Common occurances turned into WWIII, or so your government hoped.
01-14-2008, 04:53 PM
#1
0.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 0
Common occurances turned into WWIII, or so your government hoped.
THis is what the Govt wanted you to see...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNL6DyH_IfA
Full communication between the two sides magically edited out to make it seem SPOOKY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DSlKlv6h0Y
Pentagon says, "nah, we were just kidding".
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Threats..._01132008.html
And now for commentary a few days later at the Republican debate:
HUCKABEE: I'm going to trust that the president, with the information that he had and that those com-manders had, made the right decision. I think we need to make it very clear, not just to the Iranians, but to anybody, that if you think you're going to engage the United States military, be prepared not simply to have a battle. Be prepared, first, to put your sights on the American vessel. And then be prepared that the next things you see will be the gates of Hell, because that is exactly what you will see after that.
THOMPSON: I think I agree with the governor on that. You can't take the judgment like that out of the hands of the officers on the ground there. I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins that they're looking forward to seeing.
(LAUGHTER)
Iran was clearly testing us. They took British hostages under similar circumstances and it proceeded ob-viously much past what happened to us, but they're testing our resolve. They know that they're dealing with a nation that's not going to put up with that sort of thing. But it's some insight as to the way that they're thinking.
I think the Revolutionary Guard now has taken over from the regular military force with regard to those speedboats and so forth, so they're going to get a little more frisky. But they need to understand that if they cross the line, they're going to be destroyed.
GIULIANI: Well, this really should give us some sort of indication that the NIE should not be inter-preted as the -- the National Intelligence Estimate, where it was suggested that possibly Iran had stopped their nuclear program in 2003, high confidence that they stopped it in 2003, only moderate confidence that they haven't continued it.
I think an incident like this reminds us that we shouldn't be lulled into some false sense of confidence about Iran. We have to be very focused on the fact that Iran should not be allowed to become a nuclear power. We should make it very, very clear that we're not going to allow that, and we should go to every country that we can think of to impose serious sanctions on Iran.
There are also indications that there are economic problems within Iran itself, domestic difficulties in Iran.We've seen some conflict between some of the leaders there. Maybe by using this incident and the fact that Iran certainly shouldn't be seen as benign, as some people saw it when they tried to spin the NIE, as suggesting that maybe we were being too serious about Iran. It would seem to me that this inci-dent should wake a lot of people up.
MCCAIN: If I'd have been the captain of the ship, I probably would have assessed the situation as it was at the time. And for those of us who are not in that situation to second guess is a little bit presumptuous. It's a long, hard process to become the commander of a Navy ship. These are the most professional and well trained and capable people in the world.
And since our beginning days as an independent nation, we've had conflicts over the issue of freedom of the seas, dating back to the Barbary pirates, dating back to World War I when German u-boats were sinking U.S. maritime ships, to the outbreak of -- led to the outbreak of World War II, as well.
MCCAIN: I agree with Rudy. Maybe the Iranians think we're weaker because of the NIE. Maybe the Iranians aren't really slowing their export of most lethal explosive devices into Iraq.
And I believe the president of the United States made the right statement. He told them that we will pre-serve the fundamental principle of freedom of the sea, and he will do what's necessary in order to pre-serve it.
So I believe these people -- these commanding officers made the right decision, and I believe that we entrusted their ships and the lives of the people under them in the most appropriate fashion.
But don't think that this wasn't a serious situation of the utmost seriousness in one of the most important waterways in the world, because of so much of the world's oil goes through there.
The Iranians better understand that the United States will stick to its many years-long tradition of pre-serving the fundamental principle of freedom of the seas.
PAUL: I would certainly urge a lot more caution than I'm hearing here tonight. It reminds me of what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin. We went to war there, then, later on, found out there was a lot of false information.
So here we have -- let's put it in perspective. We have five small speedboats attacking the U.S. Navy with a Destroyer? They could take care of those speedboats in about five seconds. And here we're ready to start World War III over this?
And now, guess what, today, the Navy commander of the Fifth Fleet was on ABC and announced that, you know, that voice might not have come from those vessels. So what does that mean?Was there a rush to judgment on this, ready to go to war?
And you know there are people in this administration and in Washington, D.C., that are looking for the chance.They were so disappointed with the national estimate on intelligence. And they were disap-pointed that there's no attempt to build weapons in Iran since 2003.
PAUL: Of course we want caution. But I'm worrying about the policy of why we're looking for a justification. Now there are no weapons, actually people are looking around for an excuse to bomb Iran.
I mean, we're already, with our CIA, being involved in trying to overthrow that government, and we don't need another war. And this incident should not be thrown out of proportion to the point where we're getting ready to attack Iran over this.
ROMNEY: I think Congressman Paul should not be reading as many of Ahmadinejad's press releases. But let's...
(APPLAUSE)
I think Iran represents a very serious threat. I do not believe this action was taken by rogue elements within the Iranian forces. I believe it was calculated.
And I believe it was designed to test our defenses. I believe it was also designed to rattle a sword to the Arab neighbors to see that they could go after the Straits of Hormuz. I believe, as well, that it was a di-versionary tactic for them to consider other actions in other places.
And so I believe it was a very serious act. And the Iranians continue to take acts like this, it points out that we have in Iran a very troubled nation.
And we're going to have to have a comprehensive strategy with our friends and with some others who we need to pull into our circle of friendship to put extraordinary pressure on Iran.
And I've been speaking since January about tightening dramatically the economic sanctions, the diplo-matic sanctions, directly communicating to the Iranian people. And I believe -- by the way, I can see you want to get the rest of the answer to that -- of course, this commander did exactly the right thing. The captains did the right thing.
Cliff notes. Nothing was out of the ordinary or threatening about the Iranian canoes, the government tried to use it to start thier next war, the Republicans all took the bait, media did it's job, and Ron Paul was painted as a loon for calling it for exactly what it was......NOTHING.
My next post will detail the advisors of all these clowns, and who they are in the establishment. Happy voting, *********.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNL6DyH_IfA
Full communication between the two sides magically edited out to make it seem SPOOKY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DSlKlv6h0Y
Pentagon says, "nah, we were just kidding".
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Threats..._01132008.html
And now for commentary a few days later at the Republican debate:
HUCKABEE: I'm going to trust that the president, with the information that he had and that those com-manders had, made the right decision. I think we need to make it very clear, not just to the Iranians, but to anybody, that if you think you're going to engage the United States military, be prepared not simply to have a battle. Be prepared, first, to put your sights on the American vessel. And then be prepared that the next things you see will be the gates of Hell, because that is exactly what you will see after that.
THOMPSON: I think I agree with the governor on that. You can't take the judgment like that out of the hands of the officers on the ground there. I think one more step and they would have been introduced to those virgins that they're looking forward to seeing.
(LAUGHTER)
Iran was clearly testing us. They took British hostages under similar circumstances and it proceeded ob-viously much past what happened to us, but they're testing our resolve. They know that they're dealing with a nation that's not going to put up with that sort of thing. But it's some insight as to the way that they're thinking.
I think the Revolutionary Guard now has taken over from the regular military force with regard to those speedboats and so forth, so they're going to get a little more frisky. But they need to understand that if they cross the line, they're going to be destroyed.
GIULIANI: Well, this really should give us some sort of indication that the NIE should not be inter-preted as the -- the National Intelligence Estimate, where it was suggested that possibly Iran had stopped their nuclear program in 2003, high confidence that they stopped it in 2003, only moderate confidence that they haven't continued it.
I think an incident like this reminds us that we shouldn't be lulled into some false sense of confidence about Iran. We have to be very focused on the fact that Iran should not be allowed to become a nuclear power. We should make it very, very clear that we're not going to allow that, and we should go to every country that we can think of to impose serious sanctions on Iran.
There are also indications that there are economic problems within Iran itself, domestic difficulties in Iran.We've seen some conflict between some of the leaders there. Maybe by using this incident and the fact that Iran certainly shouldn't be seen as benign, as some people saw it when they tried to spin the NIE, as suggesting that maybe we were being too serious about Iran. It would seem to me that this inci-dent should wake a lot of people up.
MCCAIN: If I'd have been the captain of the ship, I probably would have assessed the situation as it was at the time. And for those of us who are not in that situation to second guess is a little bit presumptuous. It's a long, hard process to become the commander of a Navy ship. These are the most professional and well trained and capable people in the world.
And since our beginning days as an independent nation, we've had conflicts over the issue of freedom of the seas, dating back to the Barbary pirates, dating back to World War I when German u-boats were sinking U.S. maritime ships, to the outbreak of -- led to the outbreak of World War II, as well.
MCCAIN: I agree with Rudy. Maybe the Iranians think we're weaker because of the NIE. Maybe the Iranians aren't really slowing their export of most lethal explosive devices into Iraq.
And I believe the president of the United States made the right statement. He told them that we will pre-serve the fundamental principle of freedom of the sea, and he will do what's necessary in order to pre-serve it.
So I believe these people -- these commanding officers made the right decision, and I believe that we entrusted their ships and the lives of the people under them in the most appropriate fashion.
But don't think that this wasn't a serious situation of the utmost seriousness in one of the most important waterways in the world, because of so much of the world's oil goes through there.
The Iranians better understand that the United States will stick to its many years-long tradition of pre-serving the fundamental principle of freedom of the seas.
PAUL: I would certainly urge a lot more caution than I'm hearing here tonight. It reminds me of what happened in the Gulf of Tonkin. We went to war there, then, later on, found out there was a lot of false information.
So here we have -- let's put it in perspective. We have five small speedboats attacking the U.S. Navy with a Destroyer? They could take care of those speedboats in about five seconds. And here we're ready to start World War III over this?
And now, guess what, today, the Navy commander of the Fifth Fleet was on ABC and announced that, you know, that voice might not have come from those vessels. So what does that mean?Was there a rush to judgment on this, ready to go to war?
And you know there are people in this administration and in Washington, D.C., that are looking for the chance.They were so disappointed with the national estimate on intelligence. And they were disap-pointed that there's no attempt to build weapons in Iran since 2003.
PAUL: Of course we want caution. But I'm worrying about the policy of why we're looking for a justification. Now there are no weapons, actually people are looking around for an excuse to bomb Iran.
I mean, we're already, with our CIA, being involved in trying to overthrow that government, and we don't need another war. And this incident should not be thrown out of proportion to the point where we're getting ready to attack Iran over this.
ROMNEY: I think Congressman Paul should not be reading as many of Ahmadinejad's press releases. But let's...
(APPLAUSE)
I think Iran represents a very serious threat. I do not believe this action was taken by rogue elements within the Iranian forces. I believe it was calculated.
And I believe it was designed to test our defenses. I believe it was also designed to rattle a sword to the Arab neighbors to see that they could go after the Straits of Hormuz. I believe, as well, that it was a di-versionary tactic for them to consider other actions in other places.
And so I believe it was a very serious act. And the Iranians continue to take acts like this, it points out that we have in Iran a very troubled nation.
And we're going to have to have a comprehensive strategy with our friends and with some others who we need to pull into our circle of friendship to put extraordinary pressure on Iran.
And I've been speaking since January about tightening dramatically the economic sanctions, the diplo-matic sanctions, directly communicating to the Iranian people. And I believe -- by the way, I can see you want to get the rest of the answer to that -- of course, this commander did exactly the right thing. The captains did the right thing.
Cliff notes. Nothing was out of the ordinary or threatening about the Iranian canoes, the government tried to use it to start thier next war, the Republicans all took the bait, media did it's job, and Ron Paul was painted as a loon for calling it for exactly what it was......NOTHING.
My next post will detail the advisors of all these clowns, and who they are in the establishment. Happy voting, *********.
01-14-2008, 05:13 PM
#3
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: Common occurances turned into WWIII, or so your government hoped.
just like the fruit in the bbc video said, both videos are real, both are from diffferent parts of the exchange.
i guess dropping fake mines in front of the ships is not a threat...
blame america first
i guess dropping fake mines in front of the ships is not a threat...
blame america first
01-14-2008, 05:39 PM
#5
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: Common occurances turned into WWIII, or so your government hoped.
Originally Posted by 45psi
john, your a retard if you cant see our fucked off politicians thoroughly ------- the American people in the ***.
yesssssssss
01-14-2008, 05:57 PM
#6
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 0
Re: Common occurances turned into WWIII, or so your government hoped.
Those boats in question were not Iranian military ships.
Even if they did drop mines, which would probably be some kind of low type II grade explosive, which would be some kind of salt based solid fuel reaction, the Navy Destroyers have had countering depth charges since around the war of 1812 when Submarines were first used.
i.e. Even if we saw these small ships running up on us, we saw them, and could have shot them out of the water should they breach the agreed 4 knot maritime boundary.
Those ships were no reason to start a war that we cannot afford.
Even if they did drop mines, which would probably be some kind of low type II grade explosive, which would be some kind of salt based solid fuel reaction, the Navy Destroyers have had countering depth charges since around the war of 1812 when Submarines were first used.
i.e. Even if we saw these small ships running up on us, we saw them, and could have shot them out of the water should they breach the agreed 4 knot maritime boundary.
Those ships were no reason to start a war that we cannot afford.
01-14-2008, 06:05 PM
#8
0.0 BAR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 0
Re: Common occurances turned into WWIII, or so your government hoped.
Originally Posted by random-strike
blame america first 
go suck amadajadanijah's dick
go suck amadajadanijah's dick
Are you still claiming that? haha.
01-14-2008, 06:07 PM
#9
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: Common occurances turned into WWIII, or so your government hoped.
Originally Posted by Stealthmode
A.K.A. If you don't go along with my war plan, you aren't American. lol. I've heard Hannity come up with better one liners than that, and that's not saying much. What about that "Bush isn't trying to start war with Iran" Johnny? Are you still claiming that? haha.
Are you still claiming that? haha. when iranian boats come out and harrass american ones in international waters you blame america.
true colors steve.
01-14-2008, 06:15 PM
#10
3.0 BAR
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Your mom's panties
Posts: 3,696
Re: Common occurances turned into WWIII, or so your government hoped.
It's not blaming American troops for reacting to Iranian boats coming at them, this type of ---- happens a lot. It's blaming the officials that are trying to push their vendetta. Get it? It's not anti-Americanism, it's anti-warmongering, which is happening. Renegade speed boaters threaten your battleship, what do you try to do? Declare war with a nation? Wrong, you have discussions with that nation's officials and come to some kind of understanding. Gunboat diplomacy should be dead.
