Is there any point in keeping NATO around?
- Thread starter Godwynn
- Start date
And I never claimed it did. I asked whether it is ok for NATO members to invade and bomb another country. You are simply pretending that I asked something else, over and over again.
Am I? Or are you simply too lazy to make up an actual argument and repeat what I said you are doing?
You asked a question about whether it would be OK if NATO bombed or invaded a country (a question anyone with a search engine would know the answer to). This was answered. Next you bring up Iraq. Which had (and has) nothing to do with NATO. Seriously, what exactly is your point - if any?
You asked a question about whether it would be OK if NATO bombed or invaded a country (a question anyone with a search engine would know the answer to). This was answered. Next you bring up Iraq. Which had (and has) nothing to do with NATO. Seriously, what exactly is your point - if any?
No, that's not what happened - though you spend quite a lot of effort to represent it this way.
You came here attacking my argument about NATO, by bashing Russia's internal policies. While can't answer simple questions and openly admit any wrongdoings of NATO countries. Anyone who followed the thread should be able to understand my point.
Manufacturing public consent and materializing any plan is easier said than done. In Clark's book, Winning Modern Wars, published in 2003, he describes his conversation with a military officer in the Pentagon shortly after 9/11 regarding a plan to attack seven Middle Eastern countries in five years: "As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and finishing off Iran.
The USA has equipped both the Syrian and Libyan rebels, the latter of which were backed up by NATO air-support. Libya lays in ruins and civil war now, the same of Syria. Who do you think armed and equipped the "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union? It's the same routine over & over again.
They needed another Pearl Harbor. G. W. Bush's approval rating spiked to around 90% shortly after 9/11.
Every time there's the threat of war, people tend to rally around their leader...but it's much more sinister than that and almost too convenient. Eye-witness accounts and independent studies point to fact that 9/11 itself was a hoax, a false flag operation.
In fact, decades of terror against their own population blamed on extremists has actually funded and planned by the White House. Top level officials in the USA government and the CIA confirm that. Operation Gladio: "You had to attack civilians, the people, women children, far removed from any political game. This would allow authorities to bring in a state of emergency" - V. Vinciguerra (Source: NATO's secret armies, La Repubblica).
Your average Joe will have a hard time believing that terrorism can actually be manipulated and that people can be moved around like unsuspecting sheep; and if you're told that you're a sheep and are moved by flag false operation - you obviously will not like hearing that.
Agreed. USA and the west has strategic interests in the Middle East: Oil, protecting key waterways for the transport of said oil (Suez Canal and the Persian Gulf), and ensuring a safe & secure environment for Israel to continue its apartheid and encroachment on the Palestinian Territories. USA is the largest exporter of terrorism world wide.
AMEN.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
Come now, you don't believe that, do you?
Well, never mind. I don't believe it. (Even though I've no vested interest in disbelieving it - not being American.) And I'm notoriously gullible about most things.
I'm putting the 9/11 hoax theory firmly in the box marked "conspiracy theories". Along with the fake moon landing, giant lizard men, and the Illuminati.
Still, experience tells me that conspiracy theorists never change their minds. No matter what.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Careful. If you put all those things in the same box they might breed.
I guess you're in the minority then.
84% of Americans reject Official 9/11 Story. USA government is:
Hiding something 53%
Mostly lying 28%
Not sure 3%”
Telling the truth 16%
Source
9/11 is the biggest hoax/fraud of the turn of the century. Do your own research.
I understand your disbelief. Why would any government in the world, after all, attack its own population or, only slightly less criminal, deliberately allow a foreign group to carry out such an attack?
While brutal dictatorships, such as the regime of Pol Pot in Cambodia, are known to have had little respect for the life and dignity of their citizens, surely a Western democracy, the average Joe thinks, would not engage in such an abuse of power. And if criminal elements within a Western democracy, in North America or in Europe, had engaged in such a crime, would not elected officials or the media find out and report on it?
Is it imaginable that criminal persons within a government could commit terrorist operations against innocent citizens, who support the very same government with the taxes they pay every year? Would nobody notice? I had these questions too.
But in fact, there are historical examples of such operations being implemented by Western democracies. There are ample examples & evidence of secret warfare during the Cold War conducted by Western "democracies" of terrorizing its own citizen and its own population to manufacture public consent and sway public opinion as means of generating a pretext for war or to further their agenda and NATO played a key role in it and continues till today. A secret military strategy that targets domestic populations with terrorism does indeed exist.
It is called the “strategy of tension.” And it was implemented by Western democracies.
Look it up and learn for a change.
Wolfbeckett
Jerkin' and nonsense.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,682
Borachio, stop. Don't let the ramblings of a conspiracy theorist derail the thread!
As I had suspected, too afraid to conduct their own research. For anyone else who might be interested in NATO's hidden Terrorism over the past few decades, here's a start:
Daniele Ganser, professor of contemporary history at Bale University (Switzerland) and chairman of the ASPO - Switzerland, published a landmark book about "NATO’s Secret Armies." According to him, during the last 50 years the United States have organized bombings in Western Europe that they have falsely attributed to the left and the extreme left with the purpose of discrediting them in the eyes of their voters. This strategy is still present today, inspiring fear for the Islam and justifying wars on oil.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article144748.html
Daniele Ganser, professor of contemporary history at Bale University (Switzerland) and chairman of the ASPO - Switzerland, published a landmark book about "NATO’s Secret Armies." According to him, during the last 50 years the United States have organized bombings in Western Europe that they have falsely attributed to the left and the extreme left with the purpose of discrediting them in the eyes of their voters. This strategy is still present today, inspiring fear for the Islam and justifying wars on oil.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article144748.html
I wouldn't go as far as to suspect U.S. government in organizing 9/11 event, but for example the things like existence of secret CIA prisons outside of USA territory has been confirmed. Which clearly indicates that covert activity of secret services spreads far beyond public awareness about it. No need even to start talking about Snowden reports.
Why not? Too psychologically overwhelming? There's no reason to doubt that the USA government is capable of terrorizing its own populace as previous plans were proposed to the Kennedy during the 1960's as a pre-text for war on Cuba; including but limited to blowing up painted civilian airplanes and blaming the act on Cuba.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Kennedy was later assassinated.
There's no doubt that all 3 WTC buildings were brought down via controlled demolition and thousands of Engineers and Architects already attest to that fact: http://www.ae911truth.org/
You're simply an average Joe stuck in the middle who is too afraid to confront the truth; or worse, cares not.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
"Physiologically overwhelming"!
Weeell. I doubt anything I say, or don't say, is going to make any difference.
Weeell. I doubt anything I say, or don't say, is going to make any difference.
Fixed. Thank you.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
There is a gigantic gap between "I believe they are hiding something" and "I believe it was a false flag operation". The US government is "hiding something" about every subject you can name. Heck, I'm hiding something about most subjects you can name. I'm more surprised that 16% answered "telling the truth".
Similar threads
