Re: Bin Laden dead?

by **Ptolemy** Mon May 02, 2011 8:55 pm

too late

by **Aardvark** Mon May 02, 2011 9:00 pm

*Sigh* OK this is Bush era administration here, so don't expect brilliant planning. We let this attack occur, the people get outraged and want a culprit to punish, we point them to an oil nation and pick someone out then say after a couple weeks that the entire country is run by these people. America, still outraged, demands the government do something about it so we dedicate resources to "liberate" the country so that we can then place our own yes-men in power, then pull out and the "grateful" nation essentially gives us oil for cheap. But they don't stop to think that a rebel organisation, or to use the more common term terrorist group(really the same name just changes with the side you take) might know more about the country and terrain, and then we get this really long drawn out catastrophe leading to the financial crisis we have now.

You see if you invade a country and set up an oil rig people are gonna call you out on it, OPEC in particular controlling most of the world's oil is gonna tell us to fuck off and then we're fucked, and alienated from the rest of the world as a pariah for starting an oppressive regime in a weaker country. So you go the long route, which didn't pay off this time.

by **Dray The Fingerless** Mon May 02, 2011 9:03 pm

dandaman7 wrote:
It's not a failure if they planned it is what I said, please reread, you seem to be making the claim they planned it, it's not failing if they are doing what's according to plan. Especially considering most conspiracy theorists claim that Air Force people shot down flight 93.
It wasn't all sudden, but when they knew it was hijacked, what could they do? Ask them to please not run into a building? I have no idea what you are trying to say in the second paragraph, but in response to 3rd, how exactly do you plant a bomb a building with 50,000 and no one notices.
Kami, pearl harbor likely wasn't a conspiracy. Why would they even risk losing their entire pacific fleet to wage war on Japan? The government strictly warned the military not to give any excuse to have someone attack us. FDR did not want any war at all and looking at a history book can help recognize the fact. Now, it could have been a conspiracy, but see there's a lack of evidence for it. People like have grand theories to make sense of grand events.
We receive 1-4% oil from Iraq. And pay full price for it. Foreign oil we receive comes mostly from Canada, Mexico, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia. Not Iraq.

where are you geting those stupid numbers? 1-4%? what ive officially read is higher than that. also, whatever goes to Arabia is a special agreement with the US. why you think so many Sheiks visit the White House for a tea party? whatever benefits Saudi, benefits US, so take that into account. and whatever benefits both, benefits OPEC.

also, thank you for ignoring most of my argument and not answering me how professionally trained men failed to even ACKNOWLEDGE that there was a situation. Tell you what, go hijack a plane dan, deviate his course, see how long it takes for them to release a alarm and start launching out fighters as PREVENTIVE MEASURE. im not telling you that they should of scrambled jets and shoot the bastards off the sky in less than 10 minutes. no, what im saying, is that not ONE word came from NORAD that SEVERAL planes were deviating their routes, DANGEROUSLY, and not one alarm was raised? ive heard accounts of officers acknowledging that they tried to contact the planes, but apart from that....NOTHING. 4 planes deviate and go AWOL,and all you hear about the people in charge of that is...well we kinda tried talking to them once....FUCKING, BULLSHIT.

and as i said, i didnt say anything about conspiracies, more so the fact that this is Pearl Harbor all over again. And Kami is right, Eisenhower admitted to knowing about Pearl Harbor, but he needed a reason and support to go to war against the Axis.

by **soran** Mon May 02, 2011 9:05 pm

5.00 dollars a gallon doesnt really show me that we're in the war for cheap oil. ever since we got in the war gas has gone up.

it would make sense because the american people were HIGHLY against joining the war. but i mean they could have got the ''american pride'' up without sacrificing our own citizens EASILY. thing about Americans, we can get our pride up pretty easily so tis not hard at all

by **dandaman7** Mon May 02, 2011 9:06 pm

Not sure if you're joking or don't know what Pearl Harbor is, but it's a naval base, you can expect ships at a naval base. The US people and FDR want to get involved in it. The attack happened in order to keep the U.S. Pacific Fleet from interfering with military actions the Empire of Japan. What would the US gain out of joining in on the war when losing that many people, couldn't something a little smaller been enough, than lowering your chance of usefulness in a war by blowing up your own people fighting.
I find the conspiracy theories with no evidence more pathetic than both of those really.
The first, not very pathetic, like I said two times, what could we do, we could beg them not to run into a building, blow up the plane before it does, attempt to board the plane (which would have resulted in fail), or what? They thought they had bombs on the airplane, what can they do in that case, either way a shit load of people are going to be killed. The latter I don't really see, what did the politicians achieve in the next years of being in power? Lost money to war and got slandered. Like I said we didn't really get much oil from them. Not everything is a conspiracy. Yes. George Bush, the man thought of as an incompetent moron, apparently by you also, orchestrated a perfect attack, fooling everyone. Even more amazingly, all of the people who would have had to be involved to pull off an attack of this magnitude never said anything about it. Do you hear yourself talk? We pointed to an oil nation, but not their leader, Saddam Hussein, who didn't have much to do with anything. We didn't put our men in power, we took someone out, trained their military, and left. We aren't getting oil any cheaper than another country.

by **Dray The Fingerless** Mon May 02, 2011 9:09 pm

better question. Why did you go there in the first place? you expect me to believe the US deployed thousands and thousands oftroops and army gear n one specific location in hopes of geting ONE man? Bin laden? and then again, why did you go to Iraq?

by **soran** Mon May 02, 2011 9:11 pm

iraq and osama were two TOTALLY different situations. well not totally but they were different.

by **Aardvark** Mon May 02, 2011 9:11 pm

Soran what part of "it didn't work out this time" is so hard to understand? I already told you we didn't plan and it backfired.

What we get out of it WW2 Dan? For 40 years the planet was our bitch, take 3 guesses what we got out of it. We were given credit as world saviors for christ's sake what more motivation do you need?

And I give up trying to explain the phrase "let it happen" when you let something happen by definition you do NOTHING. And if Bush was a super idiot he wouldn't have been a politician, Bush was just smart enough to understand motivation, but too stupid to anticipate reactions. I really don't have the time to fully explain political motivation in detail so you'll have to actually think about the scenario as something other then what the press tells you.

by **soran** Mon May 02, 2011 9:13 pm

Aardvark wrote:Soran what part of "it didn't work out this time" is so hard to understand? I already told you we didn't plan and it backfired.

what, are you talking about O_o?

by **Dray The Fingerless** Mon May 02, 2011 9:16 pm

soran wrote:5.00 dollars a gallon doesnt really show me that we're in the war for cheap oil. ever since we got in the war gas has gone up.

it would make sense because the american people were HIGHLY against joining the war. but i mean they could have got the ''american pride'' up without sacrificing our own citizens EASILY. thing about Americans, we can get our pride up pretty easily so tis not hard at all

actually, going for the oil would be motivated by oil running out. just, you dont goin the middle east and win. for millennia that land has been unconquered, because they are guerrilla wars. you dont win a guerrilla war. you just drag it out till you give up.

by **soran** Mon May 02, 2011 9:20 pm

very true. but america actually has ALOT of oil reserves so this plan(conspiracy theory) that they're going to take all the worlds oil so the world will have to use american oil is going to fail because its already killing america's economy sot hey better start switching over to the reserves or we might eventually actually go into a depression. THEN alqueda will be on a FIELD DAY! lolz

by **haize** Mon May 02, 2011 9:30 pm

soran wrote:very true. but america actually has ALOT of oil reserves so this plan(conspiracy theory) that they're going to take all the worlds oil so the world will have to use american oil is going to fail because its already killing america's economy sot hey better start switching over to the reserves or we might eventually actually go into a depression. THEN alqueda will be on a FIELD DAY! lolz

we are on our reserves we haven't bought oil in months thats why its so high....

by **soran** Mon May 02, 2011 9:33 pm

for real? wait why would we make our own reserves so much expensive then us using foreign oil. would foreign oil be more expensive then oil from america?

by **Aureus** Mon May 02, 2011 9:35 pm

Derp

PS: The gas companies couldnt give a lesser shit about how u cant afford gas.

Next time gas prices go down (if they do) watch how long it takes to reach a reasonable level. When gas prices go up watch how much faster it is.

The Government is just like a corporation if not one. Zey Want DA MOOLA

ALSO: If we're using reserves that means THATS ALL YOU GOT. Which makes it more expensive. The rarer a substance, the more expensive it is. Actually being from a foreign country products tend to be cheaper. That's why businesses outsource. They make more for less.

by **Red-X** Mon May 02, 2011 9:36 pm

Rich bastards

by **soran** Mon May 02, 2011 9:41 pm

Red-X wrote:Rich bastards

by **dandaman7** Mon May 02, 2011 9:52 pm

Dray The Fingerless wrote:
dandaman7 wrote:
It's not a failure if they planned it is what I said, please reread, you seem to be making the claim they planned it, it's not failing if they are doing what's according to plan. Especially considering most conspiracy theorists claim that Air Force people shot down flight 93.
It wasn't all sudden, but when they knew it was hijacked, what could they do? Ask them to please not run into a building? I have no idea what you are trying to say in the second paragraph, but in response to 3rd, how exactly do you plant a bomb a building with 50,000 and no one notices.
Kami, pearl harbor likely wasn't a conspiracy. Why would they even risk losing their entire pacific fleet to wage war on Japan? The government strictly warned the military not to give any excuse to have someone attack us. FDR did not want any war at all and looking at a history book can help recognize the fact. Now, it could have been a conspiracy, but see there's a lack of evidence for it. People like have grand theories to make sense of grand events.
We receive 1-4% oil from Iraq. And pay full price for it. Foreign oil we receive comes mostly from Canada, Mexico, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia. Not Iraq.

where are you geting those stupid numbers? 1-4%? what ive officially read is higher than that. also, whatever goes to Arabia is a special agreement with the US. why you think so many Sheiks visit the White House for a tea party? whatever benefits Saudi, benefits US, so take that into account. and whatever benefits both, benefits OPEC.

also, thank you for ignoring most of my argument and not answering me how professionally trained men failed to even ACKNOWLEDGE that there was a situation. Tell you what, go hijack a plane dan, deviate his course, see how long it takes for them to release a alarm and start launching out fighters as PREVENTIVE MEASURE. im not telling you that they should of scrambled jets and shoot the bastards off the sky in less than 10 minutes. no, what im saying, is that not ONE word came from NORAD that SEVERAL planes were deviating their routes, DANGEROUSLY, and not one alarm was raised? ive heard accounts of officers acknowledging that they tried to contact the planes, but apart from that....NOTHING. 4 planes deviate and go AWOL,and all you hear about the people in charge of that is...well we kinda tried talking to them once....FUCKING, BULLSHIT.

and as i said, i didnt say anything about conspiracies, more so the fact that this is Pearl Harbor all over again. And Kami is right, Eisenhower admitted to knowing about Pearl Harbor, but he needed a reason and support to go to war against the Axis.

Where am I getting numbers?
Bin Laden dead? - Page 3 Curdeoil

What you've read is wrong. Idk why Sheiks visit the White House because I don't usually attend these meetings or bother to research what it's about. I don't really know what to say about the people not acknowledging the offcourse of the plane, because I haven't researched it, but let's take a look at the premises of your argument.
1. If professionally trained men didn't acknowledge the events to our knowledge, there could have been something planned
2. Professionally trained men didn't acknowledge the events to our knowledge
3. Therefore 9/11 was a conspiracy by the government to go into Iraq for oil.
I'm no logic expert but I'm not sure about the argument here.
I don't really feel like hijacking a plane today but I do agree that people would be more prepared, have you thought maybe it's because the increase in awareness and security now? I understand you say no one said anything, but what I am saying is even if they did, even if the entire world knew about it while it happened, what could we have done?
I'm actually a little disappointed at the lack of research regarding Pearl Harbor, Eisenhower was put in charge AFTER Pearl Harbor, and war was already declared by FDR, not Eisenhower. I haven't heard about admitting to Pearl Harbor conspiracy, I'm open minded to it if you can find me a link.

Dray The Fingerless wrote:better question. Why did you go there in the first place? you expect me to believe the US deployed thousands and thousands oftroops and army gear n one specific location in hopes of geting ONE man? Bin laden? and then again, why did you go to Iraq?

soran wrote:iraq and osama were two TOTALLY different situations. well not totally but they were different.

Soran's correct (WHAT THE)
We didn't go to Afghan for the purpose of finding bin Laden. War on Terror is not just War on bin Laden, it's war on terrorism, which has been happening long before we were there.
We went to Iraq because Saddam was killing hundreds of thousands of his own people, and claiming he had WMD, but refusing to show anybody, breaking the contract he signed around the gulf war. Which was actually cause for a war. But ja, the media says Bush was an idiot and just assumed Iraq had WMD for no reason.

Aardvark wrote:Soran what part of "it didn't work out this time" is so hard to understand? I already told you we didn't plan and it backfired.

What we get out of it WW2 Dan? For 40 years the planet was our bitch, take 3 guesses what we got out of it. We were given credit as world saviors for christ's sake what more motivation do you need?

And I give up trying to explain the phrase "let it happen" when you let something happen by definition you do NOTHING. And if Bush was a super idiot he wouldn't have been a politician, Bush was just smart enough to understand motivation, but too stupid to anticipate reactions. I really don't have the time to fully explain political motivation in detail so you'll have to actually think about the scenario as something other then what the press tells you.

No, what did we get out bombing our people that were fighting for us. I understand bombing civilians, but soldiers? How does that help us?
And you rly think that the government thought that we would be top power when it happened? The only thing actually raised us to the top of the war line and kept us there was bombing Japan, which Truman did, and you probably say FDR and Eisenhower knew he was going to. What reaction was Bush supposed to predict, that there would be dumbass conspiracy theorists for every terrorist action that happens?
Pakistani terrorists attack Mumbai hotels in India, MUSTA BEEN INDIA TRYNA DECLARE WAR ON PAKISTAN RITE?
Russian school gets held hostage by Islamic Chechans, MUSTA BEEN RUSSIA TRYNA DECLARE WAR ON ISLAM ITSELF
Car bomb found in New York, MUSTA BEEN THESE DARN GOVERNMENT PEOPLE TRYING TO SEND MORE TROOPS THE MIDDLE EAST?
Not everything is a conspiracy.

by **soran** Mon May 02, 2011 10:03 pm

lol i just got done having a, cant even call it a debate, where this kid was pretty much saying the same thing but waaaay more ignorantly and i shut him down quickly Very Happy

also, damn...... dan got serious XD also offtopic, dan isnt your name supposed to be blue O_o

by **Aragorn** Mon May 02, 2011 10:08 pm

If we could drill on our own soil, all this wouldn't be a problem...We wouldn't NEED to rely on foreign oil but the environmentalists won't let us...Heck, if we drilled in frigging Alaska, we'd be set for quite some time.

by **haize** Mon May 02, 2011 10:17 pm

Take over canadia they have the biggest amount of natural gas in the world... (:

by **Aardvark** Mon May 02, 2011 10:20 pm

Dan we were the only international power with completely untouched military resources and the Axis, while strong, was stretched thin, ANY new power added to the fighting would have resulted in a collapse of the Axis so yes it was very predictable. And as I said, a FLEET makes a good target especially one "in repair". Yes Hawaii was a naval base, why station a whole fleet that far from American borders? Some ships make sense, a whole fleet is idiotic by any military standard.

There was no reason to launch a war in Afghanistan, no reason to go to Iraq and Iran. The bombing runs were more then enough retribution, by definition this terrorist group couldn't have been in power over the countries otherwise they wouldn't be terrorists. So I guess I need to expand my explanation, by being part of the OPEC, any country owing another means the organization owes them so the oil discount would be very helpful.

by **soran** Mon May 02, 2011 10:31 pm

yes there was a reason and dan just explained it >.<

by **Aardvark** Mon May 02, 2011 10:48 pm

You mean what he'd been doing since we left after Desert Storm and what he never stopped doing in the intervening years?

by **Aragorn** Mon May 02, 2011 10:59 pm

haize wrote:Take over canadia they have the biggest amount of natural gas in the world... (:

WHOA WHOA WHOA WHOA, back up...Canada has something USEFUL affraid

by **soran** Mon May 02, 2011 11:10 pm

uhhhh other then awesomely stronger and better tasting beer??? YES!!!

by Sponsored content