Author Topic: US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war  (Read 4342 times)

Offline Eaglecz

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 753
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #75 on: March 04, 2003, 06:18:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Steve
Lol  Eaglecz.

If what you say is true... which I doubt:  
Again... what has your post got to do with the fact that Germany needs to start paying back some of the kindness we showed them?


check history , check more sources and tell me what you found

if germany owe you, what does America, Frane, UK owe us ?


anyway its silly to support someone just because he helped us 40 years ago.... we are sheep, we like to talk about matters

and if you need that support so badly, explain it
because we do not see your concern and your official reasons are BS.... stop whinning and bring some facts

Offline Eaglecz

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 753
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #76 on: March 04, 2003, 06:27:49 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ping
The Reason for the USA in Europe to begin with was for the Destruction of the NAZI forces rampaging through Europe. That is not what we were discussing.  


If western countries never break their promisis, WW2 would never be by that way

so im not eating your promisis anymore, i dont care whats your economic interest, while you wanna slaughter few dweebs, just to increase military industry
i read about 1000x in the news paper.. "new weapons will be tested in Iraq"

i never read.... " our concern is " ..." because " ... " and it will mean " ....

only "we need .... they are so bad... so shut up and join"

facts ??? 0


btw why US lost 1/3 of oil reserves in past 3 months ???
did price of oil increased ? what is economic impact ?
how much money cost you to run that band of dweebs(army) around the world ? Do free people of US paying them with a smile ? (because they are pretty useless)

as you see we are running out of answers here
and nobody wants to answer us ..... only one thing we hear is "we need.... you need... they are sooo bad"

Stalin spoke like that, but he had sypfilis :D

ps.: do you still fear international law court ?
« Last Edit: March 04, 2003, 06:30:46 PM by Eaglecz »

Offline Ping

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 957
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #77 on: March 04, 2003, 06:29:04 PM »
Eaglecz
You lost me
I/JG2 Enemy Coast Ahead


Offline X2Lee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #78 on: March 04, 2003, 06:45:16 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Eaglecz



so sorry my sceptic about your pathetic peace defender with Mr. Butcher on lead..


i was so please that turkey goverment respected wish of their people, while mr. Butcher saing that he will ignore willing of his owen people ..

they day someone will shoot his brain of his head, i will not cry .. not realy



orel


Its not often that I read a post and feel utter contept for a human being. But you did the trick orel.
Hell I woulnt even give you a check six now...

Offline X2Lee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #79 on: March 04, 2003, 06:46:14 PM »
Btw 75% of Americans want saddam brought to justice.

Offline Montezuma

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 959
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #80 on: March 04, 2003, 07:44:20 PM »
Spying Report No Shock To U.N.
 
By Colum Lynch
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 4, 2003; Page A17


UNITED NATIONS, March 3 -- Security Council diplomats today shrugged off a British newspaper report that the super-secretive National Security Agency had ordered an eavesdropping "surge" on their telephones to determine their voting positions on a resolution that would pave the way for a U.S.-led war against Iraq.

"The fact is, this sort of thing goes with the territory," Pakistan's U.N. ambassador, Munir Akram, said in an interview. "You'd have to be very naive to be surprised."

The Observer, which is based in London, on Sunday published what it said was a directive from an NSA official describing an effort to increase electronic eavesdropping on select Security Council members -- including Chile, Angola, Cameroon, Bulgaria, Guinea and Pakistan -- whose votes would be crucial for adoption of the resolution.

The NSA official, described by the paper as the chief of staff of regional targets, urged his field agents to decipher the nations' voting plans, their negotiation strategy and any "alliances/dependencies" that might influence their decisions.

"The Agency is mounting a surge particularly directed at the U.N. Security Council members (minus US and GBR of course) for insights as to how membership is reacting to the ongoing debate" on Iraq, according to the official's allegedly "top secret" Jan. 31 e-mail. It instructed NSA operatives to collect "the whole gamut of information that could give U.S. policymakers an edge in obtaining results favorable to U.S. goals or to head off surprises."

Senior administration officials have acknowledged that they were confident about prevailing in their effort to adopt an initial resolution in November threatening "serious consequences" against Iraq if it failed to disarm in part because they were eavesdropping on French and Russian conversations.

U.S. officials in New York and Washington declined to confirm or deny the authenticity of the directive or the existence of the NSA official, whose name was published by the Observer.

"As a matter of long-standing policy, the administration never comments on anything involving any people involved in intelligence," White House press secretary Ari Fleischer told reporters.

U.N. diplomats and analysts said that espionage had been a fact of life at the United Nations since its founding in 1945, and they assume they are being monitored by many foreign intelligence agencies.

"I assume every phone conversation I have either on the cell phone or at the office is listened to by several people," said a European diplomat who requested anonymity. Another Security Council diplomat, asked in a telephone interview if he believes his calls are monitored by American intelligence agencies, said, "Let's ask the guy who's listening to us."

"No member state has raised a complaint with us, and to my knowledge no government has raised the issue in the committee on host country relations, where an issue of this nature would be appropriately addressed," said U.N. chief spokesman Fred Eckhard.

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #81 on: March 04, 2003, 08:03:12 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ping
Actually Toad: The ommision of the quartering of Berlin was unintentional. I just wanted to point out that Having the US, British and the French inside their borders would be a thorn.
 
My main point still stands however. Germany played the role of a Buffer Zone between NATO and the USSR NATO was for the defense of Europe. However If their ever was a war, Germany would have been wiped out. Nukes would have been used. That has BUFFER written all over it.
 
I agree with you, the line was drawn in the sand. It was all about stopping the Communist expansion. But what would have happened if the USSR invaded?
 Germany was going to fall and most likely to Nukes. The President even said that Nukes would be used.


It should be noted that for 30 plus years France was NOT a contributor to the military defense of Europe. Having correctly determined that the Americans, Germans and British would pay the price.. ANY price for the defense of Europe, the sniveling smarmy slimey french toejams decided to pull out of NATO and let the rest of NATO pay for their defense.

Bastards.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline AKS\/\/ulfe

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4287
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #82 on: March 04, 2003, 08:47:52 PM »
Awwwwwwwwwww roadkill.

Germany was no buffer zone, as Russia and the US had signed the MAD pact.

Mutual Assured Destruction, once one nuke went off, they all went off.

You can't very well have a buffer zone when there's nukes hitting every part of every major continent within minutes of each other.
-SW

Offline Steve

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6728
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #83 on: March 04, 2003, 09:02:29 PM »
Orel my original post is full of facts, what the hell are you talking about? You shouldn't support us because we supported you and it was 40 years ago?  LOL that's a very short time in history... so since a few years have past... far from 40... since we helped you, you shouldn't help us?  Like my post says... ungrateful Germany is.
And what should we owe you?  for what?  WWI? thanks.  WWII?  Thanks

As for needing your support... we don't .. just don't get in the way ok?  Just keep your cowardly, ungratefull tulips on the sidlines.... again


I don't think you are sheep.... many sheep have balls.
Member: Hot Soup Mafia - Cream of Myshroom
Army of Muppets  Yes, my ingame name is Steve

Offline Cobra

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 677
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #84 on: March 04, 2003, 09:08:05 PM »
Steve,
You catch any of the Royals games down there in Surprise?

I hear it's a great complex that the Royals and Rangers share.

Cobra

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #85 on: March 04, 2003, 09:11:35 PM »
Wulf.. the germans took their position as the buffer zone seriously... they knew damn well if they were unable to stop and hold a russian armor advance it would be their homes, towns, cities gettin mauled by a tactical nuclear exchange.. if the russians broke thru, West Germany would simply cease to exist. They made damn sure they wouldn't. In fact their armor and tactics were good enuf to pound our tulips silly in each and every reforager exercise ever conducted. Their contribution to NATO buring the cold war years was impressive.. to say the very least.

The French; on the other hand, were worse than useless.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline Steve

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6728
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #86 on: March 04, 2003, 09:14:38 PM »
Cobra, not yet but the facility is less than 10 mins from my home... goin soon... toured facility... truly awesome. :)
Member: Hot Soup Mafia - Cream of Myshroom
Army of Muppets  Yes, my ingame name is Steve

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #87 on: March 04, 2003, 10:36:58 PM »
Wait... an "outpost" is now a "base"? Not the same thing at all, militarily.

So what is a "buffer" in your meaning there Ping? Is it just the place where opposing forces end up face to face or it is some metaphysical thingie that exists between the cosmic yin of captialism and yang of communism? Or what?

Perhaps if you can tell me what the DMZ in Korea is, that would help me. Is that a buffer? And what kind of buffer is it?

Quote
Realisticly this was about the "United States' determination to maintain a presence on the Continent of Europe."


Perhaps. But only in the sense that isolationism failed to keep us out of WWI, which wasn't "our" war. And in the sense that the Neutrality Act of 1935 failed to keep us out of WW2 in Europe which certainly wasn't "our" war until Hitler in his brilliance declared war on us.

Thus ONE MORE attempt to keep out of yet another war in Europe by staying there and making sure it didn't happen. Looks like it worked.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2003, 10:39:50 PM by Toad »
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
OREL
« Reply #88 on: March 04, 2003, 10:53:22 PM »
Quote
1939 - America & UK & France gave Czech republic to Hitler w/o any problem or feeling of moral ... There was proper official aliance between Czech and those countries..


Haven't heard of any alliance between the US and Czech Republic in 1939. Can you give me a link or some more information? Thx!
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Ping

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 957
US dirty tricks to win vote on Iraq war
« Reply #89 on: March 05, 2003, 03:16:11 AM »
Point taken regarding the meaning of Outpost and Forward Base regarding the city of Berlin.

All this started because it was stated that the USA saved germany from communism.
I then stated that Germany was nothing more than a buffer zone.
 
The USG was not being altruistic in its occupation of Germany. All my quotes are from Declassified American Documents.

"Second , the over-all situation in Europe and its capacity to effect changes in the relative position and potentials of the West and the East. Third, the long-term importance, to both West and East, of controlling—or neutralizing—the potential of Central Europe (Germany and Austria)."
http://www.cia.gov/csi/books/17240/2-19.pdf
It was not concern for Germany itself, it was about control and Dominance in Europe.
 You cant argue with that.
 
Purpose of edit: I think I have pretty much summed up what my thoughts were on Germany being a Buffer in other posts, perhaps you should read them.
 Germany Not being a member of Nato untill 1955 Was going to end up being the war zone and in all probability being destroyed, whether through Conventional or Nuclear weapons, in any full blown conflict with the USSR.
 
"As the lines were drawn in the postwar confrontation that ushered in the Cold War, these symbolic, political, and strategic considerations emerged as factors of permanent importance to US policy toward Berlin, Germany, and Europe."
 It was these factors that lead To Germany being a Buffer between the USSR and (note this Judge) Western Europe.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2003, 06:04:08 AM by Ping »
I/JG2 Enemy Coast Ahead