The WWIII Thread

^ Naplam regularly? Are we still in Vietnam? You are pretty bend and bashing the US. Also.. the US military doesn't utilize landmines regularly. The only ones who regularing mess that with stuff is SAPPER or engineers. (Vets please correct me if I'm forgetting a unit) The last place the US has placed mines were in the Korean DMZ. We've been trained on using claymores, and general knowledge of anti personnel, or whatever type of mine, but are not used and if anyone did it would be SF or SAPPER or related units training in disarming. The government has been pushing to destory all UXO and landlines in other reigons as well. For someone who I suspect has no prior affiliation with a military branch or specific knowledge of a combat units weaponry arsenal/SOPs I can surely say OP you are truely just making shit up and at best your "sources" are wrong. I was my unit armorer for a combat brigade...and I can tell you I've never disturbed mines, napalm, flamethowers, poison darts, or anything else you claim we use.. So please feel free to try and dismiss what I'm saying. I really cant wait to hear your rebuttal.
 
If you are referring to my statements, here I will make it a little clearer. Chemical weapons are nonetheless barbaric, but so is carpet bombing, strategic bombing, drone strikes, machine-gunning, and other 'orthodox,' 'legal,' methods of warfare the US and its allies utilize regularly.

Not to mention, the United States government as well as UK's DU, depleted Uranium. "UK forces used about 1.9 metric tons of depleted uranium ammunition in the Iraq war in 2003," UK Defense Secretary Liam Fox said in a written reply to the House of Commons, in addition to the use of white phosphorus during military combat operations in Fallujah as well as the use of the Mark 77 bomb (MK-77). An air-dropped incendiary bomb carrying a fuel gel mix which is the direct successor to napalm with similar destructive characteristics. U.S. Marine pilots and their commanders stated that they had utilized Mark 77 firebombs on military targets:

Then the Marine howitzers, with a range of 30 kilometres, opened a sustained barrage over the next eight hours. They were supported by U.S. Navy aircraft which dropped 40,000 pounds of explosives and napalm, a US officer told the Herald. "We napalmed both those [bridge] approaches," stated Colonel James Alles, commander of Marine Aircraft Group 11. "Unfortunately there were people there ... you could see them in the cockpit video. They were Iraqi soldiers." As stated by the Italian public service broadcaster RAI's documentary, MK 77 were used in Baghdad in 2003 in civilian-populated areas.

I should also mention Operation Midnight Climax and the Pentagon Treating Black Cancer Patients with Extreme Radiation. However, this was in the past and we the people have standards now. Hypocrisy at its finest. And still the usage of this taboo (chemical weapons) permits Western nations to selectively cite use of chemical weapons as reasons for military action. And of course it's all hypocritical, and downright irrational: hence the importance of media saturation campaigns and consistent government propaganda concerning WMDs.

 
Once again quoting a biased unreliable source. How about formulating an opinion of your own without justifying your opinion without using copy and paste from websites designed for conspiracy theorists. Once again... if you yourself or the reporting source were a member of government or an armed force I'd be more inclined to believe that. But from first hand experience I will disupte these claims til the day I die. Watch how easy it is to lie over the internet. Are you watching? "Foodbuffet11 is an extremist militant". Obviously not true. My point is people are always looking for reasons to distrust government and mainstream media.. and as long as there people like you and those people.. a smart person decided to create websites with fabricated stories with non existant interviews to exploit people like you. Example: star news and all those other fake newspapers you can buy in Walmart. And some dude is getting rich off of exploiting your weak mind which never looks at the story full circle. People who believe biased and/or fabricated news and sources like yours more than first hand accounts are not better than people who join those doomsday cults. Just because you give me a news clipping with an official sounding quote doesn't make it real. Also, I'm still waiting for your actual opinion without copy and paste.
 
"justifying your opinion without using copy and paste from websites designed for conspiracy theorists."

"This is my opinion" what more do you want?

Western nations have a conditioned aversion to chemical weapons. Historically, because of the conditions of World War 1 their usage became taboo, in spite of their minor role in combat. Having no doubt, chemical weapons are barbaric, but so is carpet bombing, strategic bombing, drone strikes, machine-gunning, and other 'orthodox,' 'legal,' methods of warfare the US and its allies utilize regularly. Not to mention, the untied states government DU and use of white phosphorus during military combat operations in Fallujah.

In any case, the very actuality of the taboo permits Western nations to selectively cite use of chemical weapons as reasons for military action. This use is, of course selective; if it's a client regime using them against enemies of the US or its allies, no enforcement, and perhaps even outright aid, as in the case of Iraq against Iran. And of course it's all hypocritical, and downright irrational: hence the importance of media saturation campaigns and consistent government propaganda concerning WMDs. Every government has committed acts of obscenity. If you are referring to my Syria thread, I was wrong about the hacked emails as they were not genuine. And I blindly took a conspiracy websites word for it.

Sources,

http://www.rainews24.rai.it/ran24/inchiesta/foto/documento_ministero.jpg

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmhansrd/vo050110/text/50110w21.htm

http://rt.com/news/uk-iraq-depleted-uranium/

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmhansrd/vo050111/text/50111w01.htm
 
so this was in the russian news:

/images/flash_video_placeholder.png

and this was up in times square the other day, called "re-think 9-11":

ReThink911-Times-Square1.jpg
 
Posted before i got to finish, so double post, but Russia has already said they will defend Syria if there is an attack, I'm wondering if they're starting this whole cold war-esque anti-us agenda. The "Re-think 9/11" campaign is American though so i guess it's becoming less of a conspiracy here and more people are accepting it? i never really bought into it but i really haven't delved into much either
 
If you are interested, start by reading the commision report, not conspiracist websites. They make some valid points, but it can be misleading, so start with what is generally accepted.
 
The problem with the Commission Report is that it does not mention WTC7, the third sky scraper that collapsed once. That enough tells me that something is going on.
 
you know the report wasn't meant to be a breakdown of the collapses or aftermath of the attacks, right?

It's supposed to be the report of what happened leading up to the attacks.
 
Sorry, the NIST report NCSTAR1, which was followed by NCSTAR1A dealt with Building 7. Stated that office fires were the primary cause of collapse, of a severed column 47 I believe. They also denied free-fall speed for many years.
 
This is what most people believe, like foodbuffet, when in reality, like you say, why should it be mentioned?
 
good thing that's exactly what we're talking about, and we never specifically mentioned the 9/11 Commission Report as being the information in question...

however all sarcasm aside, thank you for bringing up the NIST report as it also makes for some interesting reading. When you read about it, WTC 7 was really a poorly designed building in the first place.
 
Yes, it most definitely was designed quite poorly, I still think there's questions unanswered. And NIST has denied free-fall for quite some time. I'm not saying it was an inside job, I'm just saying they're many questions that have not yet been fully answered.
 
Putin also stated that Russia will not go to war over Syria.

Unfortunately on the 9/11 front people prefer to go to the internet, watch all these "truth reports" and never actually read anything that can be considered wholly credible. I'm sure if the public were to go out and buy a book, such as Ali Soufan's The Black Banners or Lawrence Wright's The Looming Tower they would pretty much understand that 9/11 was not a false flag attack and that it is utterly ridiculous that people actually believe this. These books clearly state the motivation of the perpetrators to the attacks, how they did it and even the failures of the agencies responsible for preventing the attacks. The best part about published books? You can go find reviews on them written by credible groups, they are fully sourced with real sources (journals, real newspapers, actual intelligence) and all the information can be cross referenced with other books on the topic.

Sure it may be easier to watch ten youtube clips put out by "architects and engineers for 9/11 truth" or some other group of conspiracy theorists but the information will be either tailored, discombobulated or straight out lying. On the other hand, if you truly want to get an accurate account for what happened you can read a 600+ page book, read reviews both praising and criticizing the book and start to formulate an opinion with much better information. Unfortunately it is much easier for someone else to interpret the information for you, that's what all these conspiracy groups are doing, instead of reading a large variety of text and formulating your own opinion.
 
jelly. $4.30 where I live. I know, I know...wages here are probably higher, too. Still jelly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top