Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: US/Israeli Forces to Begin Largest Defense Co-opt in History.

Posted 7 years ago on Oct. 17, 2012, 2:06 p.m. EST by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

More sanctions, cripple your people, and just incase anyone thinks we wont back Israel no matter what, check out this massive excercise to showcase our incredible military power!!!

Bwahhh ha ha hah ah!!.....




Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by turbocharger (1756) 5 years ago
[-] 2 points by Nevada1 (5843) 7 years ago

Not about the nuclear. If Iran gave it all up, a new excuse for attack would be generated.

[-] 4 points by SparkyJP (1646) from Westminster, MD 7 years ago

Right !! Libya is a prime example. Gaddafi gave up his nuclear efforts and you can see what it got him. I'm sure that Iran notices this fact too.

[-] 4 points by Nevada1 (5843) 7 years ago

Good point Sparky.

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

Neither corporate candidate will stop the imperialism.

Stop voting for more war.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

HR 4310 Prepares For War In Iran.

It makes military action part of policy.

It's already passed the House and it's going to the Senate soon enough and then straight to the President's desk.

You all might remember that bill that so many excuse makers have said "the president has to sign it no matter what" ... the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013.

No he does not. And no Congress does not need to be passing it either. These provisions must be removed or the bill should not be allowed to pass.

What WMD in Iran? They didn't even have any in Iraq. Which means everything they are saying is JUST ONE BIG LIE ALL OVER AGAIN

[-] 4 points by NVPHIL (664) 7 years ago

You would think if the gov wants us in another useless war at least the would come up with a new excuse.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago


Either they're just that stupid... or they think the American people are just that stupid.

[-] 2 points by NVPHIL (664) 7 years ago

Considering people still support the two parties after the last 30 years I'm willing to bet that we are one of the less intelligent electorates.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

Not stupid, cowards. "I'll vote third party if everybody else does".

[-] 2 points by NVPHIL (664) 7 years ago

Cowards with a helping of ignorance, which can be blamed on the media. I still run into people who never heard that our right to due process has been taken away.

[-] 2 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

Many have become blinded by party affiliation in the 2 party system.

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

Funny how the Fed can step in and float wall st whenever it wants, but when it comes to anything else, it will be total chaos if the legislation is not signed immediately.

[-] 3 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

The Federal Reserve is NOT bound by the U.S. Constitutional branches. It was created in the beginning of the Prohibition to enable the U.S. government to BORROW all of the money that it needs if it needs to. It also came with the federal income tax. Both the Federal Reserve and the income tax were ways to support the U.S. government so that it would not be starved by losing its revenues from the alcohol trade. Fanatical pursuit of teetotalism gave us both the Federal Reserve AND the federal income tax. Well, alcohol trade came back alive and well but we are stuck with the Federal Reserve and the federal income tax. Be skeptical of zealotry, fanaticism, or extremism (unless you love the unintended consequences)!

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

We're not really stuck with them; the Reserve can be eliminated and Federal taxes greatly reduced.

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

I have lived long enough to discern the naivete about eliminating the Federal Reserve which is neither federal nor has any reserve or reducing the federal taxes greatly. There was never a subterfuge or a tax that politicians did not love. I grant you that only recently, the U.S. had FINALLY stopped the tax to fund the Spanish-American War. I think probably almost ALL of the participants of that war had passed away in the intervening century.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

I don't quite agree with this; as I have been stating for the last twenty years, I think it would be very possible, and relatively easy, to eliminate the Federal Reserve, fractional banking, and our national debt - legally, all we have to so is invoke the Constitution. I don't believe the transition would be all that difficult.

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

If the 99% are smart enough, they can stop using "Federal Reserve Notes" altogether by substituting another currency such as "OWS Honor Notes." Cite the clause or section of the U.S. Constitution that if changed can do all of what you had mentioned.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

Or we can employ government to do this for us.

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

In our "democracy," you need the votes or something else to get our government to do this. As long as people acquiesce, nothing happens and we can all continue to wait for the Second Coming of the American Revolution.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

I'm not so sure; all it would take is one president with backbone.

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

I have not seen one President with backbone for decades but it really takes more than a President who may have the most significant power in our system but definitely not enough power to effect the transition unless you are thinking about extra-systemic methods of transition.

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

I don't believe there are that many bankers in Congress; one good president could turn the private Fed into a Federal central bank; print its own money, eliminate fractional banking - more, much more - and eliminate the debt. Just one president that is not owned by the money mongers.

And then we could afford national healthcare, free higher education, aid to the elderly, etc.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

I remember that some of what you want were exactly what the American people put Obama in the Presidency for. The world lauded our breakthrough to put a "black"(people still have the racial/racist mindset that a little bit of blackness taints the whole person black) President in office and even gave him the Nobel peace prize. Where are we now, huh? If we are not back to square one, we are back to square two, right?

"National healthcare" will be provided by private corporations and supported by the government. "Free higher education" is nowhere in sight but higher tuitions and fees have become very common. "Aid to the elderly" is provided by rising costs of living in the name of supporting the economy but really to prevent the fat cats from being dripped upon by their own urine. There are not that many bankers in Congress but do you think that the same agenda can be enacted through their puppets?

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

I think the central bankers were trying to get that established here long before prohibition came about.

[-] 3 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

It was a Faustian bargain. The bankers, central or otherwise, did not realize how good a deal they had gotten from the U.S. until later. Before the bargain, it was powerful banker like J.P. Morgan who shored up the stock market and the economy. There were wild fluctuations in the economy but the Federal Reserve so-called "moderated" those with perennial cheapening of the dollar. The Federal Reserve's mantra is "If the numbers on your financial sheets matter, we can easily make them bloat and float so they do not implode. Shh! Do not ask and do not tell what they really MEAN to hoi polloi."

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

NDAA breakdown in regards to Iran, you have probably already posted this before:


[-] 3 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

Many times! It's a great article from one of my favorite people constantly trying to get people to understand the truth.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 7 years ago

2 of the biggest reasons we haven't invaded Iran are China and Russia

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Read what the Christians have to say about the propaganda.

Christian Science Monitor

Imminent Iran nuclear threat? A timeline of warnings since 1979.

Breathless predictions that the Islamic Republic will soon be at the brink of nuclear capability, or – worse – acquire an actual nuclear bomb, are not new.

For more than quarter of a century Western officials have claimed repeatedly that Iran is close to joining the nuclear club. Such a result is always declared "unacceptable" and a possible reason for military action, with "all options on the table" to prevent upsetting the Mideast strategic balance dominated by the US and Israel.

And yet, those predictions have time and again come and gone. This chronicle of past predictions lends historical perspective to today’s rhetoric about Iran.


[-] -2 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

I'm not overly religious but the Christian Science Monitor remains one one my preferred avenues to world events. In short, they appear worried.

[-] -2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

According to the IAEA, in the last two years Iran has produced 400 Lbs. of 20% enriched fuel. A nuclear power plant only needs 3-5% enriched fuel.


The Fordow enrichment facility near Qom is buried deep in the side of a hill, protected by anti aircraft batteries. All of this expense just to enrich 20% fuel for a civilian medical research reactor?


When producing fissionable material, the 20% enriched fuel takes 90% of the processing time. The last enrichment phase to the 80% to 90% weapons grade material takes just 10% more processing time.

[-] 4 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

According to your own government, Iran has been two years away from producing a nuclear weapon since 1978. What happened to those claims?

I will remind you that Iran is a signatory to the non-proliferation pact, and Israel is not. Pakistan, currently being bombed by drone strike, is a nuclear-capable nation, and supposedly an ally. North Korea is actively pursuing a nuclear warhead, and at the latest advice, has the means to deliver a nuclear device to mainland USA. I don't hear much trumpeting about those facts in your media.

I will also remind you that Iran is a highly developed first-world nation with some of the most advanced medical research facilities in the world, and medical isotopes are one reason for enriching uranium above 20%. Aside from that, there are no legal reasons to disallow Iran from furthering their research.

Propaganda that has been current since the 1979 revolution still interests you why exactly?

[-] 4 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

How much oil is in Pakistan and North Korea? How close are they to the Persian Gulf which is the oil tank for the whole world? Iran is a different case altogether because of its strategic importance as an oil and gas producing country. Not only does Iran have oil, it is also well capable of disrupting oil and gas shipments due to its location. Even more worrisome is that Iran has got the technological base already to build nuclear bombs and it has many enemies in the region. North Korea or Pakistan have been rotting for a long time but Iran does NOT need to join the rotting club.

[-] -2 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

There is more to Iran, too. This is not the largely secular Ba'ath party that it used to be - this is the Muslim Brotherhood.

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

Religion is definitely a part of it, too. Mark the words of Iran's Supreme Ayatollah that nuclear weapons are un-Islamic. When Iran detonates a nuclear weapon, we can all learn about the true nature of Islam that for the "infidels" lies from the mouths of the truly "faithful" are in the will of Allah, the true God.

[-] 2 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

The nuclear situation in Iran is more complicated than simply reaching a certain level of enrichment. I forget when, but sometime in the last 10-15 years we offered to give Iran all the enriched uranium and materials they needed to their medical and civilian reactors in exchange they shut down their program. They refused.

There is evidence and reasons to suspect that their research and development goes far beyond civilian use. They are simply not just being uncooperative, they are allowing their economy to go completely in the shitter for what? Pride? Sorry, but if they really had nothing to hide, they would have worked with the ENTIRE world to stave off sanctions and save their economy. Why else would they bulldoze and raze the contested nuclear sites? Makes no sense. Basically, they are letting their economy get ruined for 2 reasons: either 1.) They have no nuclear weapons strategy and they are too proud to allow inspections and peace talks to work. 2.) They HAVE weapons programs and if they allow inspectors in they will find stuff. Also they want to continue their program in spite of the west and their own people.

Iran also has the means to launch a nuclear weapon.

North Korea has nuclear weapons, but no means to use them on anyone except South Korea. No viable means of distribution.

Pakistan is allowing us to bomb the terrorists in the FATA. Not their whole country. They also enjoy billions of $$ from us.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago


5:52AM EDT October 9. 2012 -

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — North Korea on Tuesday warned that the U.S. mainland is within range of its missiles, and said Washington's recent agreement to let Seoul possess missiles capable of hitting all of the North shows the allies are plotting to invade the country.

Seoul announced Sunday it reached a deal with Washington that would allow it to nearly triple the range of its missiles to better cope with North Korean missile and nuclear threats.

On Tuesday, North Korea called the deal a "product of another conspiracy of the master and the stooge" to "ignite a war" against the North.

[-] -1 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

Yea if North Korea said that North Korea can reach the mainland...it is bullshit. Basically NK found out about the missile shield deal, so in response they made another hollow threat.

Have you not missed the decades of repeated and ridiculous rhetoric from NK?

Forget their failed "rocket" launch in April and then their immediate response of the failure to destroy South Korea and the USA?

Every few months NK likes to say a bunch of crap to remind everyone they are still there and they are still angry at democracy.

Rule of thumb is, don't trust anything North Korea says, because it is usually 99% propaganda and 1% lies.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Sounds just like the misinformation that led to the illegal invasion of Iraq.

[-] 0 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

No not really like that at all actually lol. In fact they are not related in anyway. Maybe a conspiracy theorist could put something together, but really just look at the facts and study history.

We don't really bother North Korea, they are the ones that usually just ramble on about stuff and no one pays any particular interest. Seriously, just read up on Korea and post Korean War North Korea. \

If NK was going to invade South Korea, they would have done it a long time ago. Before most of their country was starving, before they were decades behind in military and space age technology, before most of their military equipment hasn't been sitting unused for decades, and before they lost real support from other communist regimes.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

I've read a lot about the war in Korea.

It was a complete embarrassment for the fool in charge of the mission. Two of my cousins died because of poor management and the megalomania of MacArthur. Nations that were allies completely lost their trust in the US of A.

If the mad general had his way, nuclear weapons would have been deployed, and China would have handed him his head on a plate. As it was, they allowed our allied forces to withdraw without too many more casualties.

[-] -1 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

Yes, but you can look at history through "what-ifs". It already happened, it is fact.

Look at the pattern from North Korea since 1953. You will see North Korea is technically a threat, but just blows A LOT of hot air. Their social, economical, and political state are just terrible right now to wage a sustained war against South Korea and the USA. They just want to keep looking tough on the world stage.

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

North Korea is surprisingly IMMUNE to the hot air from the U.S. Their people being poor enough to rip out copper wires effectively deters electronic cyber-threats of all kinds. It is no fun to have such strong immunity though because some North Koreans apparently love to vote with their feet for China. In this case, the U.S. can gloat over its humongous illegal immigrant population (bigger than the entire population of some countries) but it can almost sound as silly as the Big Red Dog boasting of its greatest population of fleas in the world.

[-] 0 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

I'm sorry what does your response have to do with my posts? Illegal immigration???

NK is immune from the US?? Not really at all. 60,000 US troops in South Korea is not hot air. Sorry.

What is this about them ripping copper wires so they are immune to cyber threats?? That is the most ridiculous idea ever. So your saying NK civilians, are getting away with "ripping out" copper wires in probably highly guarded military installations?? Right....Peasants ripping out some magical copper wires that control all of NK infrastructure......yea...we have plenty of ways to conduct electronic warfare against NK.

Once again, none of your response commented on anything either of us said...was totally incoherent, and made wild...weird...accusations.

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

I believe that your U.S. troop number in South Korea is off. We reduced the troop level and tucked them farther south. If one's strategy is to escalate quickly to nuclear war if the troops cannot hold the North Koreans back, having more U.S. troops there will only add to unnecessary casualties. North Korean civilians can get away with ripping out copper wires to sell in the black market although probably not in highly guarded military installations. North Korean infrastructures being so primitive make them perversely highly immune to U.S. cyber attacks because electronic warfare is useless against someone NOT using electronics, no matter how superior the electronic warfare techniques are.

Okay, I grant you that North Korea is paranoid but the U.S. and South Korea are NO fools to start a war with the rotting pile of North Korean mess. North Korea, like a volcano, just has to out-gas every now and then to show that it still threatens and is still relevant to extract international aid, a little bit like the squeegee men of New York City.

[-] 1 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

That is exactly what I said earlier about North Korea! lol. You just agreed with me.

Sorry, your right, we actually have 30k troops there. They didn't tuck them further south, they just consolidated our bases there. South Korea is not a big country by any means, so even the southern tip is only a few hours from the border. Plus we have troops in Japan. Not to mention a HUGE technology advantage over NK. We may have limited troops there, but our air superiority makes up a HUGE gap.

Yes they have a large military body wise, but a military is more than that. It is weapons, technology, food, supplies, ammunition. 2 million people can freeze and starve awfully fast without proper logistics and supplies. They can't shoot rusted guns and artillery or fix broken parts on 40 year old items without supplies.

[-] -2 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

it's not that at all - it's paranoia. They are a militarized state with some two million active duty, right? And in the 90s they lost 3 and 1/2 million to starvation. So I think it best we take precautions.

[-] 1 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

Yes they have a large military body wise, but a military is more than that. It is weapons, technology, food, supplies, ammunition. 2 million people can freeze and starve awfully fast without proper logistics and supplies. They can't shoot rusted guns and artillery or fix broken parts on 40 year old items without supplies.

We do take precautions. It is called 30k US soldiers and fighter jets in South Korea, plus the South Korean military, plus additional US forces in Japan.....

[-] 3 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

You have a very good point about the smallness of many countries relative to the size of the U.S. I was a little bit U.S.-centric when I said that we had tucked south our remaining troops in South Korea. It was more like putting up a sea buffer for our forces in Japan rather than letting them be overrun on the Korean peninsula.

We should keep that in mind, too, for example, when dealing with Israel and the Gaza Strip. Israel cannot have much advanced warning time of rocket attacks coming from Gaza. For that matter, even Iran is close to Israel missile-travel-time-wise so Iran going nuclear can topple the power balance there easily.

[-] 1 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

Yup, and that is why the whole world, especially Israel and the US are going nuts over Iran possibly obtaining nukes. That is why we have and are setting up early warning and missile defense networks in Israel.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

I seriously think that Korea's "eternal president" suffers from paranoia. And his death has not ameliorated this.

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

And the misinformation that led to Pearl Harbor, ehh?

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

I've never looked into Pearl Harbour.

Saw a recent "blockbuster" hollywood take on it.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

The Fordow enrichment facility is a fact, not propaganda. What do you think is the reason for it's considerable invulnerability from attack?

[-] 4 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Repeated threats from Israel and the US of A, perhaps?

Heard of Operation Orchard?

Operation Orchard[2][3] was an Israeli airstrike on a nuclear reactor[4] in the Deir ez-Zor region[5] of Syria carried out just after midnight (local time) on September 6, 2007. The White House and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) later confirmed that American intelligence had also indicated the site was a nuclear facility with a military purpose, though Syria denies this.[6][7] An International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) investigation reported evidence of uranium and graphite and concluded that the site bore features resembling an undeclared nuclear reactor. IAEA was initially unable to confirm or deny the nature of the site because, according to IAEA, Syria failed to provide necessary cooperation with the IAEA investigation[8][9] Syria has disputed these claims.[10] In April 2011, the IAEA officially confirmed that the site was a nuclear reactor.[4]

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 7 years ago

Then why didn't Iran build their Bushehr nuclear power plant underground if they feared an Israeli strike? The reactor had been previously damaged by Iraqi air strikes during the Iran-Iraq war in the mid-1980s.

Both the Fordow and Natanz enrichment facilities are hardened against attack for a reason. Because they are capable of producing weapons grade material.

[-] 0 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

I agree. You don't bury something in a mountain fortress unless your trying to hide or protect something. Civilian facilities are not built to withstand advanced bunker buster bombs.

I'm sure its a coincidence that they are also bulldozing over one of their other facilities.....because you know...for the same reason Fordow is protected, .there is nothing bad going on....lol

[-] -1 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

Well to start with, we blew up their enriching equipment. Or did that little tidbit somehow evade you?

Pakistan is not our allay; Pakistan is the reason we're in Afghanistan. And if it wasn't for public opinion... well, you know.

Korea, also, we don't want to talk about that.

[-] 0 points by Jencats (20) 7 years ago

We didn't blow up their enrichment equipment....It was sabotaged via cyber warfare. Also that didn't stop or shut down their enrichment process. In fact, they have added a significant amount of centrifuges over the years to increase enrichment.

[-] -2 points by yobstreet (-575) 7 years ago

haha... you better take a look in the Pacific.