jaysus Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 @tiber lol again... im not suggesting that you need that kind of intel in person but those in command at least (as you said yourself)and of course its not a job for everyone... the OSS probably did some stuff at the atlantic wall... but since you didnt attack there anyway it was mere distraction imo...im just stating that they did a lot more than that @MajrKrazam i agree with you that the CIA is a bunch of evil ner'do'wells, at least i cant remember when they did somin positive... i mean they even forged fake intel to justify an invasion apart from all the murders and terrorist acts they commited around the world which resulted in millions of dead and are more or less responsible for 911 and all that stuff (creating alquaida for example) but - in regards to waging war one needs good intel one can trust, im not saying that the cia is the best option here and im kinda bluffed by the fact that the us doesnt have anything else at handi state it again im against any form of war as i stated earlier and gave reasons for but if one is going to do so anyway against all sense then they should at least know what they are doing the problem with the cia is indeed that they gave a damn about the reality and just made one up that fitted the interest of some powerful in the us government again and again... panama to sell cheap bananas, venezuela to get cheap oil, al quaida to get a means to start some wars, jamaica to destroy a democratic gov which opposed us corporate invovlenment, liberia to destroy the same, cambodia to sell heroin and fund other ilegit actions, and so on... the list is endless in germany for example we have the KSK which is somin like the SEAL unit in the us but also gathers intel in and out of combat situations, then we have the BND which does only intel gathering and also inside and out of combat situations, same goes for the MAD and a bunch of other units i dont even know off - of the 3 named the BND is probably the most dangerous, they are not allowed to carry arms but give a damn and are more or less free of any control, the other two KSK and MAD are under direct military control and thus obliged to the parliament and are much easier to take care off... @iran and its nulear program...one must note that the iran payed for the french nuclear program... the frog eaters would still live in the stone age if the iranians didnt give em billions of bucks for scientific research in that direction with the promise of getting some civil power reactors build in the end... same goes for saddam and the brits... the frenchies were blunt enough to just say "screw toi - merci pour l'argent - nous wont give toi merde" whereas the englishmen needed an israeli airstrike to keep the bucks for themselves and not give em anything... so basicly i think they deserve some form of retribution... wether it should be nuclear reactors is another question... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiber Septim Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 @Jaysus My apologies. I meant west, but that's kind of obvious. And theres nothing localized about nuclear war. I grew up with the exact same fears. I'd also like to apologize for bringing up Germany's history. Every time we back up another step there's always someone else to blame. That s the very thing that pisses me off about this debate. And as for who was turning what upside down, ask the Kurds and the Shia (or is it Sunis? I can never keep those guys straight). And as for how I finished my last post "Maybe next time". Take a look at the news today. Next time is here. But I'm sure Europe can handle it this time. Or maybe we should just stand back and let the Taliban take over another country. I mean seriously. I don't think Pakistan's nuclear arsenal has the range to reach the US anyway. But what the heck. I don't suppose a bunch of "desert dwellers" as you call them even know how the trigger works. And if I can't make a "reasonable" argument without calling someone a tard or a slave then perhaps there is something wrong with my argument. But that's just me. If you want to call yourself a eurotard as you put it, that's your choice. Though some of your neighbors might be offended. And I sure as hell don't go to FOX for anything. All my info comes from my own observations and EXAMINING the evidence that almost exclusively comes from the very web site that thrives on wild speculation about these theories. Why do people think you actually have to "melt" steel to totally fry it's structural qualities? All you have to do is make it lose it's temper. If you would like to continue the 9/11 debate, I suggest we move this over to Above Top Secret. I have a thread over there titled "Why? Answer these 2 questions and you may find the truth". But it's totally open to more than the 2 questions I posed. @Ed Whoa...Whoa.. Whoa! Pakistan's nuclear arsenal may not reach the US, but they can improve it. I suppose the future will be dangerous. Maybe. So i think you should think more widely. Anyway, a happy news for me:The Major was really confident of the poll. Just now, he's shouting, "Navy's goin to win, son. you and your 200 bucks are goin' down!!". And yeah he changed the bet to $200. So wish me luck for 200 bucks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiber Septim Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 @ JaysusI know your not suggesting me getting into the job, but i'm just explaining why i don't like the job. The OSS did sabotaged a couple of Shore guns and the pistol petes, and of course, they gathered Intel. Probably took it from a Sleeping SS Officer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
del1diablo Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Whoa...Whoa.. Whoa! Pakistan's nuclear arsenal may not reach the US, but they can improve it. I suppose the future will be dangerous. Maybe. So i think you should think more widely. But the US already got nuclear arsenal capabel of leveling the world, so does China and Russia also have. So please............I also find a bunch of hardcore christian extremists more dangouros than a bunch of islamic extremists in that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiber Septim Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 Religions Conflict..... I hated that. Makes us think that there are two God. I'm Catholic, I'm Religious and i'm proud. You don't need to be an extremist. Are there Christian extremist?? Where? I'm sure the Pope will come to them a smack they're faces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Slyther Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 The video is pretty self-explanatory of my decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
humanbean234 Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Because the most deadly weapon in the world is the Marine and his rifle. Said by a wise man, I believe.On that subject, branch-of-service is irrelevant.Army doctrine, from an old 11M (Mechanized Infantry)... the most dangerous thing on a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, is... the six dismout troopies onboard. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Slyther Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Because the most deadly weapon in the world is the Marine and his rifle. Said by a wise man, I believe.On that subject, branch-of-service is irrelevant.Army doctrine, from an old 11M (Mechanized Infantry)... the most dangerous thing on a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, is... the six dismout troopies onboard. :thumbsup: It's some legendary statement which I truly believe in. Although, it isn't the truth. You're correct that there's quite some powerful weapons out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaysus Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 aint that from full metal jacket? sarcastic propaganda taken serious... :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajKrAzAm Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 i agree with you that the CIA is a bunch of evil ner'do'wells, at least i cant remember when they did somin positive... i mean they even forged fake intel to justify an invasion apart from all the murders and terrorist acts they commited around the world which resulted in millions of dead and are more or less responsible for 911 and all that stuff (creating alquaida for example)What a ridiculous thing to say. The CIA are not "evil", they may be ne'er-do-well's but there isn't a thread of string to connect these two non sequiturs together. As for creating al-Qaeda, the US supplied arms to the mujahedeen but following the Soviet expulsion the US abandoned them and they were able to survive largely from support from elements in Pakistan - including the ISI that aims to control/colonize parts of Afghanistan through the use of these various proxies. Regarding your 9/11 point, what a lazy syllogism you try to make. The moral equivalence you raise between 9/11 and US actions is disingenuous. It is the same mentality that suggests that America is the root cause of all its problems and as a result should not fight back against these nihilistic and barbaric Islamist - dare I say - fascists. So, please do try and elaborate on how America is the cause of Jihadism and thus 9/11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now