Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on April 04, 2003, 01:22:17 PM
-
Some crow served up fresh for some of you, but I'm sure its just all propoganda ;)
http://www.msnbc.com/news/895185.asp?cp1=1
-
With all due respect Ripsnort, I cannot beleive this until Straffo has confirmed this.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
With all due respect Ripsnort, I cannot beleive this until Straffo has confirmed this.
LOL..
-
I fear you're both missing the point somewhat. There was a bunch of Al Qaeda operatives making ricin in London too. Does that mean the US should invade the UK?
-
Originally posted by -dead-
I fear you're both missing the point somewhat. There was a bunch of Al Qaeda operatives making ricin in London too. Does that mean the US should invade the UK?
Yeah, how could Hussein have known anything about this? He just sits around in his bunker watching The Godfather, he doesn't bother anyone.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Some crow served up fresh for some of you, but I'm sure its just all propoganda ;)
http://www.msnbc.com/news/895185.asp?cp1=1
Its probably true, but they are not in an area under Saddam's control.
-
So Ansar Al-Islam went from a "group with alleged Al-Qaeda connections" through a "group ltied to Al-Qaeda" to "Al-Qaeda"?
Hmm. Why not Fatah? Or the PLO? Or Islamic Jihad? Or Hamas? Or Iranian government? Or Al-Akcsa Brigades? Or any other of the countrles muslim organisations?
What was Ansar Al-Islam doing in the north of Iraq all those years? Fighting Kurds? I thought Al-Qaeda's goal was fighting US?
How do you tell a muslim mercenary fighing for Ansar Al-Islam from an Al-Qaeda muslim mercenary fighing for Ansar Al-Islam? Isn't Al-Qaeda a loosely-organised society of isolated cells without strict membership?
miko
-
A month ago:
#1 -"There are AL Queida terrorists in Iraq"
#2 -"No way, you cannot prove any link between Iraq and Al Quedia, because there IS no link."
#1 -"But they are IN Iraq, training and manufacturing weapons."
#2 -"You are a lying imperialist dog. Prove it or shut up."
#1 *sigh*
Now:
#1 -"See, here is evidence that there are Al Queida terrorists in Iraq. There is also evidence that they were manufacturing biological weapons."
#2 -"But that is not in a part of Iraq that Saddam had control over. Now shut up you lying imperialist lackey"
#1 *sigh*
Is it just me or is it becoming really pointless to try to talk to these people...?
-
Originally posted by ra
Yeah, how could Hussein have known anything about this? He just sits around in his bunker watching The Godfather, he doesn't bother anyone.
(http://www.msnbc.com/news/1836482.gif)
Gee does it say Ansar al-islam controlled area on the map?
And would that light bit in the map be the Kurdish-controlled areas?
(http://i.cnn.net/cnn/interactive/maps/world/iraq.kurds/iraq.kurd.controlled.gif)
Yup can't imagine how Hussein could have missed that camp.
-
Heh, I've been saying that for a week now.
Is it just me or is it becoming really pointless to try to talk to these people...?
Dead, that's just proof why we need a change of power there.
-
Originally posted by -dead-
I fear you're both missing the point somewhat. There was a bunch of Al Qaeda operatives making ricin in London too. Does that mean the US should invade the UK?
I don't know... did Tony Blair ignore a cease fire agreement and fail to dismarm and destroy his WMD?
-
I will always be surprised by your incredible talent to look stupid Hortlund.
NUKE you are stupid ,idiot or both ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
I will always be surprised by your incredible talent to look stupid Hortlund.
Shouldnt you go surrender to something straffo?
You are just proving my point. Talking to you is as pointless as talking to a wall...but not any wall, no a very very stupid wall (if walls can be that stupid that is).
-
Hortlund: Shouldnt you go surrender to something straffo?
Didn't your country ply nazi with iron ore while his country - which lost a whole generation of men twenty years before that and not so strong - declared a hopeless war on a mighty Germany because of honorable obligations to insignificant Poland?
Got pummeled for that? Lost hundreds of thousands of men form a sparse young generation while your country collaborated with nazis?
Shouldn't you go collaborate with some butcher, Hortlund? Sell some sarine to Hussein? Some uranium to Al-Qaeda?
miko
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Shouldnt you go surrender to something straffo?
Thanks again you just proven my point.
For you information the 2 larges picture posted by -dead- are not from a coloring book a contrario to what you look to think.
It something called a map used to locate town,region of a country ...
Were is the Al-Asam part ?
Not in the suburbs of Bagdad ... but more in a region controlled by the Kurds ...
-
Originally posted by straffo
I will always be surprised by your incredible talent to look stupid Hortlund.
NUKE you are stupid ,idiot or both ?
Would you care to elaborate Straffo?
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Didn't your country ply nazi with iron ore while his country
We did much more than that miko. We sold them ball bearings, in fact it was Swedish ball bearings that kept the German war industry going after Schweinfurt, we sold that iron ore, yes, lots of it too, but not only that, we escorted their freighters transporting that ore and those ball bearings in the Baltic, we allowed them to fly courier flights in our airspace, we let them use our railways for transit traffic, we had volounteers fighting with both the Germans (in the Waffen SS) and with the Finns (In special Swedish units) we bought weapons from them, and we sold weapons to them, we bought food from them and we sold food to them.
Yes, one might even say we were a passive ally to Germany up until 1944. So we sided with Germany, so what? Our motivation was the same as the Finns, a common enemy (USSR).
-
Originally posted by straffo
Were is the Al-Asam part ?
Not in the suburbs of Bagdad ... but more in a region controlled by the Kurds ...
Is it in Iraq?
-
Originally posted by NUKE
Would you care to elaborate Straffo?
well I over reacted to this post :
Originally posted by NUKE
With all due respect Ripsnort, I cannot beleive this until Straffo has confirmed this.
I'm sorry I shouldn't have exploded.
Please accept my apologies.
btw the presence of Al Anssar in this region is now since 2/3 years now.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Shouldnt you go surrender to something straffo?
If we're going on patriotic sterotyping - shouldn't you keep out of the argument all together? ;)
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Is it in Iraq?
Explain why is it logicaly possible to consider the Kurds as allied when they have some extremist bull**** in their backyard for years ... and in the same time attack Iraq pretending they are supporting extremist muslim in the same kurdish region they don't control .
I'm waiting for your scientific demonstration anxiously.
-
Hortlund: So we sided with Germany, so what?
So maybe you should stop trying to offend the country that at least tried to fight nazi and was defeated - unless you still support nazi positions, of course, in which case your hostility is understandable.
I am not even discussing whether your country would have put up a better fight in a war than France did.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
Hortlund: So we sided with Germany, so what?
So maybe you should stop trying to offend the country that at least tried to fight nazi and was defeated - unless you still support nazi positions, of course, in which case your hostility is understandable.
I am not even discussing whether your country would have put up a better fight in a war than France did.
miko
If you want to open up some weird "lets compare how our well our respective armies fought in various battles through the cource of history"-discussion, go right ahead. The only one who has anything to be ashamed of there is Straffo.
If you want to open up some "you should really be ashamed over what your country did before you were born"-argument, then you should really take a look at the Soviet track record before jumping down on the Swedish position in ww2.
If you want to claim that France at least tried to fight against Germany in ww2 and they should be respected for that...fine, you go ahead and respect them all you want. Let me just point out that they did fight with Germany in ww2 too, so dont get too enthusiastic...
So anyway...what will it be?
-
Originally posted by straffo
Explain why is it logicaly possible to consider the Kurds as allied when they have some extremist bull**** in their backyard for years ... and in the same time attack Iraq pretending they are supporting extremist muslim in the same kurdish region they don't control .
wtf do the Kurds have to do with this? There is no Kurdish backyard you idiot.
Just because an area is "kurdish" on a map over ethniticity, it doesnt mean it is controlled by kurds.
-
Hortlund: If you want to open up some "you should really be ashamed over what your country did before you were born"-argument, then you should really take a look at the Soviet track record before jumping down on the Swedish position in ww2.
True, soviets did some terrible things. But then again, I was not the one offending other people because their countries suffered for doing the honorable thing fifty years ago. Same goes for respect, btw.
Myself, I claim neither guilt nor credit nor superiority over someone based on what my or his country ever did. Nor offer them offence beause of that. You do.
miko
-
Hortlund: Just because an area is "kurdish" on a map over ethniticity, it doesnt mean it is controlled by kurds.
No, not becasue it is marked "kurdish" on a map. But becasue it is really controlled by kurds.
miko
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
wtf do the Kurds have to do with this? There is no Kurdish backyard you idiot.
Just because an area is "kurdish" on a map over ethniticity, it doesnt mean it is controlled by kurds.
it is darling.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
No, not becasue it is marked "kurdish" on a map. But becasue it is really controlled by kurds.
Exactly. If you look at the map posted in this thread, the area marked as Kurdish was definitively NOT kurdish controlled before the invasion.
-
Hortlund: Exactly. If you look at the map posted in this thread, the area marked as Kurdish was definitively NOT kurdish controlled before the invasion.
I wouldn't claim it is precise. It is accurate in general. Large part of that area was controlled by the Kurds. Definitely not Kirkuk nor Mosul.
Certainly the parts around the Ansar Al-Islam-held region. I've been watching that group for a couple of years now.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
True, soviets did some terrible things. But then again, I was not the one offending other people because their countries suffered for doing the honorable thing fifty years ago. Same goes for respect, btw.
Myself, I claim neither guilt nor credit nor superiority over someone based on what my or his country ever did. Nor offer them offence beause of that. You do.
miko
Well, as you might have noticed, I'm having real problems respecting France and the French lately. Frankly I think almost everyone feels the same way more or less (except the French guys themselves presumably).
And what exactly was "the honourable thing" France did 50 years ago? I mean after all not only did they surrender, they also fought on the German side. Where is the honour in that?
As for me, true, I am proud over my country and our history. Frankly I dont see anything wrong with that.
-
Hortlund: And what exactly was "the honourable thing" France did 50 years ago? I mean after all not only did they surrender, they also fought on the German side.
They? The country that stood up for Poland was defeated and it's government removed. So I gues "they" were not the same people as the other "they".
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
And what exactly was "the honourable thing" France did 50 years ago? I mean after all not only did they surrender, they also fought on the German side. Where is the honour in that?
We fought , we lost , we have done something (more than you can say).
After the defeat some french were still fighting the Nazi ,some french were collaborating with the Nazi ,no swedish did ever fight the Nazi and some were colaborating.
French fought the Nazi more than one time it's a lot more than ZERO don't you think ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
We fought , we lost , we have done something (more than you can say).
After the defeat some french were still fighting the Nazi ,some french were collaborating with the Nazi ,no swedish did ever fight the Nazi and some were colaborating.
French fought the Nazi more than one time it's a lot more than ZERO don't you think ?
France did nothing to stop Germany when it could and should have. This attitude doomed France and this attitude seems the same today.
-
Originally posted by straffo
We fought , we lost , we have done something (more than you can say).
After the defeat some french were still fighting the Nazi ,some french were collaborating with the Nazi ,no swedish did ever fight the Nazi and some were colaborating.
French fought the Nazi more than one time it's a lot more than ZERO don't you think ?
There were Swedes fighting for the allies straffo. You are only displaying your ignorance when you say what you did. Many many died on merchants on the convoy routes. Some fought in the British army, some fought in the US army.
And the correct sequence of events would be:
You "fought", you lost, then you "fought" on the German side, then you lost again.
After the defeat some frenchmen did fight the Germans sure...but there were thousands who joined the German army and fought for them. There were hundreds of thousands of french workers who worked for the Germans. But I dont have to tell you all this, you already know it.
-
And the super-power who pretend now having won WWI didn't move either.
-
Originally posted by miko2d
They? The country that stood up for Poland was defeated and it's government removed. So I gues "they" were not the same people as the other "they".
wow, this discussion sure took a philosophical turn...
Ok, so who are "they" then? And what criteria should we use when we categorize all french guys into either one of those categories?
-
Originally posted by straffo
And the super-power who pretend now having won WWI didn't move either.
Yeah, because Germany 1936 was defintively a US problem and a US responsibility mr Versaille treaty.
-
Originally posted by straffo
And the super-power who pretend now having won WWI didn't move either.
France can't own up to it's responsibilities, just like in the past.
Germany borders France, yet America had to come over and save France after France hand-wringed while Germany ( bordering France) Illegally and openly re-armed after wwI
France can't take care of itself, let alone anyone else.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Just because an area is "kurdish" on a map over ethniticity, it doesnt mean it is controlled by kurds.
I'd agree with you if only the area on the map was marked "Kurdish". But it isn't. It's marked Controlled By Kurds[/i]. Call me gullible, but that suggests to me that it does mean that the area in question is controlled by the Kurds.
If you look at the map posted in this thread, the area marked as Kurdish was definitively NOT kurdish controlled before the invasion.
The big map with the area marked "Kurdish controlled area" was culled from this article on CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/08/13/iraq.opposition/) dated thusly: August 14, 2002 Posted: 11:21 AM EDT (1521 GMT). Before the invasion, I think you'll find.
To steal a phrase: "Is it just me or is it becoming really pointless to try to talk to these people...?"
-
Originally posted by NUKE
France can't own up to it's responsibilities, just like in the past.
Germany borders France, yet America had to come over and save France after France hand-wringed while Germany ( bordering France) Illegally and openly re-armed after wwI
France can't take care of itself, let alone anyone else.
Mister know it all what were the country asking france to evacuate the Sarre ?
-
Now as I don't want to start again a BBS fight with mister I was pretending to be a judge Hortlund.
I'm still waiting your clever demonstration .
-
Originally posted by straffo
Mister know it all what were the country asking france to evacuate the Sarre ?
Are you saying that France defers it's national interests to another nation?
France borders Germany, yet you state that America didn't move against them?
-
Originally posted by -dead-
I'd agree with you if only the area on the map was marked "Kurdish". But it isn't. It's marked Controlled By Kurds[/i]. Call me gullible, but that suggests to me that it does mean that the area in question is controlled by the Kurds.
The big map with the area marked "Kurdish controlled area" was culled from this article on CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/08/13/iraq.opposition/) dated thusly: August 14, 2002 Posted: 11:21 AM EDT (1521 GMT). Before the invasion, I think you'll find.
To steal a phrase: "Is it just me or is it becoming really pointless to try to talk to these people...?"
On the map, is Kirkuk and Irbil marked as Kurdish controlled? Are Kirkuk and Irbil Kurdish controlled? But I see what you mean ...If you cant trust maps made by CNN, who can you trust eh?
But yes, it is pointless to talk to people like you and straffo.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Some crow served up fresh for some of you, but I'm sure its just all propoganda ;)
http://www.msnbc.com/news/895185.asp?cp1=1
I'm sure it is quite factual...there is only one problem, as others have pointed out that area is not under Saddam's control.
The area where the lab was found is under the control of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK). This is a group that is "friendly" with the US along with the Kurdistan Democratic Party (shi'ite...they got Democrats there to ;) ). The KDP controls the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in the very northern two governances of Iraq. The PUK controls Suleimaniyah Governance, where the lab was located.
However...it appears that this enclave of Al Ansar is not controlled by anyone but perhaps UBL. The Iranian government does not like them and tipped off Dutch authorities to the whereabouts of the Ansar leader, Mullah Krekar, leading to his arrest in The Netherlands. Saddam does not like them because they are Al Qaeda backed and UBL has explicitly stated that Muslims should depose his secular government.
But the PUK doesn't like them either...Ansar is blamed for an assassination attempt on the leader of the PUK last year. Evidently, these extreme Wahabbi'ists don't want the PUK or KDP in power as they think they would create a secular government for Kurdistan.
Given this last case...if the US had said to the PUK, we would like to come in and take care of that Ansar problem for you, they would have been more than happy to be host to a few US Special Forces. And we have known about those Ansar camps and their link to UBL since before 9/11. More than that, we knew that these Ansar guys may have been the ones that were testing gas on animals (recall the video of the gassed dog).
-
I'm pretending that to preserve their interests in this region of Germany Two speaking English (one across the channel, one across the atlantic) country asked france to evacuate the Sarre.
And just after a strange party leaded by a almost as strange Autrichian started to grow ...
Ps : Should I recall that the Sarre was part of France before the 1870 war and what was the amount of the reparation France had to pay in 1871 ?
And that Wilson didn't want the France to get his own territory back ?
I guess that will be an insult to your historical knowledge.
-
Originally posted by straffo
I'm pretending that to preserve their interests in this region of Germany Two speaking English (one across the channel, one across the atlantic) country asked france to evacuate the Sarre.
And just after a strange party leaded by a almost as strange Autrichian started to grow ...
Ps : Should I recall that the Sarre was part of France before the 1870 war and what was the amount of the reparation France had to pay in 1871 ?
And that Wilson didn't want the France to get his own territory back ?
I guess that will be an insult to your historical knowledge.
Blame who you want....... France is responsible for France. France has demonstrated that it cannot take care of itself. France answers threats with treaties and words. Are you complaining that America and Britain didn't look out for France's national interests?
-
Accept your pa(rt of responsability that's all.
-
Originally posted by straffo
Accept your pa(rt of responsability that's all.
We ( America) accept our responsabilities ...when will France accept theirs?
-
I posted a few articles on Al Ansar a month or two back.
In each it was described how Saddams regime allowed Al Ansar and Al Qaeda operatives to freely travel to and from that region. IE They would fly in from Pakistan and land at the Airport formerly known as Saddam International and ride on up there.
Saddams regime used Al Ansar against the Kurds; the Iraqi military supplies Al Ansar with weapons.
Apparently Saddam hates Islamic extremists, but he allowed Al Ansar to operate because they were brural in their attacks on the Kurds.
So officially its "we didn't know they're there'. But unofficially they are fully supported by the regime.
Straffo do a bit more research mate. Its not hard to find.
-
The territory of northern Iraq where the traces of ricin were detected is not under the control of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Baghdad admitted to U.N. weapons inspectors in the 1990s that it had successfully weaponized ricin, botulinum and anthrax. There is no immediate evidence that suggests Saddam’s regime provided the easily produced toxins to Ansar al-Islam or al-Qaida.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
On the map, is Kirkuk and Irbil marked as Kurdish controlled? Are Kirkuk and Irbil Kurdish controlled? But I see what you mean ...If you cant trust maps made by CNN, who can you trust eh?
Well I think of CNN as pretty much the State Department's sister channel this time round... But I digress. If you look at the nice CNN map you'll see a long inroad into the area marked "controlled by Kurds" just where Kirkuk & Irbil are located. Kirkuk with it's oil fields was taken by Hussein's troops in 1991. Irbil, the capital of Kurdistan, on the other hand is controlled by the Kurds - according to Kurdistan Regional Government (it's where their Parliament building is - Here's a nice picture of it (http://www.krg.org/about/background.asp))- but I'm sure you'll come back with something along the lines of "How can you trust the KRG, the KDP and the PUK to tell you which bits they control?" All of which is a red herring as the Ansar Al-Islam is in no doubt on any map - it's in Kurd-held territory, on the Iran-Iraq border. Still if you feel you can't trust CNN's maps - here's the KRG maps:
(http://www.krg.org/reference/images/IKR09.jpg)
You'll note the copyright date on the map above is 1992
(http://www.krg.org/reference/images//goledbergMap.gif)
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
So officially its "we didn't know they're there'. But unofficially they are fully supported by the regime.
I don't deny that is a possibility. But experts in the field, including the CIA, are less convinced that they are "fully supported" by Saddam.
The PUK asserts that the link is there, but only circumstantially. One PUK official was quoted after the attempt on the PUK's leadership by Ansar, "who else but Saddam would have an interest in destabilizing a free Kurdistan." Well, for one, UBL...the PUK represent a secular government. The Ansar are Wahabbi'its and behave similar to the Taliban. They have their own interest in controlling Kurdistan.
BTW Vulcan, do you know if there is another international airport, ie port of entry, that travelers to Iraq are allowed to use when flying into Iraq? I'm less convinced that it is a case of intentionally turning a blind eye as it is ignorance as many travelers enter Iraq through Baghdad headed to other parts of the country, some for legitimate reasons and some with more evil intent. Consider the case of Canada...the US may need to consider the Canadian government as Al Qaeda conspirators as they tended to turn a "blind eye" to potential terrorist using their country as an entry point in order to cross the open border to the US.
Also, you realize that the Saddam International Airport was closed to all international flights until just a couple of years ago. And those camps have been there for many years as evidenced by their complexity.
-
I take issue with that. Canada doesn't turn a blind eye to potential terrorists using our country as a port of entry. We struggle just as hard as the US in maintaining the integrity of our borders, but it's certainly a difficult task and I think the US can appreciate that fact (as *none* of the 9/11 terrorists came through the Canadain border.... *all* came through the US's own).
-
So what you're saying is Saddam, who so brutally put down uprisings in the south, gassed his own people, and committed numerous other atrocities has had trouble dealing with a small group of terrorists in the North who coincidentally are fighting the Kurds and the 'west'.
And that Saddam who has ordinary people arrested and their tongues ripped out for slandering him has trouble arresting these terrorists as they travel through Baghdad?
yeah right :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Nash
I take issue with that. Canada doesn't turn a blind eye
No insult was intended, but rather sarcasm over Vulcan's comment...the "blind eye" was in quotes to indicate that it is not an intentional act on the Canadian government's part. Just as our own Customs did not intentionally turn a "blind eye" and let known terrorists into our own country.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
So what you're saying is Saddam, who so brutally put down uprisings in the south, gassed his own people, and committed numerous other atrocities has had trouble dealing with a small group of terrorists in the North who coincidentally are fighting the Kurds and the 'west'.
Well, he seems to have had a hard time dealing with the Kurds on the whole. I'm sure the location of the Ansar enclave being deep in Kurd controlled territory and bordering Iran is no accident. To get to them Saddam would have to get past the PUK and then Ansar could flee into Iran, where Saddam fears to tread.
But no, that is not what I said. You state that in order for them to exist in his country, then they must be conspiring. That is BS. Your logic would mean that since the US government allowed Sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman to freely come and go into NYC and knew he had created a terrorist cell in NYC, then the US government must have conspired with him to set the bomb in the WTC in 1993.
BTW, what does the fact that Saddam "so brutally put down uprisings in the south, gassed his own people, and committed numerous other atrocities" have to do with whether or not he has perfect information about people, who may be Ansar members, coming and going into Iraq?
-
The difference is the Al Ansar move freely within Saddam controlled Iraq.
The Kurds have stated that they've captured Iraqi equipment in the hands of Al Ansar, and that Al Ansar have received training from the Republican Guard.
If you believe in a dictatorship such as Iraq that active terrorists can move through the mainstream areas without Saddam and his cohorts knowing then I have a bridge you might be interested in buying.
-
Vulcan can you poing me a source for this affirmations ?
I never heard of such a complicity between Iraq and Ansar Al-Islam.
I thing crowmaw covered enought your 1rst question and I'm to lazy to start translating the fight for influence UPK PPK ... have done in this region.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
We ( America) accept our responsabilities ...when will France accept theirs?
I'm waiting to see an article showing how Wilson screwed up and how the US didn't win WWI.
US did participate (as we call them : "mieux vaut tard que jamais ...") and this Wilson acted like a SOB which is pretty normal for a complete dumb idiot.
Horlund I'm still waiting your scientific demonstration.
-
"There were Swedes fighting for the allies straffo"
hortand
would you care to compair numbers of sweeds serving on the other side?
you throwing around with us or aginst us. in the second biggest with nobody country on earth. how many relatives you had die in wars ? i have several . willing to bet straffo also has.
you havent paid the price to walk the walk you push off on us.
-
The only one who has anything to be ashamed of there is Straffo.
You're so full of crap, Hortlund. If anyone has the right to stupidly call the French surrender monkeys it certainly isn't you or any other Swede.
Your nation has nothing, absolutely nothing, to be proud of regarding its conduct in WW2. Not only is your house made of glass, but you are trying to throw stones that would give trouble to a catapult.
-
Originally posted by lord dolf vader
"There were Swedes fighting for the allies straffo"
hortand
would you care to compair numbers of sweeds serving on the other side?
you throwing around with us or aginst us. in the second biggest with nobody country on earth. how many relatives you had die in wars ? i have several . willing to bet straffo also has.
you havent paid the price to walk the walk you push off on us.
yep.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
The difference is the Al Ansar move freely within Saddam controlled Iraq.
Umm...terrorists seem to move pretty freely in many countries, including our own, without consent of the country's government. What makes you think that Saddam has perfect info on people entering his country and their intent?
The Kurds have stated that they've captured Iraqi equipment in the hands of Al Ansar, and that Al Ansar have received training from the Republican Guard.
LOL...well the Kurds use Iraqi equipment too. I guess they are in cahoots with Saddam.
And as far as Ansar getting training from the Republican Guard...when that info was passed to US intelligence agencies last year, they decided the info was not reliable. This position was bolstered by the raid on the Ansar camp by US forces last week. While many documents were found that provided strong links to Al Qaeda, which included info on terrorist activities in the US, nothing was found to tie Ansar to Saddam. (http://www.chicagosuntimes.com/output/iraq/cst-nws-ansar01.html)
If you believe in a dictatorship such as Iraq that active terrorists can move through the mainstream areas without Saddam and his cohorts knowing then I have a bridge you might be interested in buying.
I believe that his info about terrorists entering his country is probably not nearly as good as the info the US has about terrorists entering this country. Why would you think his intelligence gathering groups are better than the US's?
When you can answer the highlighted questions above and the questions you skipped from my previous posts, we can start negociations for the bridge:
Originally posted by crowMAW
IBTW Vulcan, do you know if there is another international airport, ie port of entry, that travelers to Iraq are allowed to use when flying into Iraq?
Originally posted by crowMAW
BTW, what does the fact that Saddam "so brutally put down uprisings in the south, gassed his own people, and committed numerous other atrocities" have to do with whether or not he has perfect information about people, who may be Ansar members, coming and going into Iraq?
-
Originally posted by lord dolf vader
would you care to compair numbers of sweeds serving on the other side?
you throwing around with us or aginst us. in the second biggest with nobody country on earth. how many relatives you had die in wars ? i have several . willing to bet straffo also has.
you havent paid the price to walk the walk you push off on us.
Why on earth would I want to compare number of Swedes fighting for and against Germany in ww2?
Also I completely fail to see the relevance of how many relatives we lost in the war, wtf would that prove? But if you want, sure, my dad is German, you figure it out. If you do a search on my user name and the keywords "East Prussia" you might even learn what happened to them, and you might even find the post where straffo called my dead relatives cowards for being raped and butchered by soviet "soldiers" in 45.
You dont know cheese vader, so you should STFU and crawl back under the rock you came from.
-
Originally posted by straffo
Horlund I'm still waiting your scientific demonstration.
wtf are you talking about?
-
Originally posted by straffo
Explain why is it logicaly possible to consider the Kurds as allied when they have some extremist bull**** in their backyard for years ... and in the same time attack Iraq pretending they are supporting extremist muslim in the same kurdish region they don't control .
I'm waiting for your scientific demonstration anxiously.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Why on earth would I want to compare number of Swedes fighting for and against Germany in ww2?
Also I completely fail to see the relevance of how many relatives we lost in the war, wtf would that prove? But if you want, sure, my dad is German, you figure it out. If you do a search on my user name and the keywords "East Prussia" you might even learn what happened to them, and you might even find the post where straffo called my dead relatives cowards for being raped and butchered by soviet "soldiers" in 45.
You dont know cheese vader, so you should STFU and crawl back under the rock you came from.
They were coward like mine were a "non-allied accident".
And btw you are a coward too.
-
Explain why is it logicaly possible to consider the Kurds as allied
Im still wondering how it is logically possible to consider France an ally.
-
is it an arguement or a brain fart ?
I've supported tons of posts more than infamous by some American citizen and I'm still considering the USA as allied... but I'm considering that in USA Internet acces should be more selective.
-
Originally posted by straffo
is it an arguement or a brain fart ?
I've supported tons of posts more than infamous by some American citizen and I'm still considering the USA as allied... but I'm considering that in USA Internet acces should be more selective.
You are asking me if your post is an agrument or a brain fart? Only you can tell us that.
As for my statement: " I'm still wondering how it is possible to consider France an Ally" That is known as a statement not an argument.
-
So why do you put a quote in your post if you are not refering to this quote ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
They were coward like mine were a "non-allied accident".
And btw you are a coward too.
straffo, I think it is pretty apparent that you are having problems with the english language. many times you post stuff in french simply because you dont know how to translate them, other times you say stuff in english that makes no sense whatsoever. Your first sentence in this post is an example of your problem with the language barrier. I have never said that your family was "a non allied accident". In fact, I dont have a clue as to what you are talking about. I dont know cheese about your family, and frankly I'm not really interested to hear about them either.
As for me being a coward...You dont know me ...nuff said.
-
Explain why is it logicaly possible to consider the Kurds as allied when they have some extremist bull**** in their backyard for years ... and in the same time attack Iraq pretending they are supporting extremist muslim in the same kurdish region they don't control .
Vulcan already answered that. I guess you missed his post.
-
search your very own post about Oradour.
-
Originally posted by straffo
search your very own post about Oradour.
What about it? Pull up the quote where I say it was a "non-allied accident". You should really work on your english comprehension straffo, because it is pretty apparent that you dont really understand what I said in that post on Oradour.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
Vulcan already answered that. I guess you missed his post.
And crowMAW wrote a better rebutal than I can have done ...
-
Originally posted by straffo
And crowMAW wrote a better rebutal than I can have done ...
LOL no cheese straffo...a 4 yr old kid could write a better rebuttal than you.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
What about it? Pull up the quote where I say it was a "non-allied accident". You should really work on your english comprehension straffo, because it is pretty apparent that you dont really understand what I said in that post on Oradour.
You explained how some poor SS got massacred and how justified was the massacre of 692 persoan as a proper reteliation.
Instead of picking me why don't you answer my question ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
You explained how some poor SS got massacred and how justified was the massacre of 692 persoan as a proper reteliation.
Nope, Ive never said that.
Chalk that one up to your poor reading comprehension.
-
I'll reformulate :
You used the massacre of wounded SS got to justify the massacre of 692 person as a proper reteliation.
is that better ?
-
*listens to the sound of straffo feverishly clicking on the search button to go over every single post Ive ever written on this forum*
-
Originally posted by straffo
I'll reformulate :
You used the massacre of wounded SS got to justify the massacre of 692 person as a proper reteliation.
is that better ?
Nope, still wrong, and I have never said anything like that either.
-
After Tulle was recaptured by the Germans, an SD unit moved in and shot 98 french civilians "as retaliation"
-
Yes...so did you notice the "-marks? What exactly do they tell you?
Chalk this one up to your poor english comprehension Straffo.
Not only that, the quote you pulled was regarding Tulle, we were talking about Oradour remember.
You do know what happened to the German garrison in Tulle...right?
-
Originally posted by straffo
Now as I don't want to start again a BBS fight with mister I was pretending to be a judge Hortlund.
Pardon? Hortlund lied about being a judge?
-
Nah, its just staffo and his crappy english confusing the he** out of everyone again.
-
posted the 03/11/2003 :
Originally posted by Hortlund
whatever work I will hold in the future I will do my utmost to chose different suppliers and vendors than French and German ones. I suspect there are a couple of Americans thinking along the same lines.
full post here : http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=81357&
-
So? Do you think I will stay in this job forever? I have said several times that I am looking for a new job right now.
You really should try to improve your language skills straffo, because it is pretty damn obvious that you missunderstand alot.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
You do know what happened to the German garrison in Tulle...right?
They fought and were loosing when das reich entered the town.
more number as you love them :
139 SS were killed (the SS alleged they were prisonner)
99 civilian were hanged
about 300 people were send to death camp.
-
Originally posted by crowMAW
LOL...well the Kurds use Iraqi equipment too. I guess they are in cahoots with Saddam.
And as far as Ansar getting training from the Republican Guard...when that info was passed to US intelligence agencies last year, they decided the info was not reliable. This position was bolstered by the raid on the Ansar camp by US forces last week. While many documents were found that provided strong links to Al Qaeda, which included info on terrorist activities in the US, nothing was found to tie Ansar to Saddam.
I believe that his info about terrorists entering his country is probably not nearly as good as the info the US has about terrorists entering this country.
1) theres a difference between captured equipment and supplied equipment.
2) what did you expect them to find, an autographed picture saying "Saddam was here"? Not reliable information means that the US Govt has no operatives on the ground able to confirm this. 3 months ago people on this very BBS were denying claims that Ansar was linked to Al Qaeda, quoting US intelligence as saying they received info but it 'was unreliable'.
3) Do you really think a dictatorial police state can't spot known terrorists disembarking at the airport formerly know as Saddam? The BBC report I read two months back said the Al Qaeda operatives were flying in under their real names. Like I said I have a big orange bridge I'd like to sell you.
Like I said above, many cried BS on the links between Al Qaeda and Ansar just months ago on this BBS... now what do we find?
-
Originally posted by straffo
They fought and were loosing when das reich entered the town.
more number as you love them :
139 SS were killed (the SS alleged they were prisonner)
99 civilian were hanged
about 300 people were send to death camp.
What are you talking about now? Tulle?
-
Oh, and guys, look up Abu Wael
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
What are you talking about now? Tulle?
you asked no ?
Originally posted by Hortlund
Yes...so did you notice the "-marks? What exactly do they tell you?
Chalk this one up to your poor english comprehension Straffo.
Not only that, the quote you pulled was regarding Tulle, we were talking about Oradour remember.
You do know what happened to the German garrison in Tulle...right?
-
Originally posted by straffo
you asked no ?
Yes, I just wanted to make sure we were talking about the same thing.
What is your source for the 139 SS killed at Tulle? If I remember correctly (and without checking my books) the Tulle garrison was surrounded and under attack by the Marquis. They radioed for help, and units from akl abt, DF regiment attacked the partisans and broke through to the garrison. When clearing the town, several mutilated German bodies were found.
Now, my question, if I remember correctly, the SS casualties were fairly low, like less than 10, and certainly not 139 killed. The Whermacht garrison however might very well have had that number of casualties. So did you say "SS" but mean "Germans" or do you want to maintain that 139 SS were killed?
-
if you prefer :
139 German were killed (the SS alleged they were prisonner)
Is that different ?
How 139 soldier killed compare to 97 (not 99 I've made a error) civilians hanged from their own balcony and about 300 deported ?
-
Btw I suggest you buy this book :
Verbrechen der Wehrmacht. Dimensionen des Vernichtungskrieges 1941-1944
ISBN 3-930908-74-3
It's a superb 700 + page book full of informations.
-
Originally posted by straffo
if you prefer :
139 German were killed (the SS alleged they were prisonner)
Is that different ?
How 139 soldier killed compare to 97 (not 99 I've made a error) civilians hanged from their own balcony and about 300 deported ?
There was a difference between garrison units and SS Panzer divisions yes, but only when it comes to aspects of combat quality etc, not when it comes to the value of a human life.
I dont think the SS alleged that all 139 were prisoners either.
*argh, goes to check sources*
40 men from III./95 (the garrison unit) were found executed near a school with signs of mutilation and torture.
Let me pull up the entire quote:
They showed signs of execution, and local civilians reported the men had been killed after dropping their weapons and surrendering. Only an SD officer with them had a pistol in his hand. Most of the bodies were mutilated, some had had their genitals cut off and stuffed into their mouths. Others had been covered with excrement. One man had holes in his heels with a rope through them, and a ruined face, indicating that he had been tied to the back of a truck and driven around. Other bodies were found around town, bringing the total German dead to 64. The III./95 had reported 80 missing, meaning several were unaccounted for. And 9 more Germans died in rescuing the garrison (SS losses)
So I dont think anyone alleged that all the German losses in Tulle were prisoners. But of cource, the fate of the 80 missing soldiers can only be speculated on.
Actually the correct number of civilians killed/murdered/executed is 98 (but you were close). All the men found in Tulle was rounded up at the local ammunition factory. Then the mayor of Tulle, the Das Reich Ic SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Aurel Kowatsch, and other local officials "picked out from these men all non-residents and suspicious individuals". From these suspects, 120 men were picked out for execution, but after realizing there were several teenagers among them, those were let go and 98 were executed.
I didnt know about the 300 deported, but I do not doubt that number. It happened after the SD moved back into the town yes?
Do you know who those 300 were? Were they picked at random or were they the the rest of the "non-residents and suspicious individuals"-group?
-
Random like my uncle ,he was 14.
Fyi he didn't come back.
and hanging civilian from their own balcony is not what I can call "rounded up at the local ammunition factory"
-
Btw is still recommand reading this book : Verbrechen der Wehrmacht
It's hard but it break some convenient myth about the Wehrmacht and being writen by German it can't be suspected of being biased.
Why instead of copying http://www.dasreich.ca/ger_oradour.html
don't you read the other side version ? :
http://www.dasreich.ca/oradour.html
-
Originally posted by straffo
and hanging civilian from their own balcony is not what I can call "rounded up at the local ammunition factory"
First all men were rounded up at the local ammo factory. There 98 men were picked for execution. Those 98 were hanged by soldiers of the pioneer platoon, DR akl abt. I dont know where they were hanged, but if your relatives say they were hanged from the balcony's, then I believe that.
-
Originally posted by straffo
being writen by German it can't be suspected of being biased.
I think I have read parts of it. It is very much about whermacht war crimes in Russia...yes?
Anyway, I disagree with the quoted sentence.
-
Originally posted by Hortlund
I think I have read parts of it. It is very much about whermacht war crimes in Russia...yes?
Not only , I've seen the exhibition in Vienna some one year ago.
Anyway, I disagree with the quoted sentence.
the unbiased part ?
-
Originally posted by straffo
the unbiased part ?
Yes.
-
yep , perhaps.
But the convenient myth about the Wehrmacht not doing atrocities ,had to be broke no ?
Not that the Wehrmacht was full of mass-murderer brainwashed killer like the SS but it was not completly innocent either.
-
The funnyest part is that the US are co-operating with the Kurds who allowed AL-khaeda to operate on thier territory..
-
Guy from Angola...try reading at least parts of the thread before posting next time...