Printable View
Heres another little known thing I heard on the the "Alex Bennet" show on Sirius Left 146...if a US soldier is wounded in Iraq, gets flown to Ramstein in Germany and dies on the operating table there, the death isn't "registered" in the US Army body count for the war in Iraq. To put it simply if you were shot in Iraq and died in Germany from your wounds you're not included in the "2378 dead" list.Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhamish
That being the case how many have really died?
Very true dancinpants, I remember that too. Extrapolate that too to take in the families effected. Guess we're talking tens of thousands without a husband, brother, son, daughter, wife, sister etc etc Plus all the sneaky ways the Bubble Boy regime has reduced funding for vets.Quote:
Originally Posted by dancinpants
1 Million Dead Iranians
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle12801.htm
Extract
This potential death toll is not pacifist hyperbole; it comes from a National Academy of Sciences study sponsored by the Pentagon itself, as The Progressive reports. The NAS study calculated the kill rate from "bunker-busting" tactical nukes used to take out underground facilities -- such as those housing much of Iran's nuclear power program. Another simulation using Pentagon software was even more specific, measuring the aftermath from a "limited" nuclear attack on the main Iranian underground site in Esfahan. The result? Three million people killed by radiation in just two weeks. Bush now has about 50 nuclear "earth-penetrating weapons" at his disposal
A Brief History of U.S. Interventions - 1945 to 1999
By William Blum
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle12820.htm
Opening extract
1999 - "ZMag" -- -The engine of American foreign policy has been fueled not by a devotion to any kind of morality, but rather by the necessity to serve other imperatives, which can be summarized as follows:
* making the world safe for American corporations;
* enhancing the financial statements of defense contractors at home who have contributed generously to members of congress;
* preventing the rise of any society that might serve as a successful example of an alternative to the capitalist model;
* extending political and economic hegemony over as wide an area as possible, as befits a "great power."
This in the name of fighting a supposed moral crusade against what cold warriors convinced themselves, and the American people, was the existence of an evil International Communist Conspiracy, which in fact never existed, evil or not.
The United States carried out extremely serious interventions into more than 70 nations in this period.
John Reid's comments, below, are almost straight out of Orwell's "1984"
The madness of bombing Iran
By Robert Skidelsky
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle12827.htm
Extract:
John Reid, the Defence Secretary, has recently been arguing that the right of pre-emption should be turned into the right of prevention
Reid really scares me. Particularly the way that he's able to twist logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhamish
http://www.epolitix.com/EN/Bulletins...e+acknowledgedQuote:
"If they attack us we will defend ourselves and if defending ourselves... means taking pre-emptive action we will do that. If they attack our troops we will attack back, in some cases taking the initiative."
Taking the initiative in defending oneself - interesting concept. I wonder if I could get away with that, attacking a complete stranger then explaining that I was just being pro-actively defensive as the stranger may have attacked me first.
Everything in politics comes back to the economy and it seems pretty clear at this stage that we are going to pay dearly over the coming years for the war in Iraq. I can't see the US attacking Iran militarily as they clearly cannot afford it or have the manpower/resources to deal with the repercussions.
Politically Bush and the Republicans are being hammered at home as the war in Iraq becomes more unpopular. The Iranians attempting to build Nuclear Weapons will be dealt with through the UN.
The biggest concern for the Bush Administration is an exit strategy out of Iraq.
As an aside it is reported in todays papers that German Neo Nazi's are planning marches in sympathy with the Iranians view of the Holocost. Interesting how extremist opinions of any persuasion find common ground with each other.
It is indeed rebs23, particularly when those thugs firebomb and attack Turkish folks on a regular basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
I made reference to a website above where extreme right wingers now support Muslims to fit in with the formers' anti-Semitism.
Another version of "my enemy's enemy is my friend".
Strange days indeed, as John Lennon sand.
LOL:D :D Beautifully put Hither Green. Anyone in mind???:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Hither green
i'd say it's more winning the mid-term elections. karl rove was just reassigned for this exact purpose. that way they can continue doing whatever they want in iraq (which doesn't seem to include an exit strategy at all, considering the fact they're building humongo permanent military bases all over the desert there)Quote:
Originally Posted by rebs23
Ken - if you pop over to the "Islam" thread I loaded a CNN video yesterday which shows all the American bases in the Middle East - usually close to pipelines:rolleyes: . I think they've built four or five perma-bases in Iraq with all the mod cons - y'know, McDonalds, Pizza Hut etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by ken foree
Here are a couple of things realted to your posts.
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle12839.htm
Here's a good one.
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle12606.htm
Here's an even better view of those bases - with a picture
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Apr06/Zeese24.htm
Wonder should the Iran's Nukes and Islam threads be merged Dahamsta since both issues, in geopolitical terms, are merging anyway?????
How about "Iran, Iraq, Islam"???
ahh bringing our u.s. disposable culture to the cradle of life, can armagaeddon be far behind! :rolleyes: thank you herr hamish i'll have a read of these over me morning orangeQuote:
Originally Posted by sirhamish
Hmmmmmmmm**, like that Herr Hamish name:)
Foreign Office lawyers warn: Support for Bush military action would be illegal.
Army warns: we're too stretched to cope with any more military action
By Westminster Editor James Cusick and Neil Mackay
http://www.sundayherald.com/55316
Extract
Foreign Office lawyers have formally advised Jack Straw that it would be illegal under international law for Britain to support any US-led military action against Iran.
The advice given to the Foreign Secretary in the last few weeks is thought to have prompted his open criticism last week of Tony Blair’s backing for President George Bush, who has refused to rule out military action against the regime of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
but Bliar plunges even further into la-la land
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1818475.html?menu=
**copyright dfx.
hamish
given the so -called religious implications of Iran's nuclear programme, would it be fair to call any weapons developed in Tehran.,,, The J Bomb? :D
J=Jihad
How about the A-Bomb after the first letter in the Iranian PM's name.:)Quote:
Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie
Glad that The Guardian got rid of Rod Liddle and David Aaronovitch.
War Pimp alert.
We may have to bomb Iran
Rod Liddle
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...157918,00.html
Extract
Natanz seems an agreeable little town, perched nearly 5,000ft up in the majestic mountains of central Iran, full of dusty relics of Alexander the Great and black-clad peasants scurrying hither and thither. It is a shame, then, that we may soon be obliged to bomb it to smithereens. An even bigger shame, though, if we don’t.
I love the "we" bit when ever chickenhawks advocate military action.:rolleyes:
Was listening to a radio show yesterday (hamish you might like it actually - check out www.theyoungturks.com ), and they mentioned that its been reported in some middle eastern newspapers and maybe the Boston Globe too, that the States have asked Turkey if they can use airbases there, from which to bomb Iran...should they need to. Turkey told them to f**k off. BUT, and this is the best bit, the States told them that if they did allow them use of the bases that they would build a NUCLEAR REACTOR for the Turks. Now if these newspaper reports are true, that is the most unbelievable thing I've ever heard.
Thanks a millions dancinpants - will indeedy check it out.If you check out the Information Clearing House website it has a few articles on that Turkey/Nuclear issue. Turkey has now increased its military to 250,000 soldiers on the Iraq border and has gone into Iraq up to eight kilometres chasing Kurdish rebels.Quote:
Originally Posted by dancinpants
The unfortunate Kurds are getting it all sides - bombed by the Syrians in Syria, hit by the Turks inside and outside Turkey, bombed yesterday by the Iranians in North Iran.
And now Muhammad El Sadr has moved 10,000 Shi-ites militia up to Kurdistan -especially 'round the capital city - to put a stop to a Kurds only situation.
Needless to say, the Green Zone government is powerless and the Yanks are totally clueless what to do now. Do they take a side or keep all the various elements apart - impossible anyway.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and co. were warned this would happen - fcuking b@stards went ahead anyway.
Under Article 51 of the Geneva Convention you can be charged with war crimes if you preemptively attack another country.
But, of course, those cnuts will get off scot free.
There is no justice - absolutely none.
Personally, I'd love to see a big long line of hanged b@stards, starting at one end with Bin Laden, Zarqawi, El Sadr and the rest of those Islamofascists with Bush, Cheney(an evil b@stard if ever there was one),Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle etc on the other end.
They're all the same to me - depraved, amoral b@stards.:mad:
I do not, under any circumstances, accept responsibility for the Islam thread being locked - I posted numerous opinions and sources - I didn't start the name calling FFS. I invited counter arguments FFS. What the hell am I supposed to do?? But if someone starts to insult me - or anyone else for that matter - with personal or racist drivel then I'm not fcuking lying down - period. Locking the thread means the racist has won.
If I'm banned - so be it.
AND I DID report that person to the moderator when he started the name calling - he got a slap on the wrist. :rolleyes:
A damn good thread was locked because a REPORTED troll was let away with it.:mad:
Now, back on topic.
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle12952.htm
Extract
There’ve been numerous reports ( Sy Hersh, Scott Ritter and Col. Sam Gardiner) that US forces are already inside Iran executing covert operations and locating sites for future US bombing raids. If this is true, we can assume that the logistical groundwork of moving troops and supplies to the region is already underway making war inevitable.
Hamish, you keep taking threads off-topic with your tantrums, I'll keep closing them.
If you have a complaint, there is a complaints procedure outlined in the thread I linked at the end of the last thread.
If we all ignored procedures, it'd be chaos around herel Like every other Irish footy site. Is that what you want?