fuck stalin?!Cybargs wrote:
Fuck truman fuck truman fuck truman.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
going to full scale nuclear war?!Cybargs wrote:
Not really a civil war.
They should've finished the job in fucking '53.
Truman should've let MacArthur roll into China. So Taiwan can fucking take back Manchuria.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
fuck stalin?!Cybargs wrote:
Fuck truman fuck truman fuck truman.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
going to full scale nuclear war?!
fuck napoleancl4u53w1t2 wrote:
fuck stalin?!Cybargs wrote:
Fuck truman fuck truman fuck truman.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
going to full scale nuclear war?!
Tu Stultus Es
that would have led to full scale nuclear war with the soviet unionCybargs wrote:
Truman should've let MacArthur roll into China. So Taiwan can fucking take back Manchuria.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
fuck stalin?!Cybargs wrote:
Fuck truman fuck truman fuck truman.
napoléoneleven bravo wrote:
fuck napoleancl4u53w1t2 wrote:
fuck stalin?!Cybargs wrote:
Fuck truman fuck truman fuck truman.
and we would be all dead.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
that would have led to full scale nuclear war with the soviet unionCybargs wrote:
Truman should've let MacArthur roll into China. So Taiwan can fucking take back Manchuria.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
fuck stalin?!
Or at least retake the whole peninsula. Hell it was China's problem for getting involved.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
that would have led to full scale nuclear war with the soviet unionCybargs wrote:
Truman should've let MacArthur roll into China. So Taiwan can fucking take back Manchuria.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
fuck stalin?!
fuck charlemagnecl4u53w1t2 wrote:
napoléoneleven bravo wrote:
fuck napoleancl4u53w1t2 wrote:
fuck stalin?!
Tu Stultus Es
I read about this story
http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/no … a/19415409
before I read about the ROK ship being sunk
http://www.aolnews.com/world/article/no … a/19415409
before I read about the ROK ship being sunk
Tu Stultus Es
china was the soviet union's ally. so mao's problem would have been stalin's problemCybargs wrote:
Or at least retake the whole peninsula. Hell it was China's problem for getting involved.cl4u53w1t2 wrote:
that would have led to full scale nuclear war with the soviet unionCybargs wrote:
Truman should've let MacArthur roll into China. So Taiwan can fucking take back Manchuria.
you mean the 33. waffen-grenadier-division der ss "charlemagne"?!eleven bravo wrote:
fuck charlemagnecl4u53w1t2 wrote:
napoléoneleven bravo wrote:
fuck napolean
Lul.M.O.A.B wrote:
http://politicaldemotivation.files.word … ong_ll.jpg
Naval battle between NK and SK would be odd, we might see the return of the USS Pueblo.
fuck sun tzu
False flag op. Smells like the Gulf of Tonkin.
smells liek america
wouldnt be surprised TBH. I mean Cheney wanted to paint up a boat loaded with seals like an Iranian patrol and have a "firefight" with one of our ships in the strait of Hormuz.=NHB=Shadow wrote:
smells liek america
A bunch o crows is called a murder. This I wouldn't know if it wasn't for Homer Simpson.11 Bravo wrote:
although i know you know aboot sheep....CammRobb wrote:
it's called a flock dipshit11 Bravo wrote:
herd of sheep...geddit?
A group of sheep is called a flock, herd or mob
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_sheep
lel......SonderKommando wrote:
wouldnt be surprised TBH. I mean Cheney wanted to paint up a boat loaded with seals like an Iranian patrol and have a "firefight" with one of our ships in the strait of Hormuz.=NHB=Shadow wrote:
smells liek america
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r29BtzfSz0o
i think you stole some of atg's tin foil.
I think Sy Hersh is credible. Its not tin foil stuff if reputable journalist are reporting it marine.11 Bravo wrote:
lel......SonderKommando wrote:
wouldnt be surprised TBH. I mean Cheney wanted to paint up a boat loaded with seals like an Iranian patrol and have a "firefight" with one of our ships in the strait of Hormuz.=NHB=Shadow wrote:
smells liek america
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r29BtzfSz0o
i think you stole some of atg's tin foil.
he is a cunt.SonderKommando wrote:
I think Sy Hersh is credible.
examples....
"For many of these claims, Hersh relied only on hearsay collected decades after the event."
"Some have criticized Hersh's use of anonymous sources in his reporting; implying that some of these sources are unreliable or even made up. In a review of Hersh's book, Chain of Command,commentator Amir Taheri wrote, "As soon as he has made an assertion he cites a "source" to back it. In every case this is either an un-named former official or an unidentified secret document passed to Hersh in unknown circumstances... By my count Hersh has anonymous 'sources' inside 30 foreign governments and virtually every department of the U.S. government."[31]
David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker, maintains that he is aware of the identity of all of Hersh's unnamed sources, telling the Columbia Journalism Review that "I know every single source that is in his pieces.... Every 'retired intelligence officer,' every general with reason to know, and all those phrases that one has to use, alas, by necessity, I say, 'Who is it? What's his interest?' We talk it through."[32]
In a response to an article in The New Yorker in which Hersh alleged that the U.S. government was planning a strike on Iran, U.S. Defense Department spokesman Brian Whitman said, "This reporter has a solid and well-earned reputation for making dramatic assertions based on thinly sourced, unverifiable anonymous sources."[33]"
"Hersh made a distinction between the standards of strict factual accuracy for his print reporting and the leeway he allows himself in speeches, in which he may talk informally about stories still being worked on or blur information to protect his sources. "Sometimes I change events, dates, and places in a certain way to protect people... I can’t fudge what I write. But I can certainly fudge what I say."[34]"
"In March of 2007 Hersh asserted in a piece in The New Yorker that the United States and Saudi governments were funding the terrorist organization Fatah al-Islam through aid to Lebanese Sunni Prime Minister Fouad Siniora.[35] Following the publishing of the story journalists in Beirut uncovered that Hersh put forth the claim without any reliable sources. Hersh had heard the unconfirmed story from Robert Fisk who had, in turn, heard the story from former British intelligence agent Alastair Crooke. Crooke had only heard it circulated as rumor and no one had fact checked the claims before Hersh ran the story[36] which prompted a variety of criticisms"
Touche. I was unaware, source?11 Bravo wrote:
he is a cunt.SonderKommando wrote:
I think Sy Hersh is credible.
examples....
"For many of these claims, Hersh relied only on hearsay collected decades after the event."
"Some have criticized Hersh's use of anonymous sources in his reporting; implying that some of these sources are unreliable or even made up. In a review of Hersh's book, Chain of Command,commentator Amir Taheri wrote, "As soon as he has made an assertion he cites a "source" to back it. In every case this is either an un-named former official or an unidentified secret document passed to Hersh in unknown circumstances... By my count Hersh has anonymous 'sources' inside 30 foreign governments and virtually every department of the U.S. government."[31]
David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker, maintains that he is aware of the identity of all of Hersh's unnamed sources, telling the Columbia Journalism Review that "I know every single source that is in his pieces.... Every 'retired intelligence officer,' every general with reason to know, and all those phrases that one has to use, alas, by necessity, I say, 'Who is it? What's his interest?' We talk it through."[32]
In a response to an article in The New Yorker in which Hersh alleged that the U.S. government was planning a strike on Iran, U.S. Defense Department spokesman Brian Whitman said, "This reporter has a solid and well-earned reputation for making dramatic assertions based on thinly sourced, unverifiable anonymous sources."[33]"
"Hersh made a distinction between the standards of strict factual accuracy for his print reporting and the leeway he allows himself in speeches, in which he may talk informally about stories still being worked on or blur information to protect his sources. "Sometimes I change events, dates, and places in a certain way to protect people... I can’t fudge what I write. But I can certainly fudge what I say."[34]"
"In March of 2007 Hersh asserted in a piece in The New Yorker that the United States and Saudi governments were funding the terrorist organization Fatah al-Islam through aid to Lebanese Sunni Prime Minister Fouad Siniora.[35] Following the publishing of the story journalists in Beirut uncovered that Hersh put forth the claim without any reliable sources. Hersh had heard the unconfirmed story from Robert Fisk who had, in turn, heard the story from former British intelligence agent Alastair Crooke. Crooke had only heard it circulated as rumor and no one had fact checked the claims before Hersh ran the story[36] which prompted a variety of criticisms"
wikitime
eh,in retort is it not true that wikipedia can be edited by anyone? Im sure that if someone like Hersh would be a target by the establishment, to those who would wish to discredit him? Either way, I do fancy myself a conspiracy theorist, you have to admit they are fascinating.11 Bravo wrote:
wikitime
i read the links in wiki so ya....SonderKommando wrote:
eh,in retort is it not true that wikipedia can be edited by anyone? Im sure that if someone like Hersh would be a target by the establishment, to those who would wish to discredit him? Either way, I do fancy myself a conspiracy theorist, you have to admit they are fascinating.11 Bravo wrote:
wikitime