Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Poll: What American city will be nuked by rogue Americans?

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Poll: What American city will be nuked by rogue Americans?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9, 10, 11 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

What American city will get nuked by rogue American government to faciliate martial law?

Baltimore

[ 2 ]

Denver

[ 1 ]

Detroit

26%

[ 6 ]

Seattle

[ 2 ]

San Francisco

39%

[ 9 ]

Cleveland

13%

[ 3 ]

Total Votes : 23

Author

Message

blaseblasphemener

Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:00 am Post subject:

I am a Canadian. I did give $50 to Ron Paul. I appreciate Joo's contributions to this board, but sometimes, a shit post is just a shit post. Which that one was. Nothing personal Joo.

caniff

Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:06 am Post subject:

blaseblasphemener wrote:

I am a Canadian. I did give $50 to Ron Paul. I appreciate Joo's contributions to this board, but sometimes, a *beep* post is just a *beep* post. Which that one was. Nothing personal Joo.

Okay. I'm curious what you thought was shit about the post. Again, I didn't agree with all of it, but I thought there were some valid points mixed in.

You decided it was 100% shit. Why is that?

blaseblasphemener

Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:20 am Post subject:

caniff wrote:

blaseblasphemener wrote:

I am a Canadian. I did give $50 to Ron Paul. I appreciate Joo's contributions to this board, but sometimes, a *beep* post is just a *beep* post. Which that one was. Nothing personal Joo.

Okay. I'm curious what you thought was *beep* about the post. Again, I didn't agree with all of it, but I thought there were some valid points mixed in.

You decided it was 100% *beep*. Why is that?

Quote:

Well the US made mistakes during the cold war at the same time:

North Vietnams invasion of South Vietnam was illegal.

so 50,000 americans died because an Asian country did something "illegal"? great reason to go to war.

Quote:

North Vietnam killed just as many.

source please.

Quote:

The cold war was defensive. Cuase the Soviet Union was out to get the US.

"out to get the US". hmmm. well put.

Quote:

You work in South Korea what is the difference between the Vietnam war and the Korean war anyway?

Hmmm, let's see. Ahh yes. Unilateral invasion vs. United Nations operation. 10 years vs. 3 years/60 year occupation. Defeat vs. 90% victory.

Quote:

what country currently uses deleted uranium weapons

How dangerous they are is exagerated by the left.

Hahahahahahahaha. Right. I'm sure you wouldn't mind breathing that air.

Quote:

It is no accident that the enemies of the US have the very worst human rights records anywhere.

Except that many of America's friends also have the very worst human rights records anywhere.

Quote:

The US has all the right enemies world wide.

Oh, you mean like Bin Laden? Oh wait, he was a friend first. Iraq? Friends, then enemy.

Ya-ta Boy

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:32 am Post subject:

Quote:

What about the other three?

The other 3 are true. Wasn't that obvious?

blaseblasphemener

Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Location: There's a voice, keeps on calling me, down the road, that's where I'll always be

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:36 am Post subject:

Ya-ta Boy wrote:

Quote:

What about the other three?

The other 3 are true. Wasn't that obvious?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 11:38 am Post subject:

blaseblasphemener"][

Quote:

so 50,000 americans died because an Asian country did something "illegal"? great reason to go to war.

No it wasn't but the cold war was defensive.

The US lost a similar number in the Korean war.

Quote:

Korean war casualty statistics
Copyright (C) , 1999

US 54,229

http://www.centurychina.com/history/krwarcost.html

Quote:

The accuracy of these figures has generally not been challenged.[b] 58,226 American soldiers also died in the war or are missing in action.[/b] Australia lost almost 500 of the 47,000 troops they had deployed to Vietnam and New Zealand lost 38 soldiers.

http://www.vietnam-war.info/casualties/

Quote:

North Vietnam killed just as many.

source please.

Quote:

Secondary Level of Mass Murderers:
Obviously, we're going to run into the same vagueries and uncertainties when we try to rank numbers 4 through 10 on the list of the 20th Century's worst killers, but at least we can nominate the candidates. A pretty good case could be made that each of the following rulers (listed alphabetically) were responsible for over a million unjust, unnecessary or unnatural deaths by initiating or intensifying war, famine, democide or resettlement, or by allowing people under their control to do so:

Chiang Kai-shek (China: 1928-49 )
Enver Pasha (Turkey: 1913-18 )
Hirohito (Japan: 1926-89 )
Hirota Koki (Japan: 1936-37 )
Ho Chi Minh (North Vietnam: 1945-69 )
Kim Il Sung (North Korea: 1948-94 )
Lenin (USSR: 1917-24 )
Leopold II (Belgium: 1865-1909 )
Nicholas II (Russia: 1894-1917 )
Pol Pot (Cambodia: 1975-79 )
Saddam Hussein (Iraq: 1969- )
Tojo Hideki (Japan: 1941-44 )
Wilhelm II (Germany: 1888-1918 )
Yahya Khan (Pakistan: 1969-71 )

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/tyrants.htm

Quote:

The cold war was defensive. Cuase the Soviet Union was out to get the US.

Quote:

"out to get the US". hmmm. well put.

yes the Soviets were ought to bring down the US.
That is why they deployed heavy ICBMs whose only use would be as a first strike weapon.

If they could have figured out a way to deal with US submarine missiles they very likely would have struck first.

Quote:

You work in South Korea what is the difference between the Vietnam war and the Korean war anyway?

Quote:

Hmmm, let's see. Ahh yes. Unilateral invasion vs. United Nations operation. 10 years vs. 3 years/60 year occupation. Defeat vs. 90% victory.

UN operation where the US provided most of the forces , where the only reason it was approved by the UN was that the Soviets were boycotting the UN votes.

The US lost a simlar number in 3 years versus 10 years. But why was Korea ok and Vietnam bad? And anyway they were both attempts by the US to prevent the communist world from conquering any more nations.

Quote:

The resolution was unanimously passed in the Security Council thanks to the temporary Soviet absence from the Security Council � the Soviets were boycotting the Security Council, protesting that the Chinese seat should be transferred from the (Kuomintang-controlled) Republic of China to the Communist People's Republic. With the Soviets absent and unable to veto the resolution, and with only Yugoslavia abstaining, the UN voted to aid South Korea on June 27. The resolution led to direct action by the United States, whose forces were joined by troops and supplies from 15 other UN members: Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK, France, South Africa, Turkey, Thailand, Greece, the Netherlands, Ethiopia, Colombia, the Philippines, Belgium and Luxembourg. However, the United States provided 50% of the ground forces (South Korea provided most of the remainder), 86% of the naval power, and 93% of the air power.[34]

The Soviet Union and its allies challenged the resolution on grounds of illegality since a permanent member of the council (the Soviet Union) was absent from the voting. Against this, the view prevailed that a permanent member of the Council had to explicitly veto a resolution in order to defeat it. The North Korean government also did not concur, arguing that the conflict was a civil war, and therefore not clearly within the scope of the UN. In 1950, a Soviet resolution calling for an end of hostilities and withdrawal of foreign troops was rejected.[35]

American public opinion was solidly behind the intervention.[citation needed] However, Truman later took harsh criticism for not obtaining a declaration of war from Congress before sending troops to Korea. Thus, �Truman�s War� was said by some[citation needed] to have violated the spirit, and the letter, of the United States Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War

The US goal in Vietnam was just to keep North Vietnam from conquering the South.

Quote:

Hahahahahahahaha. Right. I'm sure you wouldn't mind breathing that air

.

I don't think they are good to breathe in but how dangerous they are is exagerated by the anti war movement for political reasons.

Quote:

It is no accident that the enemies of the US have the very worst human rights records anywhere.

Quote:

Except that many of America's friends also have the very worst human rights records anywhere.

Actually the enemies are worse.

The obsever human righs index at a time close to 9-11.

Quote:

Behind Algeria, on a score of 110.55, come North Korea, Burma, Indonesia, Libya, Colombia, Syria, Iraq, Yugoslavia and China. Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan and Nigeria follow closely. The United Kingdom comes 141st; a good score on a global basis but not so admirable when compared with other rich, industrialised countries - we are seventh out of 23.

Quote:

It scores 10 out of 10 on denial of majority rights because of gassing the Kurds.

A country with a wretched record of human rights abuse could score a maximum total of 190. Saddam Hussein's Iraq proves the winner of the unmodified list - which measures human rights abuses outside of their economic context - with an unadjusted score of 155.

http://www.algeria-watch.org/mrv/mrvrap/observe4.htm

Quote:

Oh, you mean like Bin Laden? Oh wait, he was a friend first. Iraq? Friends, then enemy

Answers

1.

Quote:

Whether the al-Qaeda attacks are "blowback" from the American CIA's Operation Cyclone to help the Afghan mujahideen is a matter of some debate. Robin Cook, former member of the British House of Commons and Foreign Secretary from 1997-2001, has written that al-Qaeda and Bin Laden were, "a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies" and that the mujahideen that formed al-Qaeda were "originally ... recruited and trained with help from the CIA".[52]

However, CNN journalist Peter Bergen, known for conducting the first television interview with Osama bin Laden in 1997, calls the idea "that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden ... a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. ... Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently. ... The real story here is the CIA didn't really have a clue about who this guy was until 1996 when they set up a unit to really start tracking him."[53] Bergen and others maintain the U.S. aid was given out by the Pakistan government, that it went to Afghan not foreign mujahideen, and that there was no contact between the Afghan Arabs (foreign mujahideen) and the CIA or other American officials, let alone, arming, training, coaching or indoctrination

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda

2

Quote:

Iran 'liable' for Beirut bomb
A US federal judge has found Iran liable for the 1983 bombing of a US barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, which left 241 marines dead.
The ruling was the result of a suit brought by family members of the dead marines as well as those wounded in the 23 October 1983 attack, which was blamed on the militant Islamic group Hezbollah.

The marines were killed when an explosives-laden truck disguised as a water delivery vehicle rammed through protective barricades at the entrance of the compound entrance and detonated in front of the barracks, demolishing the building.

District Judge Royce Lamberth said that, based on the evidence presented, it was "beyond question" that Hezbollah and its agents "received massive material and technical support from the Iranian Government".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2951938.stm

Quote:

Khomeini fatwa 'led to killing of 30,000 in Iran'
By Christina Lamb, Diplomatic Correspondent
Last Updated: 3:55pm BST 19/06/2001

CHILDREN as young as 13 were hanged from cranes, six at a time, in a barbaric two-month purge of Iran's prisons on the direct orders of Ayatollah Khomeini, according to a new book by his former deputy.

More than 30,000 political prisoners were executed in the 1988 massacre - a far larger number than previously suspected. Secret documents smuggled out of Iran reveal that, because of the large numbers of necks to be broken, prisoners were loaded onto forklift trucks in groups of six and hanged from cranes in half-hourly intervals.

Gruesome details are contained in the memoirs of Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, The Memoirs of Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, one of the founders of the Islamic regime. He was once considered Khomeini's anointed successor, but was deposed for his outspokenness, and is now under house arrest in the holy city of Qom.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/02/04/wiran04.xml

3

mindmetoo

Joined: 02 Feb 2004

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:30 pm Post subject:

loose_ends wrote:

mindmetoo wrote:

blaseblasphemener wrote:

False flags are a tried, tested, and true method of operations for the CIA (and others).

Perhaps you can refresh me what false flag op the CIA has run that involves nuking cities, or at least the mass destruction of millions of american lives?

See Also:

Slippery Slope Fallacy

Well of course your question can not be answered. When was the last time millions of americans dies under any circumstances?

That is a fairly unrealistic question from all angles MM2.

No, it's not. His unstated premise is it's a reasonable leap from known CIA false flag operations to one that involves the destruction of a whole city of fellow citizens and an attack that will certainly bring the US economy to the brink.

mindmetoo

Joined: 02 Feb 2004

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 4:32 pm Post subject:

blaseblasphemener wrote:

mindmetoo wrote:

blaseblasphemener wrote:

False flags are a tried, tested, and true method of operations for the CIA (and others).

Perhaps you can refresh me what false flag op the CIA has run that involves nuking cities, or at least the mass destruction of millions of american lives?

See Also:

Slippery Slope Fallacy

So because they haven't done it in the past, it can't happen in the future?

anything's possible.

Sure. And rainbow ponies might fly out of my butt. How's the pudding? Warm, huh?

loose_ends

Joined: 23 Jul 2007

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 8:36 pm Post subject:

mindmetoo wrote:

loose_ends wrote:

mindmetoo wrote:

blaseblasphemener wrote:

False flags are a tried, tested, and true method of operations for the CIA (and others).

Perhaps you can refresh me what false flag op the CIA has run that involves nuking cities, or at least the mass destruction of millions of american lives?

See Also:

Slippery Slope Fallacy

Well of course your question can not be answered. When was the last time millions of americans dies under any circumstances?

That is a fairly unrealistic question from all angles MM2.

So can I use that logic for terrorists?

When was the last time terrorists killed millions of americans?

jkelly80

Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 8:56 pm Post subject:

From ABC News, dated May 2001.

"US Military Wanted to Provoke War With Cuba"

Quote:

In the early 1960s, America's top military leaders reportedly drafted plans to kill innocent people and commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities to create public support for a war against Cuba.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plans reportedly included the possible assassination of Cuban �migr�s, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and even orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities...

US citizens have been viewed as expendable in the past.

Quote:

America's top military brass even contemplated causing U.S. military casualties, writing: "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," and, "casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation.

Remember the Maine!

Quote:

The documents show "the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government," writes Bamford.

Civilian deaths are a means to an end, as far as the Joint Chiefs were concerned. But I'm sure no one has ever thought such horrible thoughts ever again since. God Bless America.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:08 pm Post subject:

Jill: you are citing RFK's antiCastro hysteria and attributing it to the American govt as a continuity thesis from the 1890s to the present? It does not work that way. Grow up. By the way, RFK ordered the Joint Chiefs of Staff to produce the so-called NORTHWOODS proposal, which is exactly what the cover-sheet says it is -- a proposal and not an actual course of action upon which JFK was prepared to embark. Remember, he nixed the idea once his brother presented it to him. And is that all you have got? NORTHWOODS? This proves to you that "the military-industrial complex" perpetrated 9/11 and stands poised to nuke a major American city? Please tell me you have something else to cite...

jkelly80

Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:22 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

Jill: you are citing RFK's antiCastro hysteria and attributing it to the American govt as a continuity thesis from the 1890s to the present? It does not work that way. Grow up.

By the way, RFK ordered the Joint Chiefs of Staff to produce the so-called NORTHWOODS proposal, which is exactly what the cover-sheet says it is -- a proposal and not an actual course of action upon which JFK was prepared to embark. Remember, he nixed the idea once his brother presented it to him.

Is that all you have got?

No. I'm not. What "thesis"? Is your body made of pretentiousness like others are made of water?

Here: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/northwoods.pdf
No "so-called" anything. In black and white.
It was proposed by Lyman Lamnitzer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and a military man. JFK and McNamara nixed it.

What should I grow up to be? A bloviating pedant who writes in an unnecessarily formal register, in order to impress...whom, exactly? Why don't you go back to pretending you're some kind of professor by solemnly pointing out how so many issues are "complex" and "multipolar", all the while fancying yourself some sort of macho Dorothy Parker with second rate bon-mots and witticisms? That's what you're suited for, anyway.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 9:48 pm Post subject:

jkelly80 wrote:

It was proposed by Lyman Lamnitzer...

It is Lymnitzer. And who do you think "Chief of Operations, Cuba Project" -- that is, MONGOOSE's White House director -- was, hmm?

Check out doc. no. 310 to see who I am talking about; not only was he Chief of MONGOOSE and all that it did, including NORTHWOODS contingency-planning, but it was clearly his m.o. to think this way...

mindmetoo

Joined: 02 Feb 2004

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 10:23 pm Post subject:

loose_ends wrote:

mindmetoo wrote:

So can I use that logic for terrorists?

When was the last time terrorists killed millions of americans?

Terrorists have shown a desire to kill as many foreigners as possible. I've not seen the CIA show a desire to kill as many Americans as possible to achieve a political end.

jkelly80

Joined: 13 Jun 2007
Location: you boys like mexico?

Posted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 10:24 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

jkelly80 wrote:

It was proposed by Lyman Lamnitzer...

It is Lymnitzer. And who do you think "Chief of Operations, Cuba Project" -- that is, MONGOOSE's White House director -- was, hmm?

Colonel Edward Lansdale. Jumped too soon, pony. We get it. You don't like RFK. Or the Irish. Or Catholics. Obviously. But you're letting that cloud your judgement. Landsdale provided the request to the DoD and the Joint Chiefs, based on a plan written by another CIA and Mongoose guy, William Craig. All of this was was signed off by Lemnitzer. You can try to spin this because of your emnity towards the Irish, or you can accept the facts. Like a man. This came from the DoD and CIA.

http://web.archive.org/web/20040417030823/http://www.parascope.com/ds/articles/mongooseDoc2.htm
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/index.html

"Bob Kennedy was in an even more aggressive, dogmatic, and vicious mood than the previous meeting"--Obviously the speaker was a disinterested individual, just like yourself.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9, 10, 11 Next
Page 4 of 11

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe