

[Black Diamond]

There are different quantities of jet fuel in different locations, it was not evenly spread so more beams got melted and weakened faster than others.
I guess the American government did it then. Pretty foolish to blame bin laden instead of Iran, Iraq, Syria, and all the other axis of evil players.

[Christie Brinkley]

I guess the American government did it then. Pretty foolish to blame bin laden instead of Iran, Iraq, Syria, and all the other axis of evil players.
The real axis of evil would be Saudi Arabia/Turkey/Israel

[Black Diamond]

The real axis of evil would be Saudi Arabia/Turkey/Israel

That's irrelevant. I was discussing Bush s enemies list.

[jimnyc]

But you won't go as far to say the type of people who benefit from destroying the lives of others for their gain are capable of allowing the attacks to happen and will go as far as to even assist the terrorists willing to commit terror?

Nope, not without some sort of proof. And nothing I've seen in 14 years has come even remotely close. Just thinking that one is capable doesn't equate to them having done so. I've read hundreds if not over a thousand, different types of conspiracies and angles for 9/11, and have yet to see even a single one pan out to suggest an inside job, or anything even close.

NOW.... /end :laugh: for me anyway.

But a :beer: for you for the debate, Sir. :)

[jimnyc]

The real axis of evil would be Saudi Arabia/Turkey/Israel Iran

Fixed that for you!! No evil list can be complete without Iran!!

And didn't Palestine fight for inclusion as a "state" within the UN? Then we need to add them as well, since they want to be lead by Hamas terrorists.

[Gunny]

In the official report it said the buildings came down because of fire. So are you telling me all of a sudden an entire floor/s steel beams reached melting point at the exact same time to ensure a building collapse in such an orderly fashion.

You think that can't happen? My other job besides angry jarhead is commercial electrician. There is no rocket science involved there. Shoddy workmanship and screwy Muslims equals a disaster. NYC has the most corrupt unions in the US and that fish stinks from the head. The contractors shortcut everything. And if you don't think a firestorm can cause a meltdown might want to look up Dresden.

[Christie Brinkley]

Fixed that for you!! No evil list can be complete without Iran!!

And didn't Palestine fight for inclusion as a "state" within the UN? Then we need to add them as well, since they want to be lead by Hamas terrorists.
I support Israel for its right to exist but its government are corrupt (as usual).

Only thing dangerous about Iran is its rhetoric, to be honest Iran just wants to keep the little shia influence it has in the region alive.

[Christie Brinkley]

You think that can't happen? My other job besides angry jarhead is commercial electrician. There is no rocket science involved there. Shoddy workmanship and screwy Muslims equals a disaster. NYC has the most corrupt unions in the US and that fish stinks from the head. The contractors shortcut everything. And if you don't think a firestorm can cause a meltdown might want to look up Dresden.
Dresden did not have skyscrapers if I recall?

[Gunny]

Dresden did not have skyscrapers if I recall?

It was the first actual firestorm created by bombing that is recorded.

I also know firsthand the destructive force of things.

[Christie Brinkley]

It was the first actual firestorm created by bombing that is recorded.

I also know firsthand the destructive force of things.
Don't think the fire on 9/11 was a firestorm. Large fire but not a firestorm.

[fj1200]

You claim they are not bombing them but bombing 'rebels'.

Well they dropped bombs on training camps and facilities surrounding the ISIS capital of Al Raqqa (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3257288/Two-children-killed-latest-Russian-airstrikes-U-S-general-accuses-Moscow-dropping-CLUSTER-BOMBS-obliterate-areas-size-football-fields-civilians.html) just a few days ago.


But still you insist America wants to destroy ISIS?

I insisted that? I don't recall.

I also didn't claim they weren't bombing ISIS I'm saying that their interest is in helping Assad; it appears they are focusing their efforts on the rebels and not necessarily ISIS.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The only problem is that Putin is not targeting terrorists. Russian bombs have yet to hit a terrorist target.
Putin is going after opponents of the Syrian government, which it openly supports.

Those same opponents of Assad government and supported by obama are DAMN , CERTIFIED ENEMIES of THIS NATION!
So Russia actually does the citizens of this nation a favor by striking the obama backed terrorist bastards seeking to establish the muslim Caliphate!
People are confused by the obama propaganda-- America has-NO MUSLIM ALLIES ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD!
WE HAVE MUSLIMS USING US TO ADVANCE THEIR AGENDA , THEIR STINKING RELIGION, THEIR SAVAGERY BUT WE HAVE NO DAMN TRUE MUSLIM ALLIES. A DAMN FACT! -TYR

[Christie Brinkley]

Those same opponents of Assad government and supported by obama are DAMN , CERTIFIED ENEMIES of THIS NATION!
So Russia actually does the citizens of this nation a favor by striking the obama backed terrorist bastards seeking to establish the muslim Caliphate!
People are confused by the obama propaganda-- America has-NO MUSLIM ALLIES ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD!
WE HAVE MUSLIMS USING US TO ADVANCE THEIR AGENDA , THEIR STINKING RELIGION, THEIR SAVAGERY BUT WE HAVE NO DAMN TRUE MUSLIM ALLIES. A DAMN FACT! -TYR
ISIS think they are fighting against western intervention and the United States + Israel when in reality they are fighting FOR them.


Congratulations ISIS CERTIFIABLE MORONS.
:clap:

[Christie Brinkley]

I insisted that? I don't recall.

I also didn't claim they weren't bombing ISIS I'm saying that their interest is in helping Assad; it appears they are focusing their efforts on the rebels and not necessarily ISIS.
They are bombing all terrorists. They focus on the terrorists (who are islamic extremists the west supports and calls rebels) in the west of the country because they are threatening Assads heartland and transport routes. Before Russian intervention the Assad government was on the verge of collapsing. Thank god they intervened when they did.

[fj1200]

They are bombing all terrorists.

I guess you get to win when you make up your definitions.

[Christie Brinkley]

I guess you get to win when you make up your definitions.
How am I? Al Nusra and islamic front are not terrorists then?

[fj1200]

How am I? Al Nusra and islamic front are not terrorists then?

If they were bombing all terrorists they would have to be bombing Assad's folks too.

[Christie Brinkley]

If they were bombing all terrorists they would have to be bombing Assad's folks too.
The Syrian government forces (SAA) are an army of a legitimate nation defending soldiers defending themselves against proxy armies funded and protected by the west?

[fj1200]

The Syrian government forces (SAA) are an army of a legitimate nation defending soldiers defending themselves against proxy armies funded and protected by the west?

They engage in governmental terrorism. I've heard that Hamas engages in terrorism and is thus not legitimate.

[Christie Brinkley]

They engage in governmental terrorism.
How? Fighting ISIS and Al Nusra is now terrorism?

[fj1200]

How? Fighting ISIS and Al Nusra is now terrorism?

That's not what I said. Terrorizing their own people is terrorism.

[Christie Brinkley]

That's not what I said. Terrorizing their own people is terrorism.That is called waging a war my friend, bombs have to be dropped to take back territory.

[fj1200]

That is called waging a war my friend, bombs have to be dropped to take back territory.

I'm not talking about their current actions against the rebels.

[Christie Brinkley]

I'm not talking about their current actions against the rebels.
The Syrian government are not angels but against the jihadi forces wanting to install an islamic government they are fighting for a good cause.

No one is a 'good guy', there are different shades of bad and the Syrian government are the best option for the future of Syria and its people as there are no other legitimate alternatives at this stage.

[fj1200]

The Syrian government are not angels but against the jihadi forces wanting to install an islamic government they are fighting for a good cause.

No one is a 'good guy', there are different shades of bad and the Syrian government are the best option for the future of Syria and its people as there are no other legitimate alternatives at this stage.

That's a fine opinion; There are no angels over there. I might argue whether they are the best option but that is best for us among no good ones as far as the Syrian people go.

But thanks for telling me your opinion and not telling me what mine is. :)

[Christie Brinkley]

FLASHBACK:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2NkjNvwuaU

[Gunny]

Don't think the fire on 9/11 was a firestorm. Large fire but not a firestorm.

Try being around some AV-8 fuel when that crap goes up. A 747 loaded with it hitting a building? Bye. All you got to do is hit the building in the right place and it's coming down.

They didn't spend 20 minutes thinking this one up. They spent years. And it's not that hard to figure out. The plan itself was simple. The logistics behind it is what took all the time. They also used ourselves against us. A lack of inter-agency communications was a WHOLE bunch of their logistics. Our agencies are so busy vying for funding they don't cooperate with one another. We had the intel but it never got put together because it was in bits and pieces spread over several intel agencies.

It is unfortunate that we lost close to 4k people. It is VERY fortunate they're stupid. Look at what they attacked ... symbols. Nothing strategic. Was a political attack with no real brains behind the operation. I KNOW what I'd be attacking and I ain't posting it. Not giving any casual readers any ideas.

As far as Putin goes, wasn't Neville Chamberlain your PM? He made a great deal. With the devil. 71% are okay with Putin asserting power in the Middle East? Between your 71% and our communist President how's this going to end up? WE - the US and UK - will have to clean up the mess. France can pretend they'll do something but end up surrendering to themselves.

SO how about we do something NOW before it costs the lives of our grandchildren? Everyone's all concerned about "oh the economy" "oh the environment" because of our grandchildren. How about not sending them to WWIII because we sit around and watch until it becomes a cataclysm?

[Black Diamond]

Chamberlain was a hero when he got back from Munich

[Gunny]

Chamberlain was a hero when he got back from Munich

So's Obama making a treaty with Iran if you're a leftwingnut. Chamberlain was gone within a year and a half of THAT deal.

BTW ... in case you haven't noticed, I HATE ass kissers. We're letting this escalate into the same thing as WWII. It's going to cost us WAY more than if we just stop it from the start.

[Drummond]

Chamberlain was a hero when he got back from Munich

At best, Chamberlain was an idiot. At worst .. a moonshine peddlar. Chamberlain only managed to take on 'hero' status until TRUTH won out.

No leader doing less than representing cold, hard truth, can ever be considered a hero -- in truth.

[Black Diamond]

At best, Chamberlain was an idiot. At worst .. a moonshine peddlar. Chamberlain only managed to take on 'hero' status until TRUTH won out.

No leader doing less than representing cold, hard truth, can ever be considered a hero -- in truth.

The truth being when Hitler annexed ALL of Czechoslovakia?

[Black Diamond]

So's Obama making a treaty with Iran if you're a leftwingnut. Chamberlain was gone within a year and a half of THAT deal.

BTW ... in case you haven't noticed, I HATE ass kissers. We're letting this escalate into the same thing as WWII. It's going to cost us WAY more than if we just stop it from the start.

Yeah I think most Americans are against Iran deal but the other side of the pond seems to be on board? And yeah I agree this thing is going to explode.

[Gunny]

The truth being when Hitler annexed ALL of Czechoslovakia?

Be honest. Rep if you spelled that correctly without looking. :laugh:

I'm not all that worried about Syria. The Russians have been with them from whenever. The problem is the vacuum WE created by Obama pulling us out of Iraq. If he doesn't go down as the stupidest President in history it's only because Abe beats him out, but I think he's got the wood on Abe.

This is one dumbsh*t MF-er. I'm a retired Marine Gunny and I could handle this better.

[Black Diamond]

Be honest. Rep if you spelled that correctly without looking. :laugh:

I'm not all that worried about Syria. The Russians have been with them from whenever. The problem is the vacuum WE created by Obama pulling us out of Iraq. If he doesn't go down as the stupidest President in history it's only because Abe beats him out, but I think he's got the wood on Abe.

This is one dumbsh*t MF-er. I'm a retired Marine Gunny and I could handle this better.

Lol I do know how to spell Czechoslovakia. Trouble is typing it with these stubby fingers on this phone.
Is there any way we can undo what this dipshit has done when it comes to the middle East?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's a fine opinion; There are no angels over there. I might argue whether they are the best option but that is best for us among no good ones as far as the Syrian people go.

But thanks for telling me your opinion and not telling me what mine is. :)

Sure fj.. Thats exactly what Ive been saying since about the last two years or more--you never agreed.
And I can find the posts to prove it, plenty of them.
Just goes to show what a contrarian and dishonest debater you are,.-Tyr

[Gunny]

Lol I do know how to spell Czechoslovakia. Trouble is typing it with these stubby fingers on this phone.
Is there any way we can undo what this dipshit has done when it comes to the middle East?

If you can use your fingers on a phone you're one up on me. :laugh:

It'll take direct intervention. Boots on the ground. Run ISIS back into Syria and let Putin deal with their internal crap. Think about the stupidity of what we're doing. Russia has always supported the Assad regime. We don't. We're supporting some rebel force. Russia's using ISIS as an excuse to bomb the rebel force. In the meantime, NO ONE is doing jack about ISIS. Two sorties a day. Oh whoop t do. Love to be on THAT carrier. The smoking lamp would be lit all day.

What we need is to get rid of Obama and Biden, and someone on the right with some balls besides Ted Cruz step up. I don't have a problem with Cruz except he's too much like me. I'm stepping in with a right hook. "Some"
diplomacy is kinda required. Go figure. He's a Texan. :laugh:

But, if we don't stop this NOW, the end result is going to be another global war and too many people have nukes now. Screw Iran. I'd shut their sh*t down right this second. My idea of negotiation is "Oh darn, your factory blew up."

Western people and especially leftwingers just don't get these people are playing for real and think they can talk their way out. They aren't talking. They're buying time.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's not what I said. Terrorizing their own people is terrorism.

Really!!!!!?????
When was the last time you worried about Putin or Castro or " Kim so ill " in N.Korea terrorizing their own people?????
KINDA SELECTIVE IN YOUR OUTRAGE AND TRUISMS YOU USE TO DEFEND YOUR ILLOGICAL REASONING AREN'T YA??--:laugh:
THATS CALLED--LACK OF INTEGRITY OR PRINCIPLES .
Flip flopping like a fish on a hot sandy beach is no way to dance hoss. --TYR

[Drummond]

The truth being when Hitler annexed ALL of Czechoslovakia?

The trouble with being an idiot is that it can block your understanding of whole truth.

I incline towards the 'idiot' theory where Chamberlain's concerned .. though to what extent it was wilful - who knows.

[Gunny]

The trouble with being an idiot is that it can block your understanding of whole truth.

I incline towards the 'idiot' theory where Chamberlain's concerned .. though to what extent it was wilful - who knows.

Ain't that the truth.

Chamberlain thought he was doing the right thing. WWI was devastating. No one wanted a repeat. At the same time, you have to look beyond not wanting a repeat to the inevitable. Stopping it before it starts works REAL well. But we always wait until someone's got us on the ropes before we react. The Battle of Britain. Pearl Harbour.

You can't blame Chamberlain any more than the American people at the time. We just wanted to pretend nothing was going on. Roosevelt had to back door Congress with the Lend Lease Act.

Silly games. Get straight up and in their faces.

[fj1200]

Sure fj.. Thats exactly what Ive been saying since about the last two years or more--you never agreed.
And I can find the posts to prove it, plenty of them.
Just goes to show what a contrarian and dishonest debater you are,.-Tyr

So you're evidence of something is the lack of evidence? You do create some crazy ways to to validate your own incorrect opinions about me. Now if you could find a post of mine that claimed that there are angels over there now that would actually be something.


Really!!!!!?????
When was the last time you worried about Putin or Castro or " Kim so ill " in N.Korea terrorizing their own people?????
KINDA SELECTIVE IN YOUR OUTRAGE AND TRUISMS YOU USE TO DEFEND YOUR ILLOGICAL REASONING AREN'T YA??--:laugh:
THATS CALLED--LACK OF INTEGRITY OR PRINCIPLES .
Flip flopping like a fish on a hot sandy beach is no way to dance hoss. --TYR

Yeah, it's called state terrorism; look it up. As far as other examples... :shakesfist: Who have I defended?

Besides there's nothing illogical about my reasoning considering I actually use logic and reasoning; You should give it a try, it's more fun to use my brain that it is to read your incessant ranting. :)