Moderator: Community Team
BigBallinStalin wrote:Honestly, I don't buy the pipeline hypothesis. I don't know enough about it to be as confident as patches' is.
shickingbrits wrote:Don't expect you to understand BBS, because you don't want to.
With war, they can demand taxes and spend the money on themselves. That is the main prize. Compared to hundreds of billions annually, all the other stuff is just window dressing. A pipeline? Maybe, but it's nothing more than a spoil. The treasury is being emptied, enjoy the bill. You got nothing for it.
patches70 wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:Honestly, I don't buy the pipeline hypothesis. I don't know enough about it to be as confident as patches' is.
That's cool, maybe you have an alternative hypothesis for why the US is so gun-ho to get rid of Assad. Maybe you actually believe the line about humanitarian reasons and spreading democracy? Yeah, I didn't think so.
Pirlo wrote:patches70 wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:Honestly, I don't buy the pipeline hypothesis. I don't know enough about it to be as confident as patches' is.
That's cool, maybe you have an alternative hypothesis for why the US is so gun-ho to get rid of Assad. Maybe you actually believe the line about humanitarian reasons and spreading democracy? Yeah, I didn't think so.
Why can't the pipeline go through Iraq rather than Syria?
A good hypothesis is Israel. It's not a secret that Assad is anti-Israel, and it's not a secret that Assad is the main artery of Hezbullah, or how could Iran deliver weapons? And it's not a secret that Hezbullah is the biggest pain in Israel's ass.. you remember the 2006 war when Condoleezza Rice said it was the birth of a new "Middle East?"
In September 2004, Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon agreed to connect the Arab Gas Pipeline with Iraq's gas grid to allow Iraq to export gas to Europe.[8]
patches70 wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:Honestly, I don't buy the pipeline hypothesis. I don't know enough about it to be as confident as patches' is.
That's cool, maybe you have an alternative hypothesis for why the US is so gun-ho to get rid of Assad. Maybe you actually believe the line about humanitarian reasons and spreading democracy? Yeah, I didn't think so.
Pirlo wrote:
Why can't the pipeline go through Iraq rather than Syria?
In September 2004, Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon agreed to connect the Arab Gas Pipeline with Iraq's gas grid to allow Iraq to export gas to Europe.[8]
shickingbrits wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-hoh/isis-iraq-perpetual-war_b_5801952.html
It's quite amusing how so much of the media is contradicting itself. Huffington Post has within days posted several conflicting articles.
ISIS is small. ISIS is big.
ISIS was sold their victims. The sellers are our friends.
Obama is stopping the problem. He is adding to it.
Huffington is not alone in doing it. If we compare the reports from them to let's say Fox, which is doing the same, we get a beautiful rainbow. Aren't rainbows nice. I wish there was rainbow colored Kool-aid. Oh, I guess there is.
BigBallinStalin wrote:Here's what's being overlooked:
Then again, why not run the pipeline through Iraq and have it connect to this pipeline:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Gas_P ... connection
Also:In September 2004, Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon agreed to connect the Arab Gas Pipeline with Iraq's gas grid to allow Iraq to export gas to Europe.[8]
So, instead of arming rebels in Syria, which already has a gas pipeline, why not start from Iraq, connect into it, and export through Israel or Egypt--instead of dealing with Syria?
BigBallinStalin wrote:Here's what's being overlooked:
Then again, why not run the pipeline through Iraq and have it connect to this pipeline:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Gas_P ... connection
patches70 wrote:
Few have heard of the "Rat Line". An agreement between the CIA, Turkey and the Syrian rebels to transfer weapons and ammo from Libya to Syria. This included anti tank and anti aircraft weapons and the Rat Line is the code name for the covert network to move these weapons clandestinely. The network was funded by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m- ... e-rat-line
Stevens as the Liaison to the Libyan rebels, knew about this Rat line-
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-syria ... ts-2012-10
GoranZ wrote:
They were not allowed to raise ransom Typical American bureaucracy.
shickingbrits wrote:Can't come clean.
Art of War is still relevant. How would you guys like to spend trillions of dollars which we don't have to secure Iraqi oil which Saddam is overproducing and thereby bringing down the cost because our sanctions have resulted in the starvation of 2,000,000 Iraqis including 500,000 children and has forced him to take a stand against his age old ally? Sure oil prices will go up, the petrodollar which was threatened by US policy against Iraq will be resecured and only a few wealthy companies will gain while hundreds of thousands of individuals will be paralyzed, killed, engage in torture, be tortured, etc?
What do you say Merica? Can we have the trillions?
Pirlo wrote:patches70 wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:Honestly, I don't buy the pipeline hypothesis. I don't know enough about it to be as confident as patches' is.
That's cool, maybe you have an alternative hypothesis for why the US is so gun-ho to get rid of Assad. Maybe you actually believe the line about humanitarian reasons and spreading democracy? Yeah, I didn't think so.
Why can't the pipeline go through Iraq rather than Syria?
A good hypothesis is Israel. It's not a secret that Assad is anti-Israel, and it's not a secret that Assad is the main artery of Hezbullah, or how could Iran deliver weapons? And it's not a secret that Hezbullah is the biggest pain in Israel's ass.. you remember the 2006 war when Condoleezza Rice said it was the birth of a new "Middle East?"
Phatscotty wrote:GoranZ wrote:
They were not allowed to raise ransom Typical American bureaucracy.
I'm torn on this one: yes, upon first thought when I heard on the radio that if the family tried to raise ransom they would be charged with a crime by the Federal government, I was all like 'fuckin police state', but on the other hand, what to do about a situation where the kidnappers want to kill the person while making the most horrific murder victim's home country look bad so they blurt out money totals they know they'll never get. I do believe we shouldn't negotiate with terrorists, especially in this situation. That is based on my absolute belief that people from a country that do pay ransoms are far more likely to get kidnapped and even targeted moreso since the kidnappers know for sure their wolf ticket will pay out.
Phatscotty wrote:I LOVE that we have our own organic homegrown material to draw on and reflect upon
saxitoxin wrote:Phatscotty wrote:I LOVE that we have our own organic homegrown material to draw on and reflect upon
Hillary laughing about the death of the Lion of Africa; unbeknownst to her at the time she would be cruelly celebrating the removal of the last barrier between the west and that thing in the desert that had been safely locked up by the Libyan government in Abu Salim prison for the last 40 years.
saxitoxin wrote:Phatscotty wrote:GoranZ wrote:
They were not allowed to raise ransom Typical American bureaucracy.
I'm torn on this one: yes, upon first thought when I heard on the radio that if the family tried to raise ransom they would be charged with a crime by the Federal government, I was all like 'fuckin police state', but on the other hand, what to do about a situation where the kidnappers want to kill the person while making the most horrific murder victim's home country look bad so they blurt out money totals they know they'll never get. I do believe we shouldn't negotiate with terrorists, especially in this situation. That is based on my absolute belief that people from a country that do pay ransoms are far more likely to get kidnapped and even targeted moreso since the kidnappers know for sure their wolf ticket will pay out.
I agree with Scotty on this; making deposits into the ISIS bank account is the last thing that would be helpful right now.
shickingbrits wrote:Keep up the good work PS.
I think the saddest bit of the interview with his mother is where she was lead to believe she was providing the FBI with information. Debriefing prisoners is routine and her handlers should know that they had the info. Their ongoing relations with her were no more than keeping her in check.
As for negotiating with terrorists, we do it all the time. We negotiated how many weapons to give the Libyan terrorists to overthrow Gaddafi, with the Syrian terrorists, with the Afghan terrorists, the list goes on and on. More than likely we negotiated the best time to behead him.
Anyways, why should I care about innocent people being killed to create demand for private interests?
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: DirtyDishSoap