Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Hortlund on March 06, 2003, 12:15:27 PM
-
Heard it from several different sources. White House has denied the rumor. But there is a press conference scheduled for tonight to announce a 'major success' in the war on terror.
Any speculations?
-
I haven't heard the rumor, although I have heard over the last few days that they are getting closer to finding him. If it's true it would be cause for a party. Drinks on me. :)
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2825653.stm
The White House has denied rumours circulating in Washington that it is about to announce the capture of Bin Laden.
The speculation was centred on a news conference due to be given by President Bush on Thursday evening (0100GMT Friday), in which the White House said he would be making an important announcement about successes in the "war on terror".
-
The only real succes in quest for world peace will be the demise of the White House cowboy.
g,d,r :D
-
That's not really very funny Hristo.
-
Rumor: OBL Captured.
I hope not. That may pull the rug from under our plans to wage an endless war on terrorism.
At least I hope they keep him hidden untill after we invade Iraq. Then, after he admits that Hussein was his mortal enemy rather than supporter, we could just say "oops..." :)
miko
-
depends...as things look now, he will serve Americans a war show on TV. Large kabooms, flashes, SCUD intercepts etc - all fully censored and free of blood scenes.
You will never know the exact number of dead Iraqi soldiers and civilans, much less see the real footage. Afterall, they will be totally dehumanized until then. Numbers like 100,000 will mean little in the minds of your average US citizen.
Though, there will be a lot of Oprah's and such about poor families of all those 50 US soldiers that gave their life for good cause. Yea, right. The cause of oil companies wanting more and more. They installed Bush in power, now its their turn to get what they invested for.
After the war is over, US will install puppet government in Iraq and feed on whatever natural resource that country has. Regardless of what UN has to say. Iraquis themselves will probably notice no changes, except they will look at McDonalds logo where Saddam's picture used to be.
Just my personal opinion, US is the aggressor now and I can't but to wish all the worst to the White house cowboy.
-
So Hristo I assume by your hijack that you are saying that Bush is a greater enemy than OBL?
-
Originally posted by funkedup
That's not really very funny Hristo.
Funked, thanks for your speedy response, and HRISTO: what Funked said.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Rumor: OBL Captured.
I hope not. That may pull the rug from under our plans to wage an endless war on terrorism.
At least I hope they keep him hidden untill after we invade Iraq. Then, after he admits that Hussein was his mortal enemy rather than supporter, we could just say "oops..." :)
miko
Miko2d, we should still get rid of Hussein, even if he was a mortal enemy of OBL. It's certain he's a mortal enemy of ours.
-
OBL is dead, but this fact is better kept unknown.
As it is now, the cowboy is major threat to world peace.
-
Originally posted by slimm50
Miko2d, we should still get rid of Hussein, even if he was a mortal enemy of OBL. It's certain he's a mortal enemy of ours.
OK, what exactly makes him mortal enemy of US ?
Weren't both OBL and SH your big friends back in 80s ?
-
You know...I'm starting to wonder if I missed some kind of all-European anti-US brainwashing class in school or something (I did cut alot of classes for awhile back then).
-
So, can you tell us why is Saddam Hussein mortal enemy of US ?
-
Originally posted by Oedipus
"OK, what exactly makes him mortal enemy of US citizens ?"
Because that is who he primarily tries to murder.
Oed
How ? Where ?
This logic makes the cowboy mortal enemy of people of Iraq, since he is preparing to murder them for last 6 months or so.
-
Good luck guys, deprogramming Bistro will be a difficult job. :)
-
Oed, I see you edited your post after I quoted it. I am talking about Saddam Hussein.
As things look now, he is somehow mortal enemy of US, but nobody cannot explain why. What a mistery !
-
Oedipus: How? Where? Are you that daft or just trying to be disagreeable?
The thousands in the Twin Towers, Danny Pearl, the USS Cole,
and I just got called to a meeting or I'd list the other attacks by El Quaida directed by OBL.
Oed, I would not be so quick to call others "daft". Here is a transcript of this conversation:
slimm50: Miko2d, we should still get rid of Hussein, even if he was a mortal enemy of OBL. It's certain he's a mortal enemy of ours.
Hristo: OK, what exactly makes him mortal enemy of US?
Oedipus: Because that is who he (OBL) primarily tries to murder.
It is pretty clear, except to you, that he in question is Saddam Hussein, not OBL. It is a trubute to the US propaganda machine that for people like you SH and OBL are the same man or close enough as to make no difference, while they have much less in common among themselves than each has with us.
miko
-
Hristo dont be a moron. Its our job to clean up the worlds toejam piles. Been that way for a while now. Maybe someday we can pass along a world you can live in happily but until then you show some respect.
This guy did try to assasinate a former president. Thats good enough for me. Its ashame we had to suffer through 8 years of the worst Golly-geened president in history to get here, but here we are.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Its our job to clean up the worlds toejam piles.
Did you pull that out of Mein Kampf ?
-
"OBL is dead, but this fact is better kept unknown.
As it is now, the cowboy is major threat to world peace."
Hristo has spoken.
-
Hristo
Saddam is a threat, perhaps not to us directly but to our allies. (Israel for instance)
He has had 10 years to disarm to comply with UN resolutions after the gulf war (he hasn't)
Has gassed his own people.
Even Clinton fired like 400 Tomahawks at him for violating the no-fly zone and other UN resolutions.
He defies the UN again and again, then we finally step up to him and France, Russia and Germany back out of the original resolution which promises military action if it violates the Un resolutions.
-
Originally posted by narsus
Hristo
Saddam is a threat, perhaps not to us directly but to our allies. (Israel for instance)
He has had 10 years to disarm to comply with UN resolutions after the gulf war (he hasn't)
Has gassed his own people.
Even Clinton fired like 400 Tomahawks at him for violating the no-fly zone and other UN resolutions.
He defies the UN again and again, then we finally step up to him and France, Russia and Germany back out of the original resolution which promises military action if it violates the Un resolutions.
Israel has no problems in shelling their own citizens as well, but US doesn't seem to have a problem with that.
Iraq is isolated and under sanctions for 10 years or more. It is in no way a threat to world peace anymore. The cowboy is trying to get some land - is all.
You say you protect Kurds from Saddam. Fine, but who'll protect them from Turkey ?
-
ROFLMAO!
yeah, bush is the threat to world peace?
puhleaze...and I'm sure Hristo would prefer Saddam or Osama to lead the world eh?
or maybe the Afghans
and you obviously don't know what a cowboy is.
-
Its our job to clean up the worlds toejam piles.
In Iraq's case, a more accurate sentence would be "It's our job to clean up the worlds toejam piles, whose existance is largely the result of our foreign policy and that of our allies."
-
Originally posted by Wlfgng
ROFLMAO!
yeah, bush is the threat to world peace?
puhleaze...and I'm sure Hristo would prefer Saddam or Osama to lead the world eh?
or maybe the Afghans
and you obviously don't know what a cowboy is.
Now you are being an idiot.
Neither OBL, Bush or Saddam should lead anything, if you ask me.
The cowboy wants some land and that's it. He only needs a good excuse. So far he's failed to produce it.
Ask yourself again - Why is Iraq so dangerous to world peace all of the sudden ? And US being some kind of world policeman ? After decades of supporting some of the world's worst dictators (the list including the same Saddam Hussein) ? How about the fact of OBL being on US paylist ? How do you explain that.
But nothing can change. US will start an aggression and little people don't count here. The fact that you support it shows just how powerful the indoctrination is.
No point in prolonging this thread.
-
Originally posted by Hristo
depends...as things look now, he will serve Americans a war show on TV. Large kabooms, flashes, SCUD intercepts etc - all fully censored and free of blood scenes.
You will never know the exact number of dead Iraqi soldiers and civilans, much less see the real footage. Afterall, they will be totally dehumanized until then. Numbers like 100,000 will mean little in the minds of your average US citizen.
Though, there will be a lot of Oprah's and such about poor families of all those 50 US soldiers that gave their life for good cause. Yea, right. The cause of oil companies wanting more and more. They installed Bush in power, now its their turn to get what they invested for.
After the war is over, US will install puppet government in Iraq and feed on whatever natural resource that country has. Regardless of what UN has to say. Iraquis themselves will probably notice no changes, except they will look at McDonalds logo where Saddam's picture used to be.
Just my personal opinion, US is the aggressor now and I can't but to wish all the worst to the White house cowboy.
What Hristo said.
-
Yeager: This guy did try to assasinate a former president. Thats good enough for me.
I did some search on that. Apparently it's the same kind of crap as "murdered Kuwaiti incubator infants" or "half a million iraqi troops amassed on Saudi border" that only american classibied photos would show but nobody else's.
Apparently yemeni found a car bomb in their country around the time Bush senior was going to visit in early 90s. A carefull analysis of it's wiring led them to believe that it was done in the "Iraqi style". After all, Iraqi are famous of having their own unique bomb-wiring style - they would not think of pulling one of three possible wiring diagramms from the internet, right? And of course, there can't be anyone in Yemen who would want to to play with bombs. The USS Cole and the jeep full of Al-Qaeda people were blown up elsewhere and brough and dumped in Yemen after the fact, right?
That makes it perfectly obvious that Hussein stood behind all the bombings that happened in Yemen, Pakistan, WTC I, WTC 9/11, and possibly Oklahoma bombing too. Guess where McVeigh visited few years before his crime? Iraq, of all places! Here is your proof! Get Hussein!
miko
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
You know...I'm starting to wonder if I missed some kind of all-European anti-US brainwashing class in school or something (I did cut alot of classes for awhile back then).
Exactly my thoughts. I guess I missed the classes too.
-
times change
as do allies and enemies .............
-
No point in prolonging this thread.
I'll agree with that.
the rest is simply your opinion... and mine.
-
Originally posted by Yeager.
Its ashame we had to suffer through 8 years of the worst Golly-geened president in history to get here, but here we are.
So Yeager. You're saying that Clinton was the worst U.S. president ever? Are you a republican, or just anti-Clinton? Are you one of those that blames Clinton for 9/11? If you answer yes to the above questions, then you are as narrow minded as they come.
After the fall of the "Iron Curtain", the U.S. scaled back a lot of military and intellengence numbers. Just because Clinton was the president of choice at the time, are you going to blame him for that? Some people are truly naive when it comes to politics and history.
Hristo is right about one thing. The U.S. uses people when it suits them and then kicks them to the curb. OBL and SH are both recent examples of that. We used them when it suited us, and now it's come back to haunt us. I'm sure there are other shining examples in U.S. history of this behavior.
Peace!
:)
-
Hristo Do you even CARE that SH has ignored the UN for 10 years?
Is "Cowboy" making up all the U.N. enforced resolutions that SH has completely ignored?
It's time to do something about him before we have to go in and save ANOTHER Country.
Or have you forgotten about Kuwait?
-
Originally posted by 2stony
We used them when it suited us, and now it's come back to haunt us. I'm sure there are other shining examples in U.S. history of this behavior.
Yeah. You know, we were allied with Stalin for a while. One of the world's premier practitioners of genocide and outright murder.
You obviously condemn that alliance, correct? Agree that we should have never sent him the first pair of boots or box of C-rats?
-
Originally posted by Turdboy
Hristo Do you even CARE that SH has ignored the UN for 10 years?
Looks like it's George Bush who's ignoring the UN.
-
Originally posted by TOAD.
Yeah. You know, we were allied with Stalin for a while. One of the world's premier practitioners of genocide and outright murder. You obviously condemn that alliance, correct? Agree that we should have never sent him the first pair of boots or box of C-rats?
Hindsight is always a convenient tool Toad. We didn't know how any of these situations was going to turn out in the end, so your statement holds about as much water as a pail full of holes.
:)
-
We didn't know how any of these situations was going to turn out in the end, so your statement holds about as much water as a pail full of holes.
Yah. Kinda like the Mujahadeen that became the Taliban.. or the Shah, or Saddam, or Noriega, or Castro, Ho Chi Minh and the Warlords in Laos and Cambodia.
Sheesh.
I'm soooooooooooooooo tired of seeing the lameo 'you sold saddam that suff' argument. like the quote above, holds as much water as a pail full of holes. What we did before the current situation is not a reason or excuse to NOT do what needs to be done NOW. The world changes, alliances change, treatys get broken, what seemed like the right course of action 20 years ago don't have a hell of a lot to do with what we need to get done today..
-
Yeah, the price of gas is now $3.00 a gallon
-
Originally posted by Hangtime.
what seemed like the right course of action 20 years ago don't have a hell of a lot to do with what we need to get done today..
The thing is Hang, that if we had handled it better then, what happened in 1991 and 2001 might not have happened. And 20 years from now if everything goes wrong(which it definately has the potential to), what are you going to say then?
:)
-
The thing is Hang, that if we had handled it better then, what happened in 1991 and 2001 might not have happened. And 20 years from now if everything goes wrong(which it definately has the potential to), what are you going to say then?
What am i going to say then? certainly not what your saying now.
you just don't get it.. I'm not intrested in sitting around playing the 'hindsight' game that seems to make your day.
When i'm at the plate eyeballing the pitcher, i'm not at all concerned with what team that amazinhunk was on last season.
-
What am i going to say then? certainly not what your saying now.
History is an interesting subject and I enjoy it thoroughly. The unfortunately problem is, that man doesn't seem to learn a whole lot by it. The current situation is a study of how to prevent what's happening today from happening again. By remembering and studying that, hopefully we can prevent it. The examples I site are ones to study and learn from.
There, how's that for hindsight?
:)
-
The unfortunately problem is, that man doesn't seem to learn a whole lot by it. The current situation is a study of how to prevent what's happening today from happening again. By remembering and studying that, hopefully we can prevent it. The examples I site are ones to study and learn from.
oh, joy. shall i start tossing out excellent examples from history on why we need to take action, sit back and twizzle my toothpick while you post up examples of your own to counter mine??
and at the end of that month long exercise, already adequitely covered by dozens of other threads on the same damn subjects right here on this board, what will we have?
horseshit.
same old horseshit.
same old tired horseshit.
no thanks.
I would be intrested in what your view of stats indicates as the right swing for the current pitcher. Bunt? Hope he walks us? He goin with a slider, curve or fastball.. in what order? Which pitch should we swing at?
Surely, 'history' has the answer?
-
Sirloin wrote:
Looks like it's George Bush who's ignoring the UN.
How so?
Has he invaded Iraq?
Is SH dead or captured?
So far he is abiding by what the UN has said.
I have to agree with Bush on one point and that is if the Security Council doesn't do something about SH's violations of the UN Resolutions then they aren't worth a fart out of weazel's ass.
And giving him more time is not an option. He's had 12 years to comply and he hasn't even tried.
-
Originally posted by 2stony
Originally posted by TOAD.
Hindsight is always a convenient tool Toad. We didn't know how any of these situations was going to turn out in the end, so your statement holds about as much water as a pail full of holes.
:)
Scuse me. The Stalin alliance is directly analogous to the situations you quoted.
2stony:
OBL and SH are both recent examples of that. We used them when it suited us, and now it's come back to haunt us. I'm sure there are other shining examples in U.S. history of this behavior.
We used Stalin against Hitler, supplying him with money, food and arms when it suited us. It came back to haunt us. We didn't know how it was going to turn out in the end.
YOU use "Hindsight" as a "convenient tool" yourself.
Does it ever bother you that you rant against something that you do yourself? Or do you even notice it when you do it?
-
Neither OBL, Bush or Saddam should lead anything, if you ask me.
You're right Hristo its way past Europe's turn to step up and...oh wait nevermind.
Perhaps another 200 years and your manhood will grow back. Here's to hoping.
-
>Did you pull that out of Mein Kampf ?
====
Ok Hristo...just for you and just this once: Zig Heil!!!
>In Iraq's case, a more accurate sentence would be "It's our job to clean up the worlds toejam piles, whose existance is largely the result of our foreign policy and that of our allies."
====
Im thinking you could more accurately state it thus:
"It's our job to clean up the worlds toejam piles, whose existance is largely the result of our (sic) allies foreign policy over two centuries and ours to a lessor extent in the post WW2 era."
England and France really fuc*ked up the middle east through the centuries. Dont saddle it all on uncle sam. Ya tard.
>I did some search on that. Apparently it's the same kind of crap as "murdered Kuwaiti incubator infants" or "half a million iraqi troops amassed on Saudi border" that only american classibied photos would show but nobody else's.
====
Apparently you are wrong. George said so :)
>So Yeager. You're saying that Clinton was the worst U.S. president ever?
====
No. Simply that Clinton is the sorriest sack of toejam ever to hold the title "Commander In Chief" in my lifetime. I felt this way long before he completed his first term. His second term only intensified my absolute disgust of the man. I would however, allow Hilliary to bear my child. She could use a damned good shagging Im sure!
-
Originally posted by Yeager.
Does it ever bother you that you rant against something that you do yourself? Or do you even notice it when you do it?
Sure I notice it. I had to speak in a language that you'd understand.
Let's try a little forsight for once with this possible senario.
U.S. attacks Iraq; Iraq uses some sort of biological/chemical agent on our troops; U.S. nukes some target in Iraq.
So, where does that leave us? I'm sure you can figure out where this might take us/world. That's the thing that I don't like about this current administration. I believe they would use nukes.
That's forsight! You tell me what would happen after that.
:(
-
This thread is disgusting. I pray that many of you never hold public office, God knows I wouldnt want you affecting the lives of my family.
Mein Kampf? Give me a diddlying break...
:rolleyes: