Only Blood Brings Freedom

[JerrySeinfeld]

I agree with the initial post - someone's gotta take out the whole region hardcore style.

Simlpe fact: take out Iran now or wait 20 years and take 'em on when they have nukes.

One of Ahmedinejad's favourite lines: "America is risk averse: that is to our advantage".

The anti war people are losing this war for us. We must as nations be on side with "the fight".

[Black Dog]

Simlpe fact: take out Iran now or wait 20 years and take 'em on when they have nukes.

Fallacy.

[JerrySeinfeld]

Simlpe fact: take out Iran now or wait 20 years and take 'em on when they have nukes.

Fallacy.

Nope. The only thing "stability" does is provide a docile environment for Iran and co. to continue moving forward with their plans.

[jdobbin]

I agree with the initial post - someone's gotta take out the whole region hardcore style.

Simlpe fact: take out Iran now or wait 20 years and take 'em on when they have nukes.

One of Ahmedinejad's favourite lines: "America is risk averse: that is to our advantage".

The anti war people are losing this war for us. We must as nations be on side with "the fight".

It would have to be a simultaneous nuclear stirke at Syria, Iran, India, China, Russia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Yemen and several other countries by the U.S. And just to be done with it Afghanistan and Iraq.

Then there will be peace in our time.

[JerrySeinfeld]

I agree with the initial post - someone's gotta take out the whole region hardcore style.

Simlpe fact: take out Iran now or wait 20 years and take 'em on when they have nukes.

One of Ahmedinejad's favourite lines: "America is risk averse: that is to our advantage".

The anti war people are losing this war for us. We must as nations be on side with "the fight".

It would have to be a simultaneous nuclear stirke at Syria, Iran, India, China, Russia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Yemen and several other countries by the U.S. And just to be done with it Afghanistan and Iraq.

Then there will be peace in our time.

Iran is the snake's head - it would be a good start.

[Black Dog]

The only thing "stability" does is provide a docile environment for Iran and co. to continue moving forward with their plans.

Yeah, forget about keeping the oil flowing, or, keeping markets open to Western capital... not to mention the fact that Iran itself can hardly be called "stable", what with all the different factions competing for control and the growing calls for liberalization. Western threats or, god forbid, an actual attack, play right into the Islamoninjaspacerobotzombies' hands..

[JerrySeinfeld]

The only thing "stability" does is provide a docile environment for Iran and co. to continue moving forward with their plans.

Yeah, forget about keeping the oil flowing, or, keeping markets open to Western capital... not to mention the fact that Iran itself can hardly be called "stable", what with all the different factions competing for control and the growing calls for liberalization. Western threats or, god forbid, an actual attack, play right into the Islamoninjaspacerobotzombies' hands..

Yes - you're right. Let's wait till Iran has a nuke, annihalates Israel and starts look at the USA as a target - I'm sure we'll be better off then.

Stability in the middle east is like frozen ice on a river: the top looks placid but there are seriouis currents underneath.

[Argus]

A religion that espouses the destruction of a whole race is not worthy of the designation and the respect that is generally accorded any Faith. There is no peace until much more blood is spilt. Hate will seek to destroy those who by their very existence show them for what they really are,Evil and Hopeless Men.Hezbollah supposedly means'' Party Of God''They are Devils in human skin.

So lets kill more of a religion to protect those of another religion? Come on man, too much genocide talk going on in these forums.

No one has spoken of genocide except people who apparently don't know what genocide is.

They seem to think that war = genocide.

[Argus]

I agree with the initial post - someone's gotta take out the whole region hardcore style.

Simlpe fact: take out Iran now or wait 20 years and take 'em on when they have nukes.

One of Ahmedinejad's favourite lines: "America is risk averse: that is to our advantage".

The anti war people are losing this war for us. We must as nations be on side with "the fight".

It would have to be a simultaneous nuclear stirke at Syria, Iran, India, China, Russia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Yemen and several other countries by the U.S.

Why?

[Army Guy]

A large portion of any Sealion force would have been paratroopers, with ships (or barges) transporting mostly armour.

Actually the planned to land over 160,000 troops, of which only one div approx 10 to 12,000 would be Paras, it would be later discovered that they would not have been able to muster even 1/2 of that due to losses in Holland..

Yes barges were to be used, River barges ones that would sink in anything over sea state 2 or as the british mildly put it a destroyer passing by at high speed could have sunk those barges, without firing a shot. each barge could only handle one piece of armour at a time, even those would not be the heavy armour such as tiger, hvy SPA arty,etc etc.

On 'Battle of Britain Day', Sept 15, 1940, Britain gambled virtually all of their available fighters. From "The World At War: The Reader's Digest Illustrated History of WWII (1989) pg. 54...

Not true, infact 11 group which was responsable for the south still had 672 a/c of which 570 were spit fires and hurricanes, add to this that 10 and 12 groups were well rested and at full strenght, yes they were up north, but when faced with an invasion could have quickly been moved south. The orginal plan which was almost put into action was to withdrawal the 11 group further north out of the range of german fighters...

As to the use of airfields, certainly they could use a field for take-offs and landings, but fuel, ammunition and repair equipment were not so mobile.

True but remember the airfields in the south were always being pounded, in fact alot of the smaller fighter sqns had already been dispersed to rolling fields, thier ammo in trucks as well as there fuel trucks. not in the qtys that were available at the perment airfields but enough to keep them going as for repairs they were already sending a/c north for repairs something that could have still happened.

Not many historians have anything good to say about the invasion plans. other than the fact they were Hilters dream of the week. with a very low chance of success.

My Webpage

My Webpage

My Webpage

[GostHacked]

Simlpe fact: take out Iran now or wait 20 years and take 'em on when they have nukes.

Fallacy.

Nope. The only thing "stability" does is provide a docile environment for Iran and co. to continue moving forward with their plans.

So it wil take Iran 20 years to get nukes? I thought they were an imediate and grave danger to the US. Or at least that is what I am being told.

I want to preemtively attack the US for they have nukes too. I am afraid they will use them on me or someone else I know. (laughable right?).

Sure go ahead and blow up Irans nuke sites. At the same time the US should be charged with cleaning up all the depleted uranium rounds from the A-10s. And all those small tactical (possibly nukes) weapons. Bomb them back into the stone age again then. That will win friends and solve this issue?

[JerrySeinfeld]

Simlpe fact: take out Iran now or wait 20 years and take 'em on when they have nukes.

Fallacy.

Nope. The only thing "stability" does is provide a docile environment for Iran and co. to continue moving forward with their plans.

So it wil take Iran 20 years to get nukes? I thought they were an imediate and grave danger to the US. Or at least that is what I am being told.

I want to preemtively attack the US for they have nukes too. I am afraid they will use them on me or someone else I know. (laughable right?).

Sure go ahead and blow up Irans nuke sites. At the same time the US should be charged with cleaning up all the depleted uranium rounds from the A-10s. And all those small tactical (possibly nukes) weapons. Bomb them back into the stone age again then. That will win friends and solve this issue?

Win friends? what is this a popularity contest? It's about good versus evil. Kill those whose intention it is to kill us....before they kill us.

[BubberMiley]

Win friends? what is this a popularity contest? It's about good versus evil. Kill those whose intention it is to kill us....before they kill us.

Are you a good guy or an evil guy?