And there won't be peace in the middle east until we nuke that backwards screwed up area a few times over then salt the earth. Although with the nutcases over there that might not be enough.
5 or 6 nukes I think would cover most of the area but I would go with 100 just to be on the safe side.
Yep, and this administration has lost its focus on this totally and now they are letting Sharon go with a free rein and screwing the whole 'road map'.
Meanwhile the extremists and terrorists are using this to fuel the hate against America and worldwide Jewry. While this is going on, I dunno how the US is going to be able to effectively tackle the problems with Iraq, Iran, and especially North Korea.
Bush has made it clear he will not deal with Arafat. Don't you think he is right in a way? Every nation around Israel has made peace. Why is it Palestine cannot do the same?
The Jews own America. Spies, phone taps, secret agents, you name it, they have it! They got America strung by the balls.
"Evidence linking Israelis to 9/11 is classified."
"Evidence linking Israelis to 9/11 is classified."
Obviously, most people here don't know about AIPAC (the Jewish lobby) and how powerful it is. The reason why America is so biased in favor of Israel is explained below:
AIPAC-Influenced Pro-Israel PAC Contributions
http://www.washington-report.o.../Oct_2004/0410019.html
U.S. Aid to Israel 1948-Present
www.washington-report.org/us_aid_to_israel/index.htm
A good website for news on Middle East affairs is: http://www.washington-report.org
I don't think it's good that the USA fights Israel's wars by proxy:
Iraq War Launched to Protect Israel - Bush Advisor
Emad Mekay
Iraq under Saddam Hussein did not pose a threat to the United States but it did to Israel, which is one reason why Washington invaded the Arab country, according to a speech made by a member of a top-level White House intelligence group.
WASHINGTON, Mar 29 (IPS) - IPS uncovered the remarks by Philip Zelikow, who is now the executive director of the body set up to investigate the terrorist attacks on the United States in September 2001 -- the 9/11 commission -- in which he suggests a prime motive for the invasion just over one year ago was to eliminate a threat to Israel, a staunch U.S. ally in the Middle East.
Zelikow's casting of the attack on Iraq as one launched to protect Israel appears at odds with the public position of President George W. Bush and his administration, which has never overtly drawn the link between its war on the regime of former president Hussein and its concern for Israel's security.
The administration has instead insisted it launched the war to liberate the Iraqi people, destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and to protect the United States.
Zelikow made his statements about ?the unstated threat? during his tenure on a highly knowledgeable and well-connected body known as the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB), which reports directly to the president.
He served on the board between 2001 and 2003.
?Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990 -- it's the threat against Israel,? Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on Sep. 10, 2002, speaking on a panel of foreign policy experts assessing the impact of 9/11 and the future of the war on the al-Qaeda terrorist organisation.
?And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don't care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell,? said Zelikow.
The statements are the first to surface from a source closely linked to the Bush administration acknowledging that the war, which has so far cost the lives of nearly 600 U.S. troops and thousands of Iraqis, was motivated by Washington's desire to defend the Jewish state.
Source: Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/interna.asp?idnews=23078
General Zinni's views on the Iraq war and his blame of the neocons
But, don?t take what I say at face value. Listen to the words of retired General Anthony Zinni --- no nitwit he. From 1997 to 2000, he was commander-in-chief of the U.S. Central Command. He was in charge of all American troops in the Middle East.
Following Gen. Zinni?s retirement from the Marine Corps, the Bush Administration thought so much of him that he was appointed their special envoy to the Middle East. In mid-March of 2002, President Bush said that he and Vice President D. Cheney ?both trust? Gen. Zinni. In this same month and year, Vice President Cheney called him ?a superb officer.? And in late May of this year, even after the interview I?m about to tell you about, White House press spokesman Scott McClellan said: ?We have great respect for General Zinni.?
?In one article--because I mentioned the neo-conservatives, who describe themselves as neo-conservatives, I was called anti-Semitic. I mean, you know, unbelievable that that's the kind of personal attacks that are run when you criticize a strategy of those that propose it. I certainly didn't criticize who they were. I certainly don't know what their ethnic religious backgrounds are. And I'm not interested. I know what strategy they promoted, and openly, and for a number of years, and what they have convinced the president and the secretary to do. And I don't believe there is any serious political leader, military leader, diplomat in Washington that doesn't know where it came from.?
For all of this, Gen. Zinni blames ?the civilian leadership of the Pentagon directly? and others who are so-called neoconservatives. These individuals include Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith, former Defense policy board member Richard Perle, National Security Council member Eliot Abrams, and Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis Scooter Libby. He believes these persons are political ideologues who have hijacked American policy in Iraq. And they advocated an invasion of Iraq to, among other things, strengthen the position of Israel.
http://www.peroutka2004.com/sc...tview&event_id=234
AIPAC-Influenced Pro-Israel PAC Contributions
http://www.washington-report.o.../Oct_2004/0410019.html
U.S. Aid to Israel 1948-Present
www.washington-report.org/us_aid_to_israel/index.htm
A good website for news on Middle East affairs is: http://www.washington-report.org
I don't think it's good that the USA fights Israel's wars by proxy:
Iraq War Launched to Protect Israel - Bush Advisor
Emad Mekay
Iraq under Saddam Hussein did not pose a threat to the United States but it did to Israel, which is one reason why Washington invaded the Arab country, according to a speech made by a member of a top-level White House intelligence group.
WASHINGTON, Mar 29 (IPS) - IPS uncovered the remarks by Philip Zelikow, who is now the executive director of the body set up to investigate the terrorist attacks on the United States in September 2001 -- the 9/11 commission -- in which he suggests a prime motive for the invasion just over one year ago was to eliminate a threat to Israel, a staunch U.S. ally in the Middle East.
Zelikow's casting of the attack on Iraq as one launched to protect Israel appears at odds with the public position of President George W. Bush and his administration, which has never overtly drawn the link between its war on the regime of former president Hussein and its concern for Israel's security.
The administration has instead insisted it launched the war to liberate the Iraqi people, destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and to protect the United States.
Zelikow made his statements about ?the unstated threat? during his tenure on a highly knowledgeable and well-connected body known as the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB), which reports directly to the president.
He served on the board between 2001 and 2003.
?Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990 -- it's the threat against Israel,? Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on Sep. 10, 2002, speaking on a panel of foreign policy experts assessing the impact of 9/11 and the future of the war on the al-Qaeda terrorist organisation.
?And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don't care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn't want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell,? said Zelikow.
The statements are the first to surface from a source closely linked to the Bush administration acknowledging that the war, which has so far cost the lives of nearly 600 U.S. troops and thousands of Iraqis, was motivated by Washington's desire to defend the Jewish state.
Source: Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
http://www.ipsnews.net/africa/interna.asp?idnews=23078
General Zinni's views on the Iraq war and his blame of the neocons
But, don?t take what I say at face value. Listen to the words of retired General Anthony Zinni --- no nitwit he. From 1997 to 2000, he was commander-in-chief of the U.S. Central Command. He was in charge of all American troops in the Middle East.
Following Gen. Zinni?s retirement from the Marine Corps, the Bush Administration thought so much of him that he was appointed their special envoy to the Middle East. In mid-March of 2002, President Bush said that he and Vice President D. Cheney ?both trust? Gen. Zinni. In this same month and year, Vice President Cheney called him ?a superb officer.? And in late May of this year, even after the interview I?m about to tell you about, White House press spokesman Scott McClellan said: ?We have great respect for General Zinni.?
?In one article--because I mentioned the neo-conservatives, who describe themselves as neo-conservatives, I was called anti-Semitic. I mean, you know, unbelievable that that's the kind of personal attacks that are run when you criticize a strategy of those that propose it. I certainly didn't criticize who they were. I certainly don't know what their ethnic religious backgrounds are. And I'm not interested. I know what strategy they promoted, and openly, and for a number of years, and what they have convinced the president and the secretary to do. And I don't believe there is any serious political leader, military leader, diplomat in Washington that doesn't know where it came from.?
For all of this, Gen. Zinni blames ?the civilian leadership of the Pentagon directly? and others who are so-called neoconservatives. These individuals include Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith, former Defense policy board member Richard Perle, National Security Council member Eliot Abrams, and Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis Scooter Libby. He believes these persons are political ideologues who have hijacked American policy in Iraq. And they advocated an invasion of Iraq to, among other things, strengthen the position of Israel.
http://www.peroutka2004.com/sc...tview&event_id=234
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter