TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Would you support going to war with Iran?
Pages (5): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »

quote:

Originally posted by Purple UN should strike US and prevent it from invading other oil rich countries.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton I don't think the UN carries out military campaigns...

Exactly! UN is only their to keep peace.. peace keeping forces.. after all the war has happenened.. I dont know why the hell US withraws from Iraq completly and allow UN forces to gaurd oil feilds in Iraq.

quote:

Originally posted by LazFX

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Two words; bunker busters

Twenty feet of earth is about enought to stop all but extremely high yeild nukes. The colateral damage (civilian lives lost, environmental carnage, and destroyed infrastructure) associated with hitting these targets is massive.

It's really not hard to make a facility that is secure from arial assult. The only way to really hit these targets is to put boots on the ground.

quote:

Originally posted by Purple UN should strike US and prevent it from invading other oil rich countries.

If one beleives in democracy this is probably true. Why is it that American democratic thought means that only the 300,000,000 people in the US have a say in what happens?

The US has now caused more people to die, live life with debilitating inguries, to become homeless, and to live in fear then any terrorist group (possibly even all terrorist groups).

It's especially odd to think that Bush's actions have caused the death of as many Americans as Bin Ladens.

quote:

Originally posted by Purple UN should strike US and prevent it from invading other oil rich countries.

UH, what kind of dumb ass comment is that?

The US is what gives the UN its power. The freaking UN headquarters is in New York! Change starts inside the US government. What the fuk is the UN going to do to change US policy? Nothing you dimwit. The change will start from inside the US government itself or by its people. Do you like live in the Mid East or something because you seem to have a hate affair with the US.

quote:

Exactly! UN is only their to keep peace.. peace keeping forces.. after all the war has happenened.. I dont know why the hell US withraws from Iraq completly and allow UN forces to gaurd oil feilds in Iraq.

So, let me get this straight. You want the US to withdraw completely and allow UN peacekeepers to gaurd the oil facilities? What about the civil affairs? What about law and order? Who patrols the streets? The oil ain't going nowhere if the pipelines keep getting bombed and truckers keep stealing billions of dollars worth of oil. Who is going to send the troops to man the UN peacekeeping mandate? Your philosophy is so screwed up, I don't know where to start.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton UH, what kind of dumb ass comment is that? The US is what gives the UN its power. The freaking UN headquarters is in New York! Change starts inside the US government. What the fuk is the UN going to do to change US policy? Nothing you dimwit. The change will start from inside the US government itself or by its people. Do you like live in the Mid East or something because you seem to have a hate affair with the US.

US is what gives power to UN? That whats wrong.. US need to stop dominating UN and giving it 'power'.. rest of 100 countries its members will give power and authority to UN. Get out of New York and move to France, Germany, Swiss if that bring UN out of clutches of US. UN and this whole fucking world needs to think beyond fucking US...life dosent start and ends their.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton So, let me get this straight. You want the US to withdraw completely and allow UN peacekeepers to gaurd the oil facilities? What about the civil affairs? What about law and order? Who patrols the streets? The oil ain't going nowhere if the pipelines keep getting bombed and truckers keep stealing billions of dollars worth of oil. Who is going to send the troops to man the UN peacekeeping mandate? Your philosophy is so screwed up, I don't know where to start.

India will send troops to UN, so will Israel, France, Poland, Germany, France, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, China, Russia, Latvia, Lithuania, Tukey, South Africa..

UN is guarding south Lebanon's, Sudan's, Kosovo's civil affairs, streets, government buildings, toilets, law and order. So will it do the same in Iraq.

quote:

Originally posted by atbell If one beleives in democracy this is probably true. Why is it that American democratic thought means that only the 300,000,000 people in the US have a say in what happens? The US has now caused more people to die, live life with debilitating inguries, to become homeless, and to live in fear then any terrorist group (possibly even all terrorist groups). It's especially odd to think that Bush's actions have caused the death of as many Americans as Bin Ladens.

Thats a sad but true 'fact' you said.. US has terrorised this whole world more than Bin Ladens and if it continues US will bring more terror to people's life than Germany during WW2 or UK during slave trade.

quote:

Originally posted by Purple Thats a sad but true 'fact' you said.. US has terrorised this whole world more than Bin Ladens and if it continues US will bring more terror to people's life than Germany during WW2 or UK during slave trade.

quote:

Originally posted by Purple US is what gives power to UN? That whats wrong.. US need to stop dominating UN and giving it 'power'.. rest of 100 countries its members will give power and authority to UN. Get out of New York and move to France, Germany, Swiss if that bring UN out of clutches of US. UN and this whole fucking world needs to think beyond fucking US...life dosent start and ends their.

Uh, the UN Headquarters property is SOVEREIGN territory, not US. Get your facts straight before you talk shit about my country.

quote:

India will send troops to UN, so will Israel, France, Poland, Germany, France, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, China, Russia, Latvia, Lithuania, Tukey, South Africa.. UN is guarding south Lebanon's, Sudan's, Kosovo's civil affairs, streets, government buildings, toilets, law and order. So will it do the same in Iraq.

Please, name your source that says Israel, France, Poland, Germany, France, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, China, Russia, Latvia, Lithuania, Tukey, South Africa will send troops to Iraq under a UN mandate. I'll be anxiously waiting. Spain left, the UK wants to leave, Ukraine left, even the US wants to leave. What media are you reading everyday? Do you live in the Mid East?

and in the other news:

Iran riches key nuclear goal


So I wonder now whats going to happen now? would this be the so called smoking gun and Bush has been waiting for?

quote:

Originally posted by atbell Twenty feet of earth is about enought to stop all but extremely high yeild nukes.

Negative.
>Meet GRU-28<

quote:

Bye bye bunker! This dramatic image shows the first GBU-28 test article milliseconds before impacting the test target at the Tonopah test range. The weapon buried itself so deep during this drop, that the USAF did not bother trying to dig it out. During a rocket sled test conducted at that time, the BLU-113 test warhead punched through a 22 foot thick stack of steel reinforced concrete slabs, to be later found one half mile down-range from the target (TI).

>>Source<<

quote:

The colateral damage (civilian lives lost, environmental carnage, and destroyed infrastructure) associated with hitting these targets is massive.

That would depend on how close they've created the facility to their urban centers.
Frankly, I can't see a nuclear facility being built downtown, can you?
And since they wouldn't be using a nuclear device, casualties should be minimal in comparison.

quote:

It's really not hard to make a facility that is secure from arial assult. The only way to really hit these targets is to put boots on the ground.

As above, not necessarily.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r Negative. >Meet GRU-28<

Those things have come a long way since the 90s too. I think they manufacture the upgraded version over in Florida; I forgot what it's called though. Not really my area of expertise.

Suffice to say, underground facilities aren't a big obstacle, if we were to choose that route.

quote:

Originally posted by Fir3start3r And since they wouldn't be using a nuclear device, casualties should be minimal in comparison.

ya I mean the casualities could only be around a few thousands and by your standards thats probably normal.

These are innocent people we are talking here not a bunch of animals gettting slaughtered.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton People need to watch Weaponology on the Military channel

Erm no, I really don't think I do need to watch "Weaponology" on the "Military Channel"! Actually, the fact that there is a program called 'weaponology' and a channel called the 'military channel' worries me slightly less than the fact that people actually subscribe to it!!!

Did you have to pay extra to watch the start of the Iraq war?!?

I can just see it now, them advertising it through Feb and March - "Make sure you don't miss Saddam's deadline too! For only $9.99 you can watch the Iraq War live only on pay-per-view (all major credit cards accepted)"

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Uh, the UN Headquarters property is SOVEREIGN territory, not US. Get your facts straight before you talk shit about my country. Please, name your source that says Israel, France, Poland, Germany, France, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, China, Russia, Latvia, Lithuania, Tukey, South Africa will send troops to Iraq under a UN mandate. I'll be anxiously waiting. Spain left, the UK wants to leave, Ukraine left, even the US wants to leave. What media are you reading everyday? Do you live in the Mid East?

I think you have some misconception about the whole process..

Step 1: US decides and agrees to withdraw completely from Iraq... no partial withdrawal.. this demands complete withdrawal from Iraq including oil fields.

Step 2: US apologies and admits its mistake in an open speech at UNO in attendance from the parties involved like Collin, Rice, Rumsfeld, Bush, US ambassador to UN.. who deliberately lied in all UN General Meetings.

Step 3: US ambassador to UN requests UNO and its members for help and ask them to deploy their (UN) peace keeping forces in Iraq.

Step 4: Here your anxious wait ends when UN decides which countries troops should be sent to Iraq, like in case of Somalia UN asked neighboring African countries to send its troop.. and they had to follow it. Countries don't decide they want to send their troops or not, when you sign the UN treaty as its member you pledge certain number of forces to UN.. UN decides in civilized discussion general meetings and its country members follow the ruling.

quote:

Originally posted by Purple I think you have some misconception about the whole process.. Step 1: US decides and agrees to withdraw completely from Iraq... no partial withdrawal.. this demands complete withdrawal from Iraq including oil fields. Step 2: US apologies and admits its mistake in an open speech at UNO in attendance from the parties involved like Collin, Rice, Rumsfeld, Bush, US ambassador to UN.. who deliberately lied in all UN General Meetings. Step 3: US ambassador to UN requests UNO and its members for help and ask them to deploy their (UN) peace keeping forces in Iraq. Step 4: Here your anxious wait ends when UN decides which countries troops should be sent to Iraq, like in case of Somalia UN asked neighboring African countries to send its troop.. and they had to follow it. Countries don't decide they want to send their troops or not, when you sign the UN treaty as its member you pledge certain number of forces to UN.. UN decides in civilized discussion general meetings and its country members follow the ruling.

Actually, the US, Russia, UK, France and China have to agree on military action under the UN flag as they are permanent representatives on the security council and therefore each maintains a veto.

That meant that the "UN" would not allow intervention in Kosovo (Russian veto), would not allow intervention in Darfur (China veto), intervention in Iraq (France veto) or any meaningful interventions in Palestine (US veto)






Edited to add: I'm trying very very hard to think of a polite way of saying you seem to know absolutely fuck all about the UN, but I can't, so you seem to know absolutely fuck all about the UN (which to fair seems to be a requirement of most people using this forum!)

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Actually, the US, Russia, UK, France and China have to agree on military action under the UN flag as they are permanent representatives on the security council and therefore each maintains a veto. That meant that the "UN" would not allow intervention in Kosovo (Russian veto), would not allow intervention in Darfur (China veto), intervention in Iraq (France veto) or any meaningful interventions in Palestine (US veto) Edited to add: I'm trying very very hard to think of a polite way of saying you seem to know absolutely fuck all about the UN, but I can't, so you seem to know absolutely fuck all about the UN (which to fair seems to be a requirement of most people using this forum!)

Actually I think exactly the opposite.. that you dont know all that about UN..

France will veto UN intervention in Iraq?

quote:

France supports the reinforcement of the UN role in Iraq.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/9...77/6237085.html

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer and in the other news: Iran riches key nuclear goal So I wonder now whats going to happen now? would this be the so called smoking gun and Bush has been waiting for?

Yes.. this could be it.. let the fall of US begin:

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?i...ctionid=3510203

Or did it already began with twin tower collapse as predicted by Nostradamus..?

quote:

Originally posted by Purple Actually I think exactly the opposite.. that you dont know all that about UN..

out of every one here, George Pretty Much knows his shit..... actually allot of TA know more than your feeble mind can comprehend....

quote:

Originally posted by LazFX out of every one here, George Pretty Much knows his shit..... actually allot of TA know more than your feeble mind can comprehend....

When you typed "....." did you actually mean to type "about everything"?!

quote:

Originally posted by Purple France will veto UN intervention in Iraq?

No, France DID veto UN intervention in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley When you typed "....." did you actually mean to type "about everything"?!

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Erm no, I really don't think I do need to watch "Weaponology" on the "Military Channel"! Actually, the fact that there is a program called 'weaponology' and a channel called the 'military channel' worries me slightly less than the fact that people actually subscribe to it!!! Did you have to pay extra to watch the start of the Iraq war?!? I can just see it now, them advertising it through Feb and March - "Make sure you don't miss Saddam's deadline too! For only $9.99 you can watch the Iraq War live only on pay-per-view (all major credit cards accepted)"

Actually the Miilitary channel was created by the same company that started the discovery channel. It's like animal planet, health channel, the science channel, etc. The channel is not politically inclined. It's just a channel for people with an interest in military history and technology. What's wrong with that? Should we be censored from this or something? These channels are common on American cable and satellite tv and at least we don't pay extra for it. Don't think this channel is a Bush propaganda channel or some shi'ite.

quote:

Originally posted by Purple I think you have some misconception about the whole process.. Step 1: US decides and agrees to withdraw completely from Iraq... no partial withdrawal.. this demands complete withdrawal from Iraq including oil fields. Step 2: US apologies and admits its mistake in an open speech at UNO in attendance from the parties involved like Collin, Rice, Rumsfeld, Bush, US ambassador to UN.. who deliberately lied in all UN General Meetings. Step 3: US ambassador to UN requests UNO and its members for help and ask them to deploy their (UN) peace keeping forces in Iraq. Step 4: Here your anxious wait ends when UN decides which countries troops should be sent to Iraq, like in case of Somalia UN asked neighboring African countries to send its troop.. and they had to follow it. Countries don't decide they want to send their troops or not, when you sign the UN treaty as its member you pledge certain number of forces to UN.. UN decides in civilized discussion general meetings and its country members follow the ruling.

I didn't ask what you want the US and UN to do. I'm still waiting for your source that says those countries would send troops to Iraq under any UN mandate or mission. The place is a full on combat zone. What if they get hit by insurgences, which is pretty much a certainty if they are sent in today's environment? Do you think the UN with its bureacracy will be able to mount counter-insurgency operations like the US does? Dude, you are seriously misinformed. What media is filling you with these mistruths. I mean hell, when you said this...

quote:

UN should strike US and prevent it from invading other oil rich countries.

I almost fell out of my seat to think you actually first of all think the UN makes military strikes. Then suggesting the UN strike the US, are you that dumb?

Then you said this...

quote:

US is what gives power to UN? That whats wrong.. US need to stop dominating UN and giving it 'power'.. rest of 100 countries its members will give power and authority to UN. Get out of New York and move to France, Germany, Swiss if that bring UN out of clutches of US. UN and this whole fucking world needs to think beyond fucking US...life dosent start and ends their.

You didn't even realize the UN's headquarters in New York is sovereign territory. You do also realize the US only has as much power as the other Security Council members right? I'm guessing you don't because you actually believe the UN can make a difference as peacekeepers in a huge country like Iraq, where the US can't even control the roads with 150,000 troops. You are separated from reality. If you want to continue arguing your bankrupt views, then the rest of us here will not hesitate shooting you down.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Actually the Miilitary channel was created by the same channel as the discovery channel. It's like animal planet, health channel, the science channel, etc. The channel is not politically inclined. It's just a channel for people with an interest in military history and technology. What's wrong with that? Should we be censored from this or something? These channels are common on American cable and satellite tv and at least we don't pay extra for it. Don't think this channel is a Bush propaganda channel or some shi'ite.

Aye I was just takin the piss. I gathered what it was, but still find the images it congured up of gun crazed yanks all sat round the TV whooping to wars like they were football matches mildly amusing (and probably quite close to the bone for a lot of Americans!)

If there were a 24hr live war channel offering subscriptions, I honestly believe it'd attract quite few subscribers over there!!

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.