LC Final Insult Teaser !110001!!1

[MIKILLINI]

Except it wouldn't. Afghanistan is not a strategically important site, and it won't aide in controlling oil.

There's no logical reason whatsoever to go into Afghanistan, except to kill terrorists.

-Gumboot


Rebuilding America's Defenses called for the protection of the American
Homeland, the ability to wage simultaneous theater wars, perform global constabulary roles, and the control of space and cyberspace.
It claimed that the 1990s was a decade of defense neglect and that the US must increase military spending to preserve American geopolitical leadership as the world's superpower.
The report claimed that in order to maintain a Pax Americana, potential rivals — such as China, Iran, Iraq, and North Korea — needed to be held in check.

[MIKILLINI]

Yes it is. The best fighter aircraft in WWII... or at least my favourite at any rate. :)

The whistling death, as the Japanese described it, a most excellent fighter.
I'll bet Boyington absolutely loved them after flying the P-40 Curtiss.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Rebuilding America's Defenses called for the protection of the American
Homeland, the ability to wage simultaneous theater wars, perform global constabulary roles, and the control of space and cyberspace.

The implied, but missing, word in the above is "successfully". I'm not sure if you've noticed, but "they" are struggling with that part.

It seems your LIHOP idea is as ill-conceived and ill-executed by the alleged perpetrators as any MIHOP fantasy.

...but that's almost required for it to be discovered the common man, isn't it?

[T.A.M.]

The report claimed that in order to maintain a Pax Americana, potential rivals — such as China, Iran, Iraq, and North Korea — needed to be held in check.

sounds pretty smart to me. Keep your rivals and enemies in check, to insure your continued place as a power in the world. I don't think the Chinese know the words to "Kumbaya".

TAM:)

[gumboot]

Rebuilding America's Defenses called for the protection of the American
Homeland, the ability to wage simultaneous theater wars, perform global constabulary roles, and the control of space and cyberspace.
It claimed that the 1990s was a decade of defense neglect and that the US must increase military spending to preserve American geopolitical leadership as the world's superpower.
The report claimed that in order to maintain a Pax Americana, potential rivals — such as China, Iran, Iraq, and North Korea — needed to be held in check.



None of which has anything to do with Afghanistan.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

sounds pretty smart to me. Keep your rivals and enemies in check, to insure your continued place as a power in the world. I don't think the Chinese know the words to "Kumbaya".

TAM:)



Frankly, if I had to choose between being ruled by the USA or China... well... it would be an easy decision.

-Gumboot

[MIKILLINI]

None of which has anything to do with Afghanistan.

-Gumboot

Lets see....location, location, location

[MIKILLINI]

Frankly, if I had to choose between being ruled by the USA or China... well... it would be an easy decision.

-Gumboot

Frankly, if I had to chose on being a colony ruled by an empire or wanting independence....hmmm

[gumboot]

Frankly, if I had to chose on being a colony ruled by an empire or wanting independence....hmmm


That's not the scenario I was proposing...

-Gumboot

[The Silver Shadow]

Would I be wrong and premature to call sock on this one?

[MIKILLINI]

The implied, but missing, word in the above is "successfully". I'm not sure if you've noticed, but "they" are struggling with that part.

It seems your LIHOP idea is as ill-conceived and ill-executed by the alleged perpetrators as any MIHOP fantasy.

...but that's almost required for it to be discovered the common man, isn't it?

Sure "they" thought it would be successful, "they" figured "they" could pull it off.
But now the future is here and, as it turns out, the plan is Now not going as planned. Damn insurgents! Screwing everything up.

[LashL]

Would I be wrong and premature to call sock on this one?

No.

[MIKILLINI]

Would I be wrong and premature to call sock on this one?

Freedom of speech is exercised here Silver, if ya feel the need to call a sock, then by all means. Hello to you too. I'm just giving My point of view, I'm not familiar with this socks thing, though.

[gumboot]

I still don't see the benefit of invading Afghanistan. You can't invade Iran through Afghanistan - the terrain is far too inhospitable and rough. The US already as Iran hemmed in via forces and allies in Saudi Arabia, the Persian Gulf, Oman, UAE, Turkey, and so forth.

Afghanistan is not useful on containing any of the US's other major threats.

And the cost of trying to hold Afghanistan is very high - for very little (if any) gain.

-Gumboot

[MIKILLINI]

That's not the scenario I was proposing...

-Gumboot

Understood, gumboot...If I had a choice between China or the USA..Not a shred of doubt in my mind, I would choose the USA, where I live.

My point is, Look at how these people view the world.Then look at how they are applying this view. It certainly does not make Me proud. In fact, it saddens Me. I am a history buff, and throughout the course of history, empires cannot sustain their dominance. The Romans kept theirs for a very long time, as did the Dynasty's of China. But, ultimately, they are doomed to fail. Independence from an empire is a strong desire. The original 13 colonies of My country threw off the empire of Britain. Or before the USA fought in Vietnam, the USA did not realize that Vietnam fought a 1000 year war with China to gain independence. That's persistence.
The USA had their hand in putting the Shah of Iran to power, look how it turned out in '79. It was through us that Hussein gained power, so now that he's gone and insurgency has filled the vacuum, it's a quagmire, a total mess.
Now how is the USA to fix this? It's been a disaster.

[Dog Town]

. It was through us that Hussein gained power,.


While this is politics, and should be there...LINK?

[MIKILLINI]

I still don't see the benefit of invading Afghanistan. You can't invade Iran through Afghanistan - the terrain is far too inhospitable and rough. The US already as Iran hemmed in via forces and allies in Saudi Arabia, the Persian Gulf, Oman, UAE, Turkey, and so forth.

Afghanistan is not useful on containing any of the US's other major threats.

And the cost of trying to hold Afghanistan is very high - for very little (if any) gain.

-Gumboot

You're right, it doesn't make sense, unless you want to keep it out of concern for those other countries close by who were former Soviet satellites gaining their own independence, or possibly a resurgence of the Soviets themselves. Some of those in this government still have that "cold war" paranoia.

[MIKILLINI]

While this is politics, and should be there...LINK?

Sorry DT wrong word...It was through us that Hussein Increased his power

[Dog Town]

Some of those in this government still have that "cold war" paranoia.

Of the Ruskies? That is laughable! Their weapons don't work, they have no NCO's! Major downfall. The US, would have Air superiority on them in 24 hours!
We know, where their subs are. You do the math, SOCK!

/politics

[Dog Town]

Sorry DT wrong word...It was through us that Hussein Increased his power

The enemy of my enemy happens! Lived life long?

[MIKILLINI]

Of the Ruskies? That is laughable! Their weapons don't work, they have no NCO's! Major downfall. The US, would have Air superiority on them in 24 hours!
We know, where their subs are. You do the math, SOCK!

/politics

Never a guarantee, look what insurgency has wrought in Iraq.

[Dog Town]

Never a guarantee, look what insurgency has wrought in Iraq.

Apples, and oranges. You have to think diff! You aren't very good at this, are you?

[gumboot]

You're right, it doesn't make sense, unless you want to keep it out of concern for those other countries close by who were former Soviet satellites gaining their own independence, or possibly a resurgence of the Soviets themselves. Some of those in this government still have that "cold war" paranoia.


They're not very fond of the USA. Americans have this quaint notion that governments should be democratically elected and civilians shouldn't be massacred for protesting.

Needless to say, that doesn't go down at all well in former Soviet states.

-Gumboot

[MIKILLINI]

Apples, and oranges. You have to think diff! You aren't very good at this, are you?

Like I said before DT, I'm giving out My point of view, and setting out there the reasons for My perspective, if you want call Me a sock, thats your business.

[MIKILLINI]

Of the Ruskies? That is laughable! Their weapons don't work, they have no NCO's! Major downfall. The US, would have Air superiority on them in 24 hours!
We know, where their subs are. You do the math, SOCK!

/politics

So, tell Me DT, have they dismantled all their ICBM's? If not, in whose direction are they pointed?

[gumboot]

So, tell Me DT, have they dismantled all their ICBM's? If not, in whose direction are they pointed?

It's not a question of where they're pointed, it's a question of where they land.

-Gumboot

[Calcas]

Al Qaeda knew what they were doing. Having been looking into this in the last week, I'm impressed at how sophisticated their operation was (impressed and disturbed).

As an example, they specifically trained the "muscle hijackers" how to seize an airliner quickly. They practised quickly securing the cockpit, killing the pilots, and worrying about the passengers later. They were briefed on how the authorities would respond to a hijacking, and their actions took advantage of this. However they were also trained in a whole heap of things that weren't related to the attack - making truck bombs, and so forth. The intention behind this was to keep the hijackers in the dark as to their mission for as long as possible, so if they were caught authorities wouldn't know what attack was coming, and the plan could continue ahead with replacements.

This is very sophisticated. It would not surprise me in the least if Al Qaeda was leaking false threat information about unrelated attacks to confuse the system. This would explain why it was "blinking red".

-Gumboot

Very true. I just happened to see a movie on HBO yesterday that I had never heard of. "The Hamburg Cell" is about the 19 hijackers and how they came to be recruited, brainwashed, trained, and generally implemented the attack. They really believed the whole "virgins will be waiting for you" bit.

It was also interesting to see some of the "warnings" that the CIA and the State Department posted about an imminent attack (of some kind) just days beforehand. Certainly there were warning signs. But, how many times are there warning signs and nothing happens?

No LIHOP for me. Perhaps some cover-ups after the fact (which seems to always happen when something goes wrong in) and maybe some used it as leverage to later take action. But, no conspiracy.

Anyway, if you haven't seen "The Hamburg Cell" I would recommend it.

[MIKILLINI]

It's not a question of where they're pointed, it's a question of where they land.

-Gumboot

I gotta admit, thats a good point. Also, I have to say that I'm with you guys on this LIHOP, that it doesn't wash anymore with Me. This site has been gold in removing any remnants of skepticism left in Me. I started reaching for things to put out there at the end of My posts, (I imagine this is why I got the sock label)
but at least now I can assure you that here, I admit, I was wrong. You guys are really a sharp group here; you show the evidence, you explain things very well, you show the URL's. And throw in the humor (along with sarcasm..that I like) and as I was mulling through this at work today, I surmised that i had to much pride to admit being wrong. But this JREF with all of you pointing out the errors of My reasoning has set me in the right direction (I can be so stubborn at times). Thanks guys.

By the way, Gumboot.. that its not a question of where they are pointed, but where they land..gave me a thought of the Cters;
It made Me think of the movie, Dr. Strangelove, particularly of General Ripper who felt that the communists were sapping the precious bodily fluids of everyone in the country through the fluoridation of water.:D

[chipmunk stew]

What a relief, isn't it? You no longer have to fight with your brain to fend off the cognitive dissonance.

Mad props.

[MIKILLINI]

What a relief, isn't it? You no longer have to fight with your brain to fend off the cognitive dissonance.

Mad props.

Thanks Chipmunk...LOL...It's like having an argument with Myself , thinking that I'm winning while actually losing and realizing I'm not convinced about My perceived victory. A dose of looking and listening with an open mind while throwing away a bit of paradigm paralysis took care of it. I consider it a good learning experience, now to move forward and beyond the student status...:cool:

[gumboot]

I gotta admit, thats a good point. Also, I have to say that I'm with you guys on this LIHOP, that it doesn't wash anymore with Me. This site has been gold in removing any remnants of skepticism left in Me.



I hope we haven't removed your skepticism! That's the whole point of this place. :)

It's important to remember that skepticism is not about rejecting the accepted version of anything. It's simply about coming to a conclusion based on evidence, and allowing for the possibility that your conclusion is wrong, and based on incomplete evidence.

For example, were anyone actually to provide genuine evidence of government involvement in 9/11 that meshed with (or explained away) all previously existing evidence, I am sure the folks here would be the first ones calling on El Presidento and his friends being charged with treason.

I am glad to see that you have relinquished your hold on your preconceived notions on 9/11 and embraced the facts. :) Life is much easier that way.

And it takes a great deal of courage to admit you were previously misguided.

Remember, the administration can still be a bunch of scumbags even if they had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. :)

-Gumboot

[MIKILLINI]

I hope we haven't removed your skepticism! That's the whole point of this place. :)

It's important to remember that skepticism is not about rejecting the accepted version of anything. It's simply about coming to a conclusion based on evidence, and allowing for the possibility that your conclusion is wrong, and based on incomplete evidence.

For example, were anyone actually to provide genuine evidence of government involvement in 9/11 that meshed with (or explained away) all previously existing evidence, I am sure the folks here would be the first ones calling on El Presidento and his friends being charged with treason.

I am glad to see that you have relinquished your hold on your preconceived notions on 9/11 and embraced the facts. :) Life is much easier that way.

And it takes a great deal of courage to admit you were previously misguided.

Remember, the administration can still be a bunch of scumbags even if they had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks. :)

-Gumboot

Oh no, that skepticism has not gone away, it was My other skepticism that had. I will always have suspicion of this Administration, it's what they are covering up and why is what makes Me that way. And it's not only this administration, there has been questionable actions from previous administrations that have cemented in the skepticism I have toward the highest office in the land.
Congress included, they're not immune from my skep...well, you know..

[Foolmewunz]

Oh no, that skepticism has not gone away, it was My other skepticism that had. I will always have suspicion of this Administration, it's what they are covering up and why is what makes Me that way. And it's not only this administration, there has been questionable actions from previous administrations that have cemented in the skepticism I have toward the highest office in the land.
Congress included, they're not immune from my skep...well, you know..

The only problem, as I see it, is that you dropped into a CT thread instead of politics, and overt administration bashing here is quite often a prelude to bats**t crazy CT theories, so many expected you to go off the deep end at any point. I think, thus far, your bona fides are as you state. You may have a happier home in the Politics forum, as I mentioned. You'd find a whole lot more allies in the discussion. (Although there are numerous here who are not Bush fans, to say the least.)