....making you guys no better than Nazi Germany....FACT.usmarine2005 wrote:
Anyway, you really really really think we could not destroy Iran? We ran over Iraq twice. If we just decide to go to war, blow the shit out of them and leave, forget rebuilding and all the other BS, it would be over in a matter of weeks...FACT.
Except for one minor little detail, we don't toss thousands of muslims in ovens. FACTCameronPoe wrote:
....making you guys no better than Nazi Germany....FACT.usmarine2005 wrote:
Anyway, you really really really think we could not destroy Iran? We ran over Iraq twice. If we just decide to go to war, blow the shit out of them and leave, forget rebuilding and all the other BS, it would be over in a matter of weeks...FACT.
Supplying Dictators with chemical weapons to kill kurds. FACTusmarine2005 wrote:
Except for one minor little detail, we don't toss thousands of muslims in ovens. FACTCameronPoe wrote:
....making you guys no better than Nazi Germany....FACT.usmarine2005 wrote:
Anyway, you really really really think we could not destroy Iran? We ran over Iraq twice. If we just decide to go to war, blow the shit out of them and leave, forget rebuilding and all the other BS, it would be over in a matter of weeks...FACT.
the entire world supplied iraq with the right chemicals. more so europe actually. france was a big contributor to their NBC ambitions.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Supplying Dictators with chemical weapons to kill kurds. FACTusmarine2005 wrote:
Except for one minor little detail, we don't toss thousands of muslims in ovens. FACTCameronPoe wrote:
....making you guys no better than Nazi Germany....FACT.
Actually they already are since i happen to know two of them. Allah Akhbar!KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Iranian secret agents have been creating unrest and aiding to the insurgency in Iraq, much like what we are doing with the CIA in Iran. Imagine if Iranian agents were in the US...Kmarion wrote:
Proxy... (I got to post that twice now )usmarine2005 wrote:
What kind of war?
I expect a lot of dead jihadis this summer.
Run and hide yanks!!!!!!!
Why use ovens when nuclear weapons are far more efficient? I think you're skimping over the atrocities they perpetrated against the French, British, Russian, Polish, Czech, Belgian, Dutch, Greek, Ukrainian and Norwegian people there.usmarine2005 wrote:
Except for one minor little detail, we don't toss thousands of muslims in ovens. FACTCameronPoe wrote:
....making you guys no better than Nazi Germany....FACT.usmarine2005 wrote:
Anyway, you really really really think we could not destroy Iran? We ran over Iraq twice. If we just decide to go to war, blow the shit out of them and leave, forget rebuilding and all the other BS, it would be over in a matter of weeks...FACT.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-05-23 08:41:34)
interesting...tell me more...klassekock wrote:
Actually they already are since i happen to know two of them. Allah Akhbar!KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Iranian secret agents have been creating unrest and aiding to the insurgency in Iraq, much like what we are doing with the CIA in Iran. Imagine if Iranian agents were in the US...Kmarion wrote:
Proxy... (I got to post that twice now )
I expect a lot of dead jihadis this summer.
Run and hide yanks!!!!!!!
Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2007-05-23 08:42:14)
We dropped nukes? I guess CNN missed that story.CameronPoe wrote:
Why use ovens when nuclear weapons are far more efficient?usmarine2005 wrote:
Except for one minor little detail, we don't toss thousands of muslims in ovens. FACTCameronPoe wrote:
....making you guys no better than Nazi Germany....FACT.
Nope. Sorry. You might be CIA. Allah is merciful.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
interesting...tell me more...klassekock wrote:
Actually they already are since i happen to know two of them. Allah Akhbar!KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Iranian secret agents have been creating unrest and aiding to the insurgency in Iraq, much like what we are doing with the CIA in Iran. Imagine if Iranian agents were in the US...
Run and hide yanks!!!!!!!
You said:usmarine2005 wrote:
We dropped nukes? I guess CNN missed that story.CameronPoe wrote:
Why use ovens when nuclear weapons are far more efficient?usmarine2005 wrote:
Except for one minor little detail, we don't toss thousands of muslims in ovens. FACT
From that I gather you mostly advocate obliterating them from the air. ~Zero US Casualties, +++++ Annihilation.If we just decide to go to war, blow the shit out of them and leave, forget rebuilding and all the other BS, it would be over in a matter of weeks...FACT.
Of course it would entail people in the US using bicycles to get to work.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-05-23 08:45:01)
I don't think it's right to compare Nazi Germany and USA. USA doesn't tell it's people that Arabs are inferior, and that they should be attacked publically.usmarine2005 wrote:
We dropped nukes? I guess CNN missed that story.CameronPoe wrote:
Why use ovens when nuclear weapons are far more efficient?usmarine2005 wrote:
Except for one minor little detail, we don't toss thousands of muslims in ovens. FACT
No...I advocate the first Gulf War tactics. You know, the "mother of all battles."CameronPoe wrote:
You said:usmarine2005 wrote:
We dropped nukes? I guess CNN missed that story.CameronPoe wrote:
Why use ovens when nuclear weapons are far more efficient?From that I gather you mostly advocate obliterating them from the air. ~Zero US Casualties, +++++ Annihilation.If we just decide to go to war, blow the shit out of them and leave, forget rebuilding and all the other BS, it would be over in a matter of weeks...FACT.
Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-05-23 08:46:19)
I didn't call them Nazis - I said that if the US adopted what I perceive usmarine2005's tactics to be then they'd be little better than Nazis.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
I don't think it's right to compare Nazi Germany and USA. USA doesn't tell it's people that Arabs are inferior, and that they should be attacked publically.usmarine2005 wrote:
We dropped nukes? I guess CNN missed that story.CameronPoe wrote:
Why use ovens when nuclear weapons are far more efficient?
Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-05-23 08:47:13)
That didn't oust Saddam from power though.usmarine2005 wrote:
No...I advocate the first Gulf War tactics. You know, the "mother of all battles."
Very well could have, although it would have been bloodier for sure, it would not be nearly as bloddy as staying there for years. You can agree with that right?CameronPoe wrote:
That didn't oust Saddam from power though.usmarine2005 wrote:
No...I advocate the first Gulf War tactics. You know, the "mother of all battles."
I am not saying we should attack, but if we did, that would be my approach. If you go to war, then go to war.
Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-05-23 08:49:03)
Brazil didn't.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
the entire world supplied iraq with the right chemicals. more so europe actually. france was a big contributor to their NBC ambitions.cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Supplying Dictators with chemical weapons to kill kurds. FACTusmarine2005 wrote:
Except for one minor little detail, we don't toss thousands of muslims in ovens. FACT
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Brazil was busy birthing beautiful women meant to live their entire lives in bikinis showing their bronzed skin and firm bodies.
...and cocaine.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Brazil was busy birthing beautiful women meant to live their entire lives in bikinis showing their bronzed skin and firm bodies.
Your logic is sound: if the US wanted to pulverise a nation they could.usmarine2005 wrote:
Very well could have, although it would have been bloodier for sure, it would not be nearly as bloddy as staying there for years. You can agree with that right?CameronPoe wrote:
That didn't oust Saddam from power though.usmarine2005 wrote:
No...I advocate the first Gulf War tactics. You know, the "mother of all battles."
I am not saying we should attack, but if we did, that would be my approach. If you go to war, then go to war.
Not just the US alone. One of the real contributors to the success of the Gulf War was the French Foreign Legion.CameronPoe wrote:
Your logic is sound: if the US wanted to pulverise a nation they could.
Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-05-23 09:05:11)
Tropical climates are a blessing.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
Brazil was busy birthing beautiful women meant to live their entire lives in bikinis showing their bronzed skin and firm bodies.
Wtf? Is there some random piece of bad news on Brazil or Argentina you want to share?usmarine2005 wrote:
...and cocaine.
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Never say never with Iran. Iran is not Iraq and they do have some potential to be quite the advisary.CameronPoe wrote:
You kind of overlook the fact that the US home territories themselves were being bombarded by the highly mechanised and militarised Japanese Empire, but an ocean away. That is not the case and never will be with Iraq or Iran.
Newsflash: Saddam got busted in Gulf War I and got sanctioned and monitored thereafter - Hans Blix knew and stated that Saddam did not and could not possess WMD and yet you still cling to the dream of a WMD-based Iraq invasion.... Need I remind you that Iraq was an ally of the US when he gassed Halabja and was buying military equipment from the US!
Saddam got busted, but was still very much under control. In fact his military was intact enough to crush a rebeliion in Southern Iraq. (Who helped organize that rebellion? Osama)
Did you forget the cat and mouse chase that took place after Gulf War I? UN inspectors repeatedly were barred from visiting many locations, and in a few instances were arriving right when Iraqi truck convoys were leaving. EVEN HANS BLIX concedes that.
Listen, just because they didn't FIND Chemical/Biological weapons in any meaningful amounts doesn't mean they didn't have them. The same game could be played with almost any country that doesn't want you to see what they have. There was a lot of intelligence chatter between Iraq and Syria (and Russia) before Gulf War II. Saddam was many things, and he underestimated what the United States would do before both Gulf Wars, but he wasn't so stupid to just leave his WMDs in plain sight.
Since his military had been weakened and mostly demorialised, it was the only thing he had to keep Iran from pouring into his country after GW I. It was fear of him using them in his country's defense. Iran already knew what that was like from the 80's.
As far as Iraq being a US ally in the 80's... that's SORT OF true. It was more that we hated the Iranians MORE. You know the old saying, "the enemy of my enemy is.... my friend"? Well, we weren't FRIENDS per say, but we were certainly providing them invaluable intelligence on Iranian positions during their war, and had some limited military sales and high level meetings (visits by Baker and Cheney). But were we cozy with them? No, not really. We just thought the Iranians were much worse at the time. As someone previously stated, they were cozier with France and the USSR.
Last edited by bigdroo (2007-05-23 09:54:01)
Two points:bigdroo wrote:
Never say never with Iran. Iran is not Iraq and they do have some potential to be quite the advisary.
Saddam got busted, but was still very much under control. In fact his military was intact enough to crush a rebeliion in Southern Iraq. (Who helped organize that rebellion? Osama)
Did you forget the cat and mouse chase that took place after Gulf War I? UN inspectors repeatedly were barred from visiting many locations, and in a few instances were arriving right when Iraqi truck convoys were leaving. EVEN HANS BLIX concedes that.
Listen, just because they didn't FIND Chemical/Biological weapons in any meaningful amounts doesn't mean they didn't have them. The same game could be played with almost any country that doesn't want you to see what they have. There was a lot of intelligence chatter between Iraq and Syria (and Russia) before Gulf War II. Saddam was many things, and he underestimated what the United States would do before both Gulf Wars, but he wasn't so stupid to just leave his WMDs in plain sight.
Since his military had been weakened and mostly demorialised, it was the only thing he had to keep Iran from pouring into his country after GW I. It was fear of him using them in his country's defense. Iran already knew what that was like from the 80's.
As far as Iraq being a US ally in the 80's... that's SORT OF true. It was more that we hated the Iranians MORE. You know the old saying, "the enemy of my enemy is.... my friend"? Well, we weren't FRIENDS per say, but we were certainly providing them invaluable intelligence on Iranian positions during their war, and had some limited military sales and high level meetings (visits by Baker and Cheney). But were we cozy with them? No, not really. We just thought the Iranians were much worse at the time. As someone previously stated, they were cozier with France and the USSR.
1. The principle of 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' is completely incompatible with a personal motto of mine 'two wrongs don't make a right'. A bit idealistic but you get the picture.
2. I fully believe that if Saddam had an inkling as to the fact that he and his regime were about to be crushed (he must have known it was coming) he would have lashed out in one final act of defiance against the approaching US army with every dangerous chemical and compound under the sun. But he didn't. What would be the point in sending the weapons to Syria when he was just about to engage the US army militarily?
I'm just glad we stopped supplying the with F-14 parts recently. I think Iran is the only country still using them (The US retired them last year). Up until about two weeks ago we were still selling our surplus parts to them. The hypocrisy is mind boggling.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Iran was the only country besides the U.S. that had F-14s. We didn't give them to Iran. They took control of them in their Islamic Revolution 28 years ago. To date, they've only seen very limited air time since most of their (F-14) fleet was cannibalised for parts to keep others flying. Besides, F-14s are nice aircraft if flown by well-trained pilots, and not up against pilots with superior training in superior aircraft (F-22s, F-15Es, MiG-29s, Su-27s etc). F-14 pilot training is even more rare than F-14 parts, and that plane does require some healthy sized maintenance when it DOES have the parts.
In short, the F-14 in Iran is pretty much like trying to sell Pork Bar-B-Que in Islamabad, or selling Ice Cubes to Eskimos. Pretty useless, and I suspect the Iranians understand that.
In short, the F-14 in Iran is pretty much like trying to sell Pork Bar-B-Que in Islamabad, or selling Ice Cubes to Eskimos. Pretty useless, and I suspect the Iranians understand that.