REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Break up Iraq, morons!!!!!!!! Any thoughts?

POSTED BY: VOSHEXETER
UPDATED: Monday, June 18, 2007 02:03
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4308
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:04 AM

VOSHEXETER


I just read an article in a magazine with fairly wide circulation in which plenty of page space was wasted trying to illuminate the benefits of unified strategy and communications in Iraq.

Breaking the country up into more than one nation is evidently still a few months off from being mentioned in main stream media. Any thoughts, feelings, perceptions, interesting show observations?

voshExeter

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:18 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them. SECOND: I am so very sorry I libelled you by labelling you a Russian Troll. I apologize for this. http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=64646&p=2


I've been advocating this for over a year. Sunnis will not feel secure living under Shias and vice versa, and the Kurds have already split themselves off from the others. Forging a unified nation will take far more control of the Iraqi government than the USA can exert, because the ONLY way that I see to creating a unified nation is to keep kicking partisans out of high office until you find the ones who are willing to buck both al Sadr AND the Sunni insurgents ... and even if you found someone willing to do that, they would have absolutely no popular support.

The Iraq Study Group dismissed this option in one or two sentences: the costs are too high, and people are too intermingled for a clean division. But they would have said the same thing about (the former) Yugoslavia. The one difficulty in splitting up Iraq is what do do with all that potential oil money. The Sunnis don't want to give up any claim on what they see as their portion. It might be possible to buy their agreement with lots and lost of rebuilding aid, but the Sunnis must be able to see some sort of ongoing future income besides aid. Because they are clustered around Baghdad. I suppose they could become something of a financial/ industrial/ cultural/ educational center, but that really requires some thought.

---------------------------------
Reality sucks. Especially when it contradicts our cherished ideas.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:28 AM

CHRISISALL


It makes too much sense in the long run, i.e., not gonna happen.



The cynical-like Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:30 AM

CITIZEN


I don't know, lets ask India and Pakistan how it worked for them, and why they feel the need to have nuclear weapons pointed at each other.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 19, 2006 10:42 AM

CHRISISALL


I just got off the phone with them; they said it's just a sibling rivalry thing .

Don't divide 'em then, let 'em do it themselves, it's called thinning the herd Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 19, 2006 11:22 AM

CITIZEN


Whatever the consequences of not breaking up Iraq here's what you'll get if you do:

Shia Iraq, supported by Iran will be forever engaged in war with Sunni Iraq, supported by Syria. They'll merely become pawns between Iran and Syria, much like Vietnam between the US and Russia.

If anyone noticed I haven't spoken about the Kurds, it because in all likelyhood they'll be dead. Before squaring off in strings of wars Shia and Sunni Iraq will wipe out Kurd Iraq.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 19, 2006 11:25 AM

SIMONF


Partition/splitting up countries wasn't exactly a roaring success in Ireland, Palestine or Yugoslavia.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, December 19, 2006 11:26 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
Whatever the consequences of not breaking up Iraq here's what you'll get if you do:

Shia Iraq, supported by Iran will be forever engaged in war with Sunni Iraq, supported by Syria. They'll merely become pawns between Iran and Syria, much like Vietnam between the US and Russia.


Okay, possible.
Nevermind.

Knows when others know more Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 9, 2007 2:01 PM

KHYRON


While I agree with what Citizen said, I don't see how any of that would be different if Iraq stays one country. Once the Americans leave, the Kurds still won't be long for this world, and Syria and Iran will have close ties with the Sunni and Shia regional leaders.
Quote:

Originally posted by SimonF:
Partition/splitting up countries wasn't exactly a roaring success in Ireland, Palestine or Yugoslavia.

The first two don't really compare. Iraq as a country was drawn up relatively arbitrarily during colonial times with scant respect to ethnic/religious divisions, whereas Ireland wasn't partitioned to alleviate tension (as Iraq would be) and Palestine wasn't ever a country. Yugoslavia is comparable in the sense that it was a political entity that was forced upon different ethnicities, but since the split-up(s) the Balkans are in better shape, in spite of some serious teething problems. If anything, Yugoslavia could be taken as a case study of how things can go very wrong if ethnicities who don't like each other are forced to be part of the same country against their will. All of that ethnic tension that led to the Balkan wars was brewing for decades.



Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 9, 2007 4:45 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
Whatever the consequences of not breaking up Iraq here's what you'll get if you do:

Shia Iraq, supported by Iran will be forever engaged in war with Sunni Iraq, supported by Syria. They'll merely become pawns between Iran and Syria, much like Vietnam between the US and Russia.

If anyone noticed I haven't spoken about the Kurds, it because in all likelyhood they'll be dead. Before squaring off in strings of wars Shia and Sunni Iraq will wipe out Kurd Iraq.



More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.
]


No, The Shia will drive out any American influences, then the sunni...

Turkey will handle the Kurds

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/74D2E648-44BB-442A-ADAA-3390974
FC232.htm




" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 9, 2007 6:33 PM

CANTTAKESKY


Wow. Intelligent dialogue, analyses, and commentary without any name-calling (except the title of the thread). I am impressed. And learning a lot. Thanks guys and gals.

I hardly ever see any perfect solutions when it comes to either splitting or unifying countries. There are unsightly costs either way. Question is, who will division benefit most? The Iraqis or us?

Can't Take My Gorram Sky

--------------
Nullius in verba. (Take nobody's word.)

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 9, 2007 6:42 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


This is what I see - either they'll fight each other within the same borders or they'll fight each other across borders.

Either way the US will have to pull troops out since, they (are and) will be manipulated to support one faction or another.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 9, 2007 6:59 PM

LEADB


My biggest concern in splitting them up is we promised Turkey we wouldn't do that. They don't want an independent kurdistan on their southern border. However, things clearly aren't working on a unified government. Might be worth going back to see if Turkey would buy in some how....

====
Please vote for Firefly: http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

BBC poll is still open, vote! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6517155.stm

Consider $5/year to support FFF: http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/pay/T39WWCGS4JYCV4

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 9, 2007 6:59 PM

LEADB


My biggest concern in splitting them up is we promised Turkey we wouldn't do that. They don't want an independent kurdistan on their southern border. However, things clearly aren't working on a unified government. Might be worth going back to see if Turkey would buy in some how....

====
Please vote for Firefly: http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

BBC poll is still open, vote! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6517155.stm

Consider $5/year to support FFF: http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/pay/T39WWCGS4JYCV4

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 9, 2007 8:21 PM

BABYWITHTHEPOWER


This isn't the best option, and I honestly don't think the natives will go for it. If you had paid attention (and I don't mean that as an insult, because most people didn't) during the Yugoslavian war, you'd know that's not an easy thing to accomplish. No one wants to give up what they believe is their home, not even a part of it. Just look at Bosnia.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'll be in my bunk.
XO of the 76th Battalion http://76thbattalion.homestead.com/index.html
http://www.myspace.com/babywiththepower


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, June 9, 2007 8:41 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them. SECOND: I am so very sorry I libelled you by labelling you a Russian Troll. I apologize for this. http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=64646&p=2


Well, I think it's a moot point anyway. We don't have the power to effect that kind of change because we don't control jack shit in Iraq anymore.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 10, 2007 12:10 AM

BABYWITHTHEPOWER


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Well, I think it's a moot point anyway. We don't have the power to effect that kind of change because we don't control jack shit in Iraq anymore.



We don't need control to do that. When Yugoslavia split into Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia, Motenegro, Slovenia and Macedonia, the United States was key in bringing about the end of the war and it was without the use of control. We simply provided the neutral territory the leaders neaded in order to draw up the lines.

We didn't force the separation of the Yugoslavian nations or the partitioning of Bosnia, the respective leaders made those decisions, we simply facilitated their talks.

And don't kid yourself. As long as we have soldiers on the ground, we have influence over there.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I'll be in my bunk.
XO of the 76th Battalion http://76thbattalion.homestead.com/index.html
http://www.myspace.com/babywiththepower


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 10, 2007 12:21 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Who gets the parts with the oil?

Or do we just take that part for ourselves and make it the 51st state? Or the 52nd if you include Puerto Rico....

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 10, 2007 12:58 AM

KHYRON


Quote:

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Who gets the parts with the oil?

Or do we just take that part for ourselves and make it the 51st state? Or the 52nd if you include Puerto Rico....

53rd if you also include the UK.



Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:08 AM

6IXSTRINGJACK


Quote:

Originally posted by Khyron:
53rd if you also include the UK.



Oh.... that's good.... lol. I can't believe you haven't been mauled for that one yet. Gave me a chuckle though.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 10, 2007 11:37 AM

KANEMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by VoshExeter:
I just read an article in a magazine with fairly wide circulation in which plenty of page space was wasted trying to illuminate the benefits of unified strategy and communications in Iraq.

Breaking the country up into more than one nation is evidently still a few months off from being mentioned in main stream media. Any thoughts, feelings, perceptions, interesting show observations?

voshExeter




One thought. We have no right to even discuss the break-up of a sovereign nation. That we even discuss this shows how far from our founding we have come. We must leave Iraq immediately and let the Iraqi's decide what to do with THEIR country.....

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 10, 2007 2:08 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by kaneman:
Quote:

Originally posted by VoshExeter:
I just read an article in a magazine with fairly wide circulation in which plenty of page space was wasted trying to illuminate the benefits of unified strategy and communications in Iraq.

Breaking the country up into more than one nation is evidently still a few months off from being mentioned in main stream media. Any thoughts, feelings, perceptions, interesting show observations?

voshExeter




One thought. We have no right to even discuss the break-up of a sovereign nation. That we even discuss this shows how far from our founding we have come. We must leave Iraq immediately and let the Iraqi's decide what to do with THEIR country.....



Hate to say this, but I agree with Kaneman....

But he should really explain the concept to Bush

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/06/10/bush-albania.html

" U.S. President George W. Bush said Sunday there's no need for "endless dialogue" on the future status of the breakaway Serbian province of Kosovo, saying "the time is now" to move toward independence. "

My advice to Kaneman, small words and talk slow






" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 10, 2007 5:19 PM

LEADB


Quote:

Originally posted by kaneman:
One thought. We have no right to even discuss the break-up of a sovereign nation. That we even discuss this shows how far from our founding we have come. We must leave Iraq immediately and let the Iraqi's decide what to do with THEIR country.....

We live in America; we can discuss anything. However, 'point taken', I can accept withdrawal; there is nothing 'wrong' with offering to attempt to broker a division or what not while we are 'heading out.'

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 10, 2007 6:26 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by leadb:
Quote:

Originally posted by kaneman:
One thought. We have no right to even discuss the break-up of a sovereign nation. That we even discuss this shows how far from our founding we have come. We must leave Iraq immediately and let the Iraqi's decide what to do with THEIR country.....

We live in America; we can discuss anything. However, 'point taken', I can accept withdrawal; there is nothing 'wrong' with offering to attempt to broker a division or what not while we are 'heading out.'



I think Kaneman is refering to the principles on which your country was founded, and how far you actions over the past sixty years have taken from your origins

Right now any made in the US solution will be torn down and left hanging with the collaborators off the lampposts, and rightly so.

While the situation is bad in Iraq, Afganistan is really the more dangerous problem anyway.

" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, June 10, 2007 8:02 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


That's always been the officially published plan of British, Israeli and US govts, for at least 20 years. That's why MI6, CIA and Mossad are wearing Arab costumes, planting car bombs and bombing mosques. It's called P2OG. That's standard procedure for the psychopaths who want to be our kings.

Quote:


Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P2OG

Operation Gladio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladio

Operation Northwoods
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwoods



"You can't stop the signal!"
-Mr Universe, Pirate TV

FIREFLY SERENITY PILOT MUSIC VIDEO V2
Tangerine Dream - Thief Soundtrack: Confrontation
https://video.indymedia.org/en/2007/02/716.shtml
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=8cd2bd0379340120e7a6ed00f2a53ee5
.1044556

www.myspace.com/piratenewsctv

DRIVE BY MIND CONTROL: FREE TV EPISODES ONLINE
www.myspace.com/driveonfox


Does that seem right to you?
www.scifi.com/onair/

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 11, 2007 3:18 AM

HERO


Quote:

Originally posted by VoshExeter:
Breaking the country up into more than one nation is evidently still a few months off from being mentioned in main stream media. Any thoughts, feelings, perceptions, interesting show observations?


Historically it fits the regions pattern. The problem, as I see it, is Kurdistan. If the Kurds get their own country then they will immediatly be at odds with the Kurdish regions of Iran and Turkey.

We have already seen some incursions by the Turkish Army into Iraq because Kurdish militants in Iraq, stable and prosperous, have been supporting the Kurdish militants in Turkey. A fully independant Kurdistan would likely lead to war between America's strongest Iraqi ally and its NATO partner or worse, a three way dance between Turkey, the Kurds, and Iran, which leaves us in the position of figuring out how to support the fight against Iran but not the one against Turkey.

H

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 11, 2007 5:10 AM

MALBADINLATIN


Quote:

Originally posted by citizen:
If anyone noticed I haven't spoken about the Kurds, it because in all likelyhood they'll be dead. Before squaring off in strings of wars Shia and Sunni Iraq will wipe out Kurd Iraq.


I spent some time in Kurdish Iraq in 2002-2003. In my opinion, the Kurds can take care of themselves. If the Sunnis or Sheite attacked, they would never do it together. The same hatred that's keeping at each other's throats today would prevent that. Turkey would also have a royal shit/heart attack/baby cow birth if that happened because it would mean a couple million Kurdish refugees coming back over thier border. So even though the Turks hate the Kurds, they'll back em up in Iraq. I'm not trying to be a know it all Cit, because I've been wrong once or twice, but that's how it looks to me.

It's amazing how much panic one honest man can spread among a multitude of hypocrites

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 11, 2007 5:15 AM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.


Wow, that post from Piratenews was mercifully short.

Quote:

While the situation is bad in Iraq, Afganistan is really the more dangerous problem anyway.


How d'you figure Gino?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 11, 2007 6:11 AM

LEADB


Quote:

Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
Quote:

Originally posted by leadb:
Quote:

Originally posted by kaneman:
One thought. We have no right to even discuss the break-up of a sovereign nation. That we even discuss this shows how far from our founding we have come. We must leave Iraq immediately and let the Iraqi's decide what to do with THEIR country.....

We live in America; we can discuss anything. However, 'point taken', I can accept withdrawal; there is nothing 'wrong' with offering to attempt to broker a division or what not while we are 'heading out.'



I think Kaneman is refering to the principles on which your country was founded, and how far you actions over the past sixty years have taken from your origins


True, I wanted only to emphasize that the discussion isn't bad, especially if it yields a 'better' approach. I think there was not enough discussion leading up to the decision to go into Iraq; so I'd rather see such things discussed now with hopefully a better decision made.
Quote:


Right now any made in the US solution will be torn down and left hanging with the collaborators off the lampposts, and rightly so.

I will agree the US needs to get out of the business of imposing solutions, and instead submitting suggestions; and in any case working on getting out.
Quote:


While the situation is bad in Iraq, Afganistan is really the more dangerous problem anyway.

Hard to say. The situation in Afganistan is definitely gaining momentum in the wrong direction; and if something doesn't change it will clearly go from 'not too bad' to 'worse' and possibly head to 'awful'. It's almost enough to make me wonder if Bush truly does not want things to settle out; he simply cannot get teams together to 'win the peace'.

====
Please vote for Firefly: http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

BBC poll is still open, vote! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6517155.stm

Consider $5/year to support FFF: http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/pay/T39WWCGS4JYCV4

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 11, 2007 6:14 AM

LEADB


Quote:

Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:

Originally posted by VoshExeter:
Breaking the country up into more than one nation is evidently still a few months off from being mentioned in main stream media. Any thoughts, feelings, perceptions, interesting show observations?


Historically it fits the regions pattern. The problem, as I see it, is Kurdistan. If the Kurds get their own country then they will immediatly be at odds with the Kurdish regions of Iran and Turkey.

We have already seen some incursions by the Turkish Army into Iraq because Kurdish militants in Iraq, stable and prosperous, have been supporting the Kurdish militants in Turkey. A fully independant Kurdistan would likely lead to war between America's strongest Iraqi ally and its NATO partner or worse, a three way dance between Turkey, the Kurds, and Iran, which leaves us in the position of figuring out how to support the fight against Iran but not the one against Turkey.

H

I don't know if it is pratical or not; but at least at this point the Kurds seem to have a semblence of a regional government in place. -If- (and I have no idea if they are stable enough to do it) the 'central' kurdish authority were willing to commit to the integrity of the 'current' borders, and offer 'home land stakes' to their fellow Kurds in southern turkey who wish to be free of the turkish gov.; it might work... but it is likely just a pipe dream.

====
Please vote for Firefly: http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/index.html

BBC poll is still open, vote! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6517155.stm

Consider $5/year to support FFF: http://s1.amazon.com/exec/varzea/pay/T39WWCGS4JYCV4

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 11, 2007 3:37 PM

GINOBIFFARONI


Quote:

Originally posted by kpo:
Wow, that post from Piratenews was mercifully short.

Quote:

While the situation is bad in Iraq, Afganistan is really the more dangerous problem anyway.


How d'you figure Gino?




I think from the start the US leaned too much on Musharraf in Pakistan. While he is holding on, the country has been destabilized by its forced support of US policy in the region which is not at all popular on the ground there. In addition he was forced to fire three or four of his top Generals eroding his support in the military. As they are in a more or less cold war with an aggressive India, if Musharraf was to be killed or forced from power, any new regime would need immediate support to survive, and two regional powers will step in, China which would drive India even more nuts ( they don't get along either ) and Iran with an exchange of Nuclear tech as a likely trade.

In addition the warlords in de facto control of Northern Afghanistan are former KGB and communist party stooges, neighboring states ( Iran, China, Pakistan, several former Russian republics even India ) all have strong reasons to want the US to fail here, and leave. Anarchy at the end of the Soviet occupation was acceptable then, at the end of the American one... why not

And if the US attacks Iran ( really bad )

or India forces a confrontation with Pakistan
( even worse with mushroom clouds going up )

it could get really really bad in a big hurry



" Fighting them at their own game
Murder for freedom the stab in the back
Women and children and cowards attack

Run to the hills run for your lives "

http://www.darklyrics.com/lyrics/ironmaiden/liveafterdeath.html#12


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 11, 2007 9:18 PM

ANTIMASON


i think there are too many competing ideologies right now to form a cohesive 'national' unified government. we cant even do that here! someone during the republican debate quoted Franklin(i think) refferring to Iraq, saying 'weve given you "a republic, if you can keep it". i think a constitutional republic is the only way to go.. with a limited central power, which is there to uphold the constitution and protect state and local rights. let the communities govern themselves.. stop trying to impose international authority on people

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, June 12, 2007 5:12 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


ON TV NEWS: WHITE HOUSE CAUGHT ARMING THE ENEMY IN IRAQ, GIVING WEAPONS TO THE SAME TERRORISTS WHO BOMB US SOLDIERS EVERY DAY!

Quote:


U.S. Arming Sunni Insurgents in Iraq

NY Times
June 11, 2007

With the four-month-old increase in American troops showing only modest success in curbing insurgent attacks, American commanders are turning to another strategy that they acknowledge is fraught with risk: arming Sunni Arab groups that have promised to fight militants linked with Al Qaeda who have been their allies in the past.

American commanders say they have successfully tested the strategy in Anbar Province west of Baghdad and have held talks with Sunni groups in at least four areas of central and north-central Iraq where the insurgency has been strong. In some cases, the American commanders say, the Sunni groups are suspected of involvement in past attacks on American troops or of having links to such groups. Some of these groups, they say, have been provided, usually through Iraqi military units allied with the Americans, with arms, ammunition, cash, fuel and supplies.

American officers who have engaged in what they call outreach to the Sunni groups say many of them have had past links to Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia but grew disillusioned with the Islamic militants' extremist tactics, particularly suicide bombings that have killed thousands of Iraqi civilians.

But critics of the strategy, including some American officers, say it could amount to the Americans' arming both sides in a future civil war. The United States has spent more than $15 billion in building up Iraq's army and police force, whose manpower of 350,000 is heavily Shiite. With an American troop drawdown increasingly likely in the next year, and little sign of a political accommodation between Shiite and Sunni politicians in Baghdad, the critics say, there is a risk that any weapons given to Sunni groups will eventually be used against Shiites. There is also the possibility the weapons could be used against the Americans themselves.

www.nytimes.com/2007/06/11/world/middleeast/11iraq.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=
slogin&pagewanted=print





White House always arms the enemy ever since World War 2, including Korea, Vietnam and Iraq during Gulf War #1. White House always hires the enemy to bomb US soldiers, ever since Pearl Harbor, plus False Flag attacks including USS Liberty and 9/11.

Quote:


Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P2OG

Operation Gladio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladio

Operation Northwoods
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwoods

Operation Northwoods 9/11
www.september911surprise.com



"You can't stop the signal!"
-Mr Universe, Pirate TV

FIREFLY SERENITY PILOT MUSIC VIDEO V2
Tangerine Dream - Thief Soundtrack: Confrontation
https://video.indymedia.org/en/2007/02/716.shtml
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?vid=8cd2bd0379340120e7a6ed00f2a53ee5
.1044556

www.myspace.com/piratenewsctv

DRIVE BY MIND CONTROL: FREE TV EPISODES ONLINE
www.myspace.com/driveonfox


Does that seem right to you?
www.scifi.com/onair/

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Monday, June 18, 2007 2:03 AM

JAYNEZTOWN


Quote:

Originally posted by VoshExeter:

Breaking the country up into more than one nation is evidently still a few months off from being mentioned in main stream media. Any thoughts, feelings, perceptions, interesting show observations?



A Kurdistan look like a good idea but it would p*ss of the Turks who are are friends, Turkey a very secular and even though it has poor human rights is perhaps one of the better examples of democracy in the region

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

FFF.NET SOCIAL