Israel slaughters another 37 Palestinians - Page 11 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #101 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-21-2008, 06:34 AM
Membership withdrawn by request
 
Von Vorschlag's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2006
Vehicle: A red Vimana
Location: the pale blue dot
Posts: 19,563
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 1119 Post(s)
^^^ and don't forget Julia Gorin's golden statement "The displaced Arabs started out with 400,000; they screamed genocide and became four million. This is what happens when you leave genocide up to Jews".
Attached Images
 
Von Vorschlag is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #102 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-21-2008, 06:39 AM
CH4S Artist
 
Teutone's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1985 500SEC, 1991 190E 2.6.
Location: Los Angeles / Hannover Germany
Posts: 33,584
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Quoted: 960 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Very true, but for how many Generations is ME oil going to last?
What will the World look like at the end of this Century, provided we don't blown each other into oblivion until then.
There was a cartoon;'Will the last person to leave the Planet please turn off the lights.'
Attached Images
 
Teutone is offline  
post #103 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-21-2008, 06:56 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
I don't know what it will look like but it is a safe bet that it will not look like anything any of us imagine.

What I mean is this: When we make predictions we usually imply that factors that we believe are controlling events NOW will be the same factors later. This is a falalcy on at least 2 counts.

1. It assumes we know what controls events now. Our own disagreement in this OT community is easily scalable to the world outside -- in essence, we don't know WTF is controlling the world.

2. Even if we did know and understand the factors that control the world now does not mean the same factors will be in play next year, much less in 100 years. As an exersize, take any 100 year period in history and imagine predicting what the end result will be. That would work until one got to a far more primitive time or place.

B

The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and thatís what I intend to reverse.

~ Senator Barack H. Obama

Last edited by Botnst; 01-21-2008 at 07:01 AM.
Botnst is offline  
post #104 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-21-2008, 09:54 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elitist
 
Marsden's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2005
Vehicle: Mercedes-Benz
Location: United States
Posts: 11,335
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 420 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
In the beginning, Israel was our potential military staging area should the USSR continue it's push through the Caspian Sea.
To which time period does your "in the beginning" refer? And what evidence is there to support the assertion that the U.S. ever intended to use Israel as a military staging area?

An interesting twist, to be sure; it's hardly as sensible as supporting Arab nations would have been, if our only interest was oil, but it's an entertaining digression.

Of course, sitting squarely in the path of this excursion is the USA's history in relation to Iran. Which country, not coincidentally, sits squarely in the path of the USSR's path from the Caspian Sea to the Indian Ocean. (Which would then, of course, have provided it with coveted warm-water seaports.)

On the topic of Cold-War containment, scholars are unanimous (as I'm sure you know) in indentifying the CIA's overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq in Iran and subsequent installation of Shah Reza Pahlavi as the USA's principal intervention in the region you identify. In 1951, Iran's Parliament had voted to nationalize its oil industry--a move always certain to infuriate the U.S. and its oil companies--and legislators elected Dr. Mosaddeq as prime minister.

The fears of the American leadership at the time (both Truman's and especially Eisenhower's administrations) focused generally upon both the supply of oil and the possible spread of Communism. Nationalizing the oil supply threatened in both regards. The CIA, as part of its destabilization program, directed a campaign of bombings by Iranians posing as members of the Communist Party and of course funneled untold millions to Pahlavi and his minions, much as we're now doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. In this way they sought (and succeeded, I think) to foment some degree of public dissatisfaction with and, utlimately, rebellion against, the Prime Minister.

However, the signal event was the approach of an Iranian military general to the CIA via the American Embassy in Tehran. What ultimately resulted has been called the CIA's first overthrow of a major government, and was used, unfortunately, as a blueprint for later fiascos such as the ones in Cuba and Guatemala. Of course, naturally, it was sold to the American public as a "liberation" and "birth of freedom" etc. Needless to add, the Iranian people didn't quite see it that way and sort of resented the autocratic Shah and his band of SAVAK torturers and murderers.

At this point popular history picks up and I need hardly describe the animosity which has prevailed between the US and Iran ever since. US Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright acknowledged the coup's pivotal role in the troubled relationship and almost even apologized for it, something our current rulers would never do except perhaps if they were waterboarded:

"The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons," she said. "But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."

And of course, as I mentioned, a quick glance at any map of the Middle East shows that it is Iran, not Israel, in the way of any supposed push by the Soviet Union from the Caspian Sea to the Indian Ocean.

Once again, I invite anyone reading to imagine if the tables were turned, and another country had meddled in your country's affairs to this extent, involving an overthrow of your government, theft of your natural resources, and decades of tortures, murders, and disappearances, etc. etc. Who knows, you might resent it too.

There's much more, of course, but more than 50 years after the event, the CIA still maintains strict secrecy in relation to many important documents. Meanwhile, available sources include:

Secrets of History: The CIA in Iran - Empire? - Global Policy Forum
History of Iran: A short account of 1953 Coup
Did the CIA give Iran the bomb? Extracts from New York Times reporter James Risen's new book | Environment | The Guardian
Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 Coup in Iran
New York Times Special Report: The C.I.A. in Iran
Electronic Briefing Book: The Secret CIA History of the Iran Coup
Marsden is offline  
post #105 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-22-2008, 05:50 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsden View Post
To which time period does your "in the beginning" refer? And what evidence is there to support the assertion that the U.S. ever intended to use Israel as a military staging area?

An interesting twist, to be sure; it's hardly as sensible as supporting Arab nations would have been, if our only interest was oil, but it's an entertaining digression.

Of course, sitting squarely in the path of this excursion is the USA's history in relation to Iran. Which country, not coincidentally, sits squarely in the path of the USSR's path from the Caspian Sea to the Indian Ocean. (Which would then, of course, have provided it with coveted warm-water seaports.)

On the topic of Cold-War containment, scholars are unanimous (as I'm sure you know) in indentifying the CIA's overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddeq in Iran and subsequent installation of Shah Reza Pahlavi as the USA's principal intervention in the region you identify. In 1951, Iran's Parliament had voted to nationalize its oil industry--a move always certain to infuriate the U.S. and its oil companies--and legislators elected Dr. Mosaddeq as prime minister.

The fears of the American leadership at the time (both Truman's and especially Eisenhower's administrations) focused generally upon both the supply of oil and the possible spread of Communism. Nationalizing the oil supply threatened in both regards. The CIA, as part of its destabilization program, directed a campaign of bombings by Iranians posing as members of the Communist Party and of course funneled untold millions to Pahlavi and his minions, much as we're now doing in Iraq and Afghanistan. In this way they sought (and succeeded, I think) to foment some degree of public dissatisfaction with and, utlimately, rebellion against, the Prime Minister.

However, the signal event was the approach of an Iranian military general to the CIA via the American Embassy in Tehran. What ultimately resulted has been called the CIA's first overthrow of a major government, and was used, unfortunately, as a blueprint for later fiascos such as the ones in Cuba and Guatemala. Of course, naturally, it was sold to the American public as a "liberation" and "birth of freedom" etc. Needless to add, the Iranian people didn't quite see it that way and sort of resented the autocratic Shah and his band of SAVAK torturers and murderers.

At this point popular history picks up and I need hardly describe the animosity which has prevailed between the US and Iran ever since. US Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright acknowledged the coup's pivotal role in the troubled relationship and almost even apologized for it, something our current rulers would never do except perhaps if they were waterboarded:

"The Eisenhower administration believed its actions were justified for strategic reasons," she said. "But the coup was clearly a setback for Iran's political development. And it is easy to see now why many Iranians continue to resent this intervention by America in their internal affairs."

And of course, as I mentioned, a quick glance at any map of the Middle East shows that it is Iran, not Israel, in the way of any supposed push by the Soviet Union from the Caspian Sea to the Indian Ocean.

Once again, I invite anyone reading to imagine if the tables were turned, and another country had meddled in your country's affairs to this extent, involving an overthrow of your government, theft of your natural resources, and decades of tortures, murders, and disappearances, etc. etc. Who knows, you might resent it too.

There's much more, of course, but more than 50 years after the event, the CIA still maintains strict secrecy in relation to many important documents. Meanwhile, available sources include:

Secrets of History: The CIA in Iran - Empire? - Global Policy Forum
History of Iran: A short account of 1953 Coup
Did the CIA give Iran the bomb? Extracts from New York Times reporter James Risen's new book | Environment | The Guardian
Mohammad Mosaddeq and the 1953 Coup in Iran
New York Times Special Report: The C.I.A. in Iran
Electronic Briefing Book: The Secret CIA History of the Iran Coup
Nothing that you describe above undermines my own pet conspiracy theory, previously described.

The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and thatís what I intend to reverse.

~ Senator Barack H. Obama
Botnst is offline  
post #106 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-22-2008, 07:02 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elitist
 
Marsden's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2005
Vehicle: Mercedes-Benz
Location: United States
Posts: 11,335
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 420 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
(Thread Starter)
Well, your "pet theory" that Israel doesn't target "civilians" was already pretty well demolished by the description of its slaughterfest in Lebanon, which gave (and still gives) special and deadly attention to civilians. About your contention that U.S. support of Israel is because of oil, the less said the better, eh? You painted yourself into a corner and I gracefully let you out.

Meanwhile, Americans are not evil people. If they knew what was being done in their name, and with their money and military equipment, they'd put a stop to it in an instant. Which is why people such as yourself are so completely vested in their never finding out. Anyway, you should relax; the number of people who read this thread, in this forum, is quite small.
Marsden is offline  
post #107 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-22-2008, 08:09 AM
DP
Moderator
 
DP's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 190E, 400E, SLK350
Location: Chesapeak Bay
Posts: 64,125
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 991 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsden View Post
Well, your "pet theory" that Israel doesn't target "civilians" was already pretty well demolished by the description of its slaughterfest in Lebanon, which gave (and still gives) special and deadly attention to civilians. About your contention that U.S. support of Israel is because of oil, the less said the better, eh? You painted yourself into a corner and I gracefully let you out.

Meanwhile, Americans are not evil people. If they knew what was being done in their name, and with their money and military equipment, they'd put a stop to it in an instant. Which is why people such as yourself are so completely vested in their never finding out. Anyway, you should relax; the number of people who read this thread, in this forum, is quite small.
Word
You have described the situation exactly like it is, so now I wonder if Botnst has an agenda or he's simply plainly dumb.
The indicator will be in his response, you know something along this line: I don't give a fuk who's who and could care less what they do... You know, the usual Botnst BS defense. Maybe Yosey will let him borrow his brass balls for a minute or two
DP is offline  
post #108 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-22-2008, 08:13 AM
~BANNED~
 
Jakarta Expat's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2006
Vehicle: PM me to Join the Expat Muslims for Obama Club........
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 17,697
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by drewprof View Post
Word
You have described the situation exactly like it is, so now I wonder if Botnst has an agenda or he's simply plainly dumb.
The indicator will be in his response, you know something along this line: I don't give a fuk who's who and could care less what they do... You know, the usual Botnst BS defense. Maybe Yosey will let him borrow his brass balls for a minute or two

Jesus with you 2 here AIPAC will have the OT shutdown quicker than shit...........
Jakarta Expat is offline  
post #109 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-22-2008, 08:16 AM
DP
Moderator
 
DP's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 190E, 400E, SLK350
Location: Chesapeak Bay
Posts: 64,125
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 991 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakarta Expat View Post
Jesus with you 2 here AIPAC will have the OT shutdown quicker than shit...........
maybe you're right, we should tone it down so we will have an OT
DP is offline  
post #110 of 132 (permalink) Old 01-22-2008, 12:08 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marsden View Post
1. Well, your "pet theory" that Israel doesn't target "civilians" was already pretty well demolished by the description of its slaughterfest in Lebanon, which gave (and still gives) special and deadly attention to civilians.

2. About your contention that U.S. support of Israel is because of oil, the less said the better, eh? You painted yourself into a corner and I gracefully let you out.
1. That's not my pet theory, that's a fact. Unless you have some evidence that Israel orders it's forces to target civilians, you have no basis for your assertion.

War is hell, especially on civilians. It has always been the case that civilians suffer more than soldiers. Even in the most humane war ever fought -- 2003 war with Iraq.

2. No at all. I think my argument is pretty clear and consistent. Fire away.

The biggest problems we are facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all and thatís what I intend to reverse.

~ Senator Barack H. Obama
Botnst is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Israel More Than Tripled its Killings of Palestinians in 2006 firstmb Off-Topic 10 01-03-2007 11:55 AM
    Israel Escalating -- Chem attack to Israel --10:33 mcbear Off-Topic 41 07-01-2006 06:13 AM
    E slaughters 5 - Pics, Video Turbo6 W211 E-Class 0 04-19-2006 04:00 AM
    Israel halts "tax payments" to Palestinians Marsden Off-Topic 78 02-23-2006 06:10 AM
    Palestinians, Israel announce cease-fire GeeS Off-Topic 17 02-10-2005 09:38 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome