posted September 29, 2012 09:07 PM            

i have always felt that it was at least a failure of intelligence on a massive scale.

but this is different, and it happened on bush's watch as well..or almost happened. story from Veterans Today, hardly a leftist sensational rag...

posted September 29, 2012 09:10 PM            

Their real plan was to create the response themselves, as was done by the Navy during the Tonkin Gulf Incident in 1964 when America “invented” an attack by North Vietnam as a prelude to a 10 year war America eventually lost..."

posted September 29, 2012 10:33 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
Obviously, you are trying to "GO THERE" or you wouldn't have brought it up.

Who in the hell do you think you're kidding katatonic?

---

Love it *sigh*

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted September 30, 2012 04:15 PM            

did you read the story?

however both happened on bush's watch. that is the ONLY connection for the purpose of this post..

one day people will get to the truth of 9/11, but i am not going to lay accusations at anyone's feet..while i think the govt was somewhat negligent at the least, in THIS case, were they actively trying to "start something"?

posted October 01, 2012 10:35 AM            

We covered this here long, long, long ago and every single one of the nutty putty theories got ground into dust by hard scientific facts. Every single one.

Just don't say you're not going there katatonic. You brought it up.

There isn't a word of proof any of that story is true. Not a word of proof.

There's a hell of a lot more proof that Vince Foster and Ron Brown were murdered..because they knew too much and were about to rat out Clinton.

There's a hell of a lot more proof that "Friends of Bill" were murdered because of what they knew and didn't commit suicide with shotgun blasts to the back of their heads or try to fly out of high rise windows.

posted October 01, 2012 12:36 PM            

And false flag operations have been going on for long time.

How naive to think they just suddenly stopped.

posted October 01, 2012 01:23 PM            

The same can be said for "Pre-emption" if a credible argument can be made another nation is preparing to attack the US or a US ally with which we have a defense treaty or is pursuing weapons systems which are banned or which they say they will use against the US or US allies.

posted October 01, 2012 06:59 PM            

don't you know that everyone who believes in god believes god is on THEIR side? shall we spend the rest of our days invading and being invaded by those who consider their own countries "superior" and "more deserving"?

posted October 02, 2012 07:20 AM            

The sh*t is really going to hit the fan in the US in the not-too-distant future.

posted October 02, 2012 08:36 AM            

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 02, 2012 08:53 AM            

But that heavily discounts the rest. The moment Israel pulls such crap, they will get nonsense from Hezbollah, Hamas and Syria. There will be a land war inside Israel. That is one of the sole reasons why Netanyahu hasn't already attacked Iran. Israel is not capable to handling a four-pronged war without heavy US involvement. Israel also has no European NATO allies. The Germans and French will not come to Israel's rescue. The Brits will stay out. The Russians have too much economic interest in Iran.

posted October 02, 2012 12:09 PM            

If you're talking about firing a nuclear missile at Washington, New York, Chicago, Tel Aviv, London or another city of a US ally, that's an entirely different order of magnitude.

So yeah...Preemption.

And, if you're talking about detaining enemy combatants...legal or illegal...legal if they're wearing the uniform of a nation or illegal if they're fighting in civilian clothing...in Gitmo, then yeah, hold them and if they've violated the rules of warfare, committed war crimes, try them, convict them and execute them.

And if you don't like that, that's TS babies.

As a practical matter, that means every unguided rocket fired into Israel at civilian population centers by Hamas or one of the other so called Palestinian groups..terrorists, is a war crime. Every single one of them should be rounded up...as a matter of course, and executed.

posted October 02, 2012 01:56 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by juniperb:
Curious YTA, why $10 a gallon for milk if such occurs ?

---

Well, I don't know where you live, but I live on the East Coast where dairy demand far exceeds supply. From my perspective around NYC, some of the designer dairy comes from New England like Vermont and Maine, but those are organic and specialty products. Most dairy over here comes from Wisconsin, Kansas or East Texas. The trucks coming over to the East Coast still operate on West Texas Intermediate crude refined in the Gulf Coast, mostly Louisiana and Central Texas. A super high price of diesel causes logistics and distributorship operating costs to skyrocket. Everybody needs to feed their families along the way, and distributors and supermarkets need to pay their employees. This translates into expensive dairy, meat and produce. Basically, expensive crude oil means expensive everything. Unless we can figure out how trucks can run on natural gas instead.

That's the magic bullet. If we can figure out to operate machinery on natural gas, we wouldn't care two pennies about the Middle East, would we?

posted October 02, 2012 03:10 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
If you're talking about flying an airplane into a building or dropping a conventional bomb on Washington DC, that's one thing.

If you're talking about firing a nuclear missile at Washington, New York, Chicago, Tel Aviv, London or another city of a US ally, that's an entirely different order of magnitude.

So yeah...Preemption.

And, if you're talking about detaining enemy combatants...legal or illegal...legal if they're wearing the uniform of a nation or illegal if they're fighting in civilian clothing...in Gitmo, then yeah, hold them and if they've violated the rules of warfare, committed war crimes, try them, convict them and execute them.

And if you don't like that, that's TS babies.

As a practical matter, that means every unguided rocket fired into Israel at civilian population centers by Hamas or one of the other so called Palestinian groups..terrorists, is a war crime. Every single one of them should be rounded up...as a matter of course, and executed.

And, if you don't like that, then that's TS too!

---

Yes, TS!

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted October 02, 2012 03:12 PM            

ghani, do send me some and I`ll send you home made goat cheese.!

posted October 03, 2012 08:06 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
If you're talking about flying an airplane into a building or dropping a conventional bomb on Washington DC, that's one thing.

If you're talking about firing a nuclear missile at Washington, New York, Chicago, Tel Aviv, London or another city of a US ally, that's an entirely different order of magnitude.

So yeah...Preemption.

And, if you're talking about detaining enemy combatants...legal or illegal...legal if they're wearing the uniform of a nation or illegal if they're fighting in civilian clothing...in Gitmo, then yeah, hold them and if they've violated the rules of warfare, committed war crimes, try them, convict them and execute them.

And if you don't like that, that's TS babies.

As a practical matter, that means every unguided rocket fired into Israel at civilian population centers by Hamas or one of the other so called Palestinian groups..terrorists, is a war crime. Every single one of them should be rounded up...as a matter of course, and executed.

And, if you don't like that, then that's TS too!

---

posted October 03, 2012 11:01 AM            

I've seen this nonsense argument before and it's wrong on every possible level.

The US has supreme power to protect the US, US borders, US citizens and US interests, granted by the US constitution. Surprise, it's not the UN which has the "Supreme Power".

As for the Bush administration, the Congress of the United Stated gave Bush the authority to go after terrorists and also to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. If you don't believe that, you should read the Joint Resolution of Congress before making wild emotional arguments which have no merit.

Beyond that, Bush had not only the power but THE DUTY to protect the US and US citizens from attacks from abroad or from within by whatever means, including wiretapping, surveillance or other forms of snooping on suspected terrorist conversations and/or meetings.

And, Bush had the power to hold detainees captured on battlefields at Gitmo or elsewhere and to interrogate them and try them or release them.

But you really jumped the shark when you said I trust the government.

I trust the government NOT AT ALL.

I trust the O'Bomber administration even less.

I put my trust in the law and the rule of law and when the law or rule of law is subverted it's time to remove the individuals involved by whatever means are necessary.

That extends to International Law, specifically the Law of War, Genocide and War Crimes. There are far too many individuals walking around still breathing the air who are way too far over those lines who have no reason to think they should have any protection from the laws they subvert. Lucky for them I'm not calling the shots because long ago, there would have been some very bad boys set loose on their sorry as$es and they would now be decomposing into their constituent mineral components.

posted October 03, 2012 04:29 PM            

we need more than braggadoccio to start anything LIKE a war.