If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Israel strikes Syrian targets. This is not a repeat from yesterday   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 374
    More: Followup, Syrians, Damascus, Reuters News, sectarian violence, Sunni Muslims, Syrian War  
•       •       •

6920 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 May 2013 at 10:28 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



374 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-05 12:30:14 AM

utah dude: give it back to Palestine.


They never had it in the first place.
 
2013-05-05 12:32:54 AM

Smeggy Smurf: utah dude: give it back to Palestine.

They never had it in the first place.


We could give it back to the Ottoman Turks.
 
2013-05-05 12:32:59 AM

Tatsuma: Another video of the strike, incredible stuff starts 18 seconds in

Holy fark.


I heard a lot of "Ackbar", I sense this may be a trap.
 
2013-05-05 12:34:12 AM

Begoggle: UNC_Samurai: They apparently hit an ammo dump.  The missile warheads all went up at once.

I wonder what was REALLY stored at that "fertilizer plant" in Texas.


West, Texas was as much as 270 tons of ammonium nitrate.  Go take a look at the 1947 Texas City Disaster - there was a fire, people came out to rubberneck, and the fire spread to a ship carrying 2,300 tons of ammonium nitrate, and that caught another ship with ANOTHER 961 tons.

581 deaths, including all but one of the Texas City Fire Department.  500 homes were destroyed.  $1.3 billion in inflation-adjusted damages.  It's considered the sixth-largest conventional explosion in the history of man - behind the Soviet lunar rocket explosion, the two White Sands Range bomb tests, the British test-bombing of Heligoland, and the Halifax ammunition ship explosion.
 
2013-05-05 12:35:12 AM

Tatsuma: Another video of the strike, incredible stuff starts 18 seconds in

Holy fark.


BEARSTRIKE

i25.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-05 12:45:07 AM

Gyrfalcon: Smeggy Smurf: utah dude: give it back to Palestine.

They never had it in the first place.

We could give it back to the Ottoman Turks.


If they can take it and keep it they can have it.  That's the way the world works.
 
2013-05-05 12:48:19 AM
I'm of two minds here.

One, I'm glad to see that someone is helping pull some pressure off of the Syrian rebels fighting Assad.

Two, Israel better not think that we're going to jump in there if Syria gets froggy.

Obama's done a great job with foreign policy thus far, with Libya being a prime example of how to orchestrate a military effort with minimal cost and maximum results with zero American deaths.  If we can do that with Syria, awesome.  If not, screw em, it's not worth one American life.
 
2013-05-05 12:48:21 AM
Primitive Biblical bignoses are killing each other. Again.

i18.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-05 12:49:16 AM
Look at that awesome fighter jet your tax dollars paid for, America.  Look at it.
 
2013-05-05 12:51:15 AM

God-is-a-Taco: zamboni: God-is-a-Taco: Hm, those voices sound identical to the ones I've heard in previous Syrian videos. I guess it's the same people, or they're lazy and re-using audio.

The Syrian version of the Wilhelm scream?

Ugh. Ever since I saw that youtube montage of that a few months ago I hear that everywhere. American Dad uses it all the time.


The Dean scream is starting to take its place.
 
2013-05-05 12:51:55 AM

FatherofWallaby: Tommy Moo: You're on your own, Israel. Don't you dare expect that you can throw a few rocks to provoke a full scale invasion, and that the United States will then step in and fight your war for you.

A full scale invasion from whom, exactly? The Syrians? The Optometrist in Damascus has other things to worry about.


FatherofWallaby: Tommy Moo: leevis: Tommy Moo: You're on your own, Israel. Don't you dare expect that you can throw a few rocks to provoke a full scale invasion, and that the United States will then step in and fight your war for
They are spending our money every time they drop a bomb, so I wouldn't be so quick to imagine that they are some independent military titan of the Middle East. If the U.S. stopped giving them $3 billion worth of military equipment every year, they would be sitting ducks.

Um, that's not how military aid works. The US doesn't *give* Israel anything. The way it works is we transfer money there, then Israel *buys* military hardware from American companies. If we stopped giving them military aid, that's $3 billion worth of stuff that American companies wouldn't be able to sell-leading to a loss of a lot of good paying jobs. It's corporate welfare that actually wroks for all concerned. Plus, we get the results of real-world testing.


How is that any different than us gifting them the military equipment? The fact that money has made an imaginary trip in a circle? It's no different if we hand them money and they hand it back to us for weapons, or if we just give them the weapons for free. U.S. taxpayers are paying taxes to build weapons to give to Israel so they can fight wars that the U.S. has no interest in. Yes, the people who make those weapons have jobs, but this is the same thing as welfare. The government should not be spending tax money for the sole purpose of creating worthless jobs that return no value to the taxpayers. Those people could be repurposed in fields that are beneficial to the taxpayers, such as infrastructure investment.
 
2013-05-05 12:52:20 AM
Tatsuma:
Yeah this is not true.

The US would have no need for any of that intelligence if its foreign policy was to mind its own business militarily speaking. Despite what the Fox News crowd chants nobody "hates them for their freedom". They hate them for interfering with sovereign nations on behalf of the business interests of a few obscenely rich people.

If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.
 
2013-05-05 12:52:29 AM
If it keeps advanced weapons out of Hezbollah's hands....then it was a good strike.

Kudos to Israel.
 
2013-05-05 01:03:05 AM

Ghastly: The US would have no need for any of that intelligence if its foreign policy was to mind its own business militarily speaking. Despite what the Fox News crowd chants nobody "hates them for their freedom". They hate them for interfering with sovereign nations on behalf of the business interests of a few obscenely rich people.

If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.


That ship has sailed. The US couldn't be isolationist even if it wanted to (which, incidentally, would be a global economic disaster). When the US doesn't "interfere" it is seen as biased because we "interfere" everywhere else. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
 
2013-05-05 01:04:55 AM

Ghastly: If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.


Sighing so hard right here. The rise of Wahhabism had nothing to do with America. Time to go to bed.
 
2013-05-05 01:06:47 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Ghastly: The US would have no need for any of that intelligence if its foreign policy was to mind its own business militarily speaking. Despite what the Fox News crowd chants nobody "hates them for their freedom". They hate them for interfering with sovereign nations on behalf of the business interests of a few obscenely rich people.

If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.

That ship has sailed. The US couldn't be isolationist even if it wanted to (which, incidentally, would be a global economic disaster). When the US doesn't "interfere" it is seen as biased because we "interfere" everywhere else. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.


Pretty much this right here.

If you want an example of how it SHOULD be done, look at how the global community dealt with Daffy in Libya.  It was a united regional/global effort with the US mostly taking a backseat role in providing aerial support and logistics while the regional authorities did their thing and the Libyan rebels did the actual on-the-ground fighting.
 
2013-05-05 01:07:08 AM
Muslims have been killing in the name of religion for two thousand years, but let's keep pretending it's because of America's support for Israel over the past fifty.
 
2013-05-05 01:07:38 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Ghastly: The US would have no need for any of that intelligence if its foreign policy was to mind its own business militarily speaking. Despite what the Fox News crowd chants nobody "hates them for their freedom". They hate them for interfering with sovereign nations on behalf of the business interests of a few obscenely rich people.

If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.

That ship has sailed. The US couldn't be isolationist even if it wanted to (which, incidentally, would be a global economic disaster). When the US doesn't "interfere" it is seen as biased because we "interfere" everywhere else. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.


Seeing as we've become the global military police force, the least we can do is charge countries when we intervene.  Why not take oil from Iraq and sell it ourselves to pay down the cost of the war?  We gave them freedom, they can give do their part and help foot the bill.
 
2013-05-05 01:08:03 AM

Tatsuma: Ghastly: If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.

Sighing so hard right here. The rise of Wahhabism had nothing to do with America. Time to go to bed.


Riiiiiiiiight.
 
2013-05-05 01:13:24 AM
Bad Hezbollah, you are supposed to hide the weapons among innocent women and children, that way when Israel strikes at your weapons destined to kill innocent Israeli citizens; the Israeli military is to blame.  By placing your warheads away from the civilian population, there is no way to raise legitimate outrage without "innocents" being killed in the raid.

Props to Israel, battle on brothers and sisters.
 
2013-05-05 01:15:29 AM

Infernalist: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Ghastly: The US would have no need for any of that intelligence if its foreign policy was to mind its own business militarily speaking. Despite what the Fox News crowd chants nobody "hates them for their freedom". They hate them for interfering with sovereign nations on behalf of the business interests of a few obscenely rich people.

If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.

That ship has sailed. The US couldn't be isolationist even if it wanted to (which, incidentally, would be a global economic disaster). When the US doesn't "interfere" it is seen as biased because we "interfere" everywhere else. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Pretty much this right here.

If you want an example of how it SHOULD be done, look at how the global community dealt with Daffy in Libya.  It was a united regional/global effort with the US mostly taking a backseat role in providing aerial support and logistics while the regional authorities did their thing and the Libyan rebels did the actual on-the-ground fighting.


True but if Libya devolves into a full blown civil war or if the current government falls and another Dictator rises in power do we bear any responsibility of that? Or was it simply enough to leave the country in rebels hands and just be done with it? And if things fall apart and the new government is worse than before should we then do something to take that government out?
 
2013-05-05 01:17:46 AM
Here's some red meat for those of you who enjoy completely baseless speculation.
 
2013-05-05 01:21:02 AM

Tellingthem: Infernalist: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Ghastly: The US would have no need for any of that intelligence if its foreign policy was to mind its own business militarily speaking. Despite what the Fox News crowd chants nobody "hates them for their freedom". They hate them for interfering with sovereign nations on behalf of the business interests of a few obscenely rich people.

If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.

That ship has sailed. The US couldn't be isolationist even if it wanted to (which, incidentally, would be a global economic disaster). When the US doesn't "interfere" it is seen as biased because we "interfere" everywhere else. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Pretty much this right here.

If you want an example of how it SHOULD be done, look at how the global community dealt with Daffy in Libya.  It was a united regional/global effort with the US mostly taking a backseat role in providing aerial support and logistics while the regional authorities did their thing and the Libyan rebels did the actual on-the-ground fighting.

True but if Libya devolves into a full blown civil war or if the current government falls and another Dictator rises in power do we bear any responsibility of that? Or was it simply enough to leave the country in rebels hands and just be done with it? And if things fall apart and the new government is worse than before should we then do something to take that government out?


Well, as recent history has shown, we're not just 'leaving it in rebel hands'.  The CIA and State Department are in there up to their necks, you can be sure, working hard to pay off all the local tribes/militias to get them to play nice and work with the new government.  Most of which has been relatively easy considering how god-damned grateful they were to see us coming to their rescue.

Now, does that mean that the government WON'T turn into an asshole government?  Nope!  But, you can rest assured that they have plans to cover pretty much every possible outcome in Libya.
 
2013-05-05 01:24:09 AM

Tatsuma: Ghastly: It's the worst kind of corporate welfare because in the end, apart from spreading more misery in the middle east it does nothing to benefit Americans at large. A few thousand people might have jobs but when it's all said and done the only Americans who truly see any benefit from this are the owners of the weapons manufacturers.

Yeah this is not true.


WHAT ISRAEL DOES FOR THE UNITED STATES and much more

Throughout the six decades since the re-establishment of Israel, an often repeated claim in made that "Israel is a draining liability on the United States." This claim is bogus and an examination of the facts hopefully will consign this charge to the trash-heap where it belongs.

Further adding to the problem are statements made by and the conduct of Israel's leftist leaders since 1993 create the false impression that Israeli-American ties constitute a one-way relationship. The impression is given that the U.S. gives and Israel merely receives and thus must constantly bow to "American pressure" as personified by the U.S. State Department.

The truth is that the relationship is a two-way partnership. For example:

• In 1952, as the Cold War got underway, U.S. Army Chief-of-Staff Omar Bradley called for the integration of Israel into the Mediterranean Basin area, in light of the country's location and unique capabilities.

• In 1967, Israel defeated a radical Arab, pro-Soviet offensive, which threatened to bring about the collapse of pro-American Arab regimes and disrupt oil supply, thus severely undermining the American standard of living. The U.S. gained valuable military information from analysis of captured Soviet equipment, including SAM-2, SAM-12, Mig-21 aircraft, and Soviet T-54 battle tanks. In fact, Israel gave an entire squadron of MiG-21s to the U.S. which was dubbed the "Top Gun" squadron and used by the U.S. Air and Naval forces for training purposes. Since 1967, Israel transferred captured Soviet weapons systems to the U.S. Pentagon after ever ...


That's a load of bullshiat right there.

Those 50,000 "jobs" you're talking about aren't even close to making up for the millions of manufacturing jobs Israel has propped up and stolen from us with said monetary and military aid. I use cutters every day that used to be made here in the US but are now made in Israel.

They don't deserve our aid, they don't deserve out military backing. They started out as terrorists and over the past 60 years have done little to improve their reputation. And if you even try to pull the Anti Semite card I will shove the menorah sitting atop my refrigerator right up your ass.
 
xcv
2013-05-05 01:24:52 AM
Apparently Israel has read a Prof. Vonnegut's "Report_on_the_Barnhouse_Effect"

Let the Assadians and Islamists kill each other with sticks and stones.
 
2013-05-05 01:26:42 AM

Ghastly: Tatsuma: Ghastly: If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.

Sighing so hard right here. The rise of Wahhabism had nothing to do with America. Time to go to bed.

Riiiiiiiiight.


Salafism (Or Wah'habism) was founded in the 1740's as the teachings of ibn al-Wahhab, and gained popularity in the late 1800's when the house of Saud began its rise to dominance of the Arabian Peninsula. Militant Wahhabism became the religion of choice in the 1960's as a way of protesting both the West and the decadent House of Saud's alliance with same, without actually severing ties with all the decadent money that came with their alliance with Saud; but to say "Wahhabism is the fault of America" is a bit like saying "drug cartels in Mexico are the fault of the Catholic Church".
 
2013-05-05 01:28:08 AM

Tatsuma: WHAT ISRAEL DOES FOR THE UNITED STATES and much more


Get the United States into wars like Afghanistan and Iraq, blackmail the United States in 1973 with worldwide nuclear war which resulted in the Oil embargo and helped foster a recession that caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands, cost the United States and Europe trillions of dollars and tens of thousands of dead people...I could go on...

The evidence is undeniable but they ride the Holocaust card and call anyone a Nazi Hitler farker who calls them out on this. They want a pile of sand that is surrounded by people who hate them based on a farking fairytale, go for it. Leave the rest of the world out of it. Scumbags.
 
2013-05-05 01:31:19 AM

bindlestiff2600: Lsherm: UNC_Samurai: They apparently hit an ammo dump.  The missile warheads all went up at once.

That was pretty impressive.


warporn  see how attractive it is
and better yet
 recomended by your superiors


Dude, you farked up the Haiku, if that's what you were going for.  I mean, you farked it up in spades.
 
2013-05-05 01:33:11 AM

Flissss: ...blackmail the United States in 1973 with worldwide nuclear war which resulted in the Oil embargo and helped foster a recession that caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands

...

Are you nuts? Israel was responsible for the Yom Kippur War? Israel threatened someone, anyone, with nukes? Israel is a member of OPEC (and OAPEC)? In what alternate parallel universe do you live?
 
2013-05-05 01:33:58 AM
Not to mention the U.S. would be balls deep in Iran right now if they had their way whileNetanyahu masturbated to the sound of American cargo jets bringing dead kids back to the U.S. to be buried. It's a giant welfare state that just keeps going "Gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme."
 
2013-05-05 01:35:18 AM

Infernalist: Tellingthem: Infernalist: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Ghastly: The US would have no need for any of that intelligence if its foreign policy was to mind its own business militarily speaking. Despite what the Fox News crowd chants nobody "hates them for their freedom". They hate them for interfering with sovereign nations on behalf of the business interests of a few obscenely rich people.

If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.

That ship has sailed. The US couldn't be isolationist even if it wanted to (which, incidentally, would be a global economic disaster). When the US doesn't "interfere" it is seen as biased because we "interfere" everywhere else. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Pretty much this right here.

If you want an example of how it SHOULD be done, look at how the global community dealt with Daffy in Libya.  It was a united regional/global effort with the US mostly taking a backseat role in providing aerial support and logistics while the regional authorities did their thing and the Libyan rebels did the actual on-the-ground fighting.

True but if Libya devolves into a full blown civil war or if the current government falls and another Dictator rises in power do we bear any responsibility of that? Or was it simply enough to leave the country in rebels hands and just be done with it? And if things fall apart and the new government is worse than before should we then do something to take that government out?

Well, as recent history has shown, we're not just 'leaving it in rebel hands'.  The CIA and State Department are in there up to their necks, you can be sure, working hard to pay off all the local tribes/militias to get them to play nice and work with the new government.  Most of which has been relatively easy considering how god-damned grateful they were to see us coming to their rescue.

Now, does that mean that the government ...


Well right now things are a little interesting at least. http://www.voanews.com/content/libya-crisis-healts-up/1653490.html

"Militiamen besieging key Libyan ministries say they won't release their chokehold on the government of Prime Minister Ali Zeidan until it fires anyone who worked for the regime of the late Moammar Gadhafi.'

And maybe we do have plans if things go south. But hopefully we wont need to use them. I'm just a little wary of celebrating our actions in Libya too much before things shake out. It could end up being a major disaster for the region...or a shining point...or something in between.
 
2013-05-05 01:35:36 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Flissss: ...blackmail the United States in 1973 with worldwide nuclear war which resulted in the Oil embargo and helped foster a recession that caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands...

Are you nuts? Israel was responsible for the Yom Kippur War? Israel threatened someone, anyone, with nukes? Israel is a member of OPEC (and OAPEC)? In what alternate parallel universe do you live?


I didn't say any of those things. Sober up or take a reading comprehension class.
 
2013-05-05 01:39:32 AM
I enjoy reading Tatsuma's posts, they let me know how people are being lied to now, how they will be lied to in the future, where they are being shepherded, and I get to see a degree of psychopathy in action that I haven't seen since I once visited a crocodile farm.

/yes I am LITERALLY Hitler
 
2013-05-05 01:41:09 AM

Flissss: Not to mention the U.S. would be balls deep in Iran right now if they had their way whileNetanyahu masturbated to the sound of American cargo jets bringing dead kids back to the U.S. to be buried. It's a giant welfare state that just keeps going "Gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme."


Please.  Israel has never been afraid to do their dirty work themselves.  Iran's ties with Russia have kept them safe in the past, and will likely continue to do so in the future, but if worst came to worst and Iran launched an attack on Israel, I don't doubt for a second that the IDF would jump into the fray with or without us to back them up.

At the end of the day the Jewish people have never launched an attack on the US, nor called for our destruction.  While there are plenty of peace loving and respectable Muslims out there, there are also a good number of them also call us the 'Great Satan' and wish for our demise, along with Israel's.

Given that, I'm behind Israel whatever they decide they need to do.
 
2013-05-05 01:41:20 AM
Pardon, Israel DID threaten to hit Soviet interests in 1973 with the explicit motivation get them involved if Nixon did not supply Israel. That really happened.
 
2013-05-05 01:42:54 AM

Flissss: Adolf Oliver Nipples: Flissss: ...blackmail the United States in 1973 with worldwide nuclear war which resulted in the Oil embargo and helped foster a recession that caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands...

Are you nuts? Israel was responsible for the Yom Kippur War? Israel threatened someone, anyone, with nukes? Israel is a member of OPEC (and OAPEC)? In what alternate parallel universe do you live?

I didn't say any of those things. Sober up or take a reading comprehension class.


I see what you said. I quoted it, in fact. The implications of your assertion were clear, I simply spelled them out. But, since you're choosing to play coy about what you meant, please answer these specific questions derived directly from your statement:

How, precisely, did Israel blackmail the US in 1973 with worldwide nuclear war? How, precisely, are the Israelis responsible for the 1973 oil embargo?

I can't wait for this...
 
2013-05-05 01:44:01 AM

TuteTibiImperes: Flissss: Not to mention the U.S. would be balls deep in Iran right now if they had their way whileNetanyahu masturbated to the sound of American cargo jets bringing dead kids back to the U.S. to be buried. It's a giant welfare state that just keeps going "Gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme."

Please.  Israel has never been afraid to do their dirty work themselves.  Iran's ties with Russia have kept them safe in the past, and will likely continue to do so in the future, but if worst came to worst and Iran launched an attack on Israel, I don't doubt for a second that the IDF would jump into the fray with or without us to back them up.

At the end of the day the Jewish people have never launched an attack on the US, nor called for our destruction.  While there are plenty of peace loving and respectable Muslims out there, there are also a good number of them also call us the 'Great Satan' and wish for our demise, along with Israel's.

Given that, I'm behind Israel whatever they decide they need to do.


The crew of the U.S.S. Liberty thinks you're full of shiat.
 
2013-05-05 01:44:27 AM

Tatsuma: This is bullshiat, you don't ever see Israelis dancing in the street and distributing sweets where there are news that children have been killed.


No, but we see them on Fark telling us that dead Arab children are merely "collateral damage" because, well, they're not quite human, are they, and certainly not God's Chosen Humans.
 
2013-05-05 01:45:49 AM

Infernalist: TuteTibiImperes: Flissss: Not to mention the U.S. would be balls deep in Iran right now if they had their way whileNetanyahu masturbated to the sound of American cargo jets bringing dead kids back to the U.S. to be buried. It's a giant welfare state that just keeps going "Gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme."

Please.  Israel has never been afraid to do their dirty work themselves.  Iran's ties with Russia have kept them safe in the past, and will likely continue to do so in the future, but if worst came to worst and Iran launched an attack on Israel, I don't doubt for a second that the IDF would jump into the fray with or without us to back them up.

At the end of the day the Jewish people have never launched an attack on the US, nor called for our destruction.  While there are plenty of peace loving and respectable Muslims out there, there are also a good number of them also call us the 'Great Satan' and wish for our demise, along with Israel's.

Given that, I'm behind Israel whatever they decide they need to do.

The crew of the U.S.S. Liberty thinks you're full of shiat.


OK, never purposefully launched an attack on the US.  War can be confusing, we've blown some stuff up that we didn't intend to as well.
 
2013-05-05 01:48:21 AM

TuteTibiImperes: While there are plenty of peace loving and respectable Muslims out there, there are also a good number of them also call us the 'Great Satan' and wish for our demise


There are just as many within the US who wish for its demise. You can't go declaring countries as enemies based on the opinions of a few citizens.
 
2013-05-05 01:49:59 AM

TuteTibiImperes: Infernalist: TuteTibiImperes: Flissss: Not to mention the U.S. would be balls deep in Iran right now if they had their way whileNetanyahu masturbated to the sound of American cargo jets bringing dead kids back to the U.S. to be buried. It's a giant welfare state that just keeps going "Gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme."

Please.  Israel has never been afraid to do their dirty work themselves.  Iran's ties with Russia have kept them safe in the past, and will likely continue to do so in the future, but if worst came to worst and Iran launched an attack on Israel, I don't doubt for a second that the IDF would jump into the fray with or without us to back them up.

At the end of the day the Jewish people have never launched an attack on the US, nor called for our destruction.  While there are plenty of peace loving and respectable Muslims out there, there are also a good number of them also call us the 'Great Satan' and wish for our demise, along with Israel's.

Given that, I'm behind Israel whatever they decide they need to do.

The crew of the U.S.S. Liberty thinks you're full of shiat.

OK, never purposefully launched an attack on the US.  War can be confusing, we've blown some stuff up that we didn't intend to as well.


The attack on the Liberty was 'called' accidental, but the evidence for it being a deliberate attack is considerable.  Look it up.

Israel attacked the Liberty with both air craft and naval vessels in a coordinated attack that lasted for a good long while.

So, yeah.  Nice guys, those Israelis.  Real solid dependable allies.
 
2013-05-05 01:50:29 AM

J. Frank Parnell: TuteTibiImperes: While there are plenty of peace loving and respectable Muslims out there, there are also a good number of them also call us the 'Great Satan' and wish for our demise

There are just as many within the US who wish for its demise. You can't go declaring countries as enemies based on the opinions of a few citizens.


I'm all for declaring the Tea Party enemies of the state and locking them up, but due process yadda yadda yadda.
 
2013-05-05 01:51:22 AM

God-is-a-Taco: Ugh. Ever since I saw that youtube montage of that a few months ago I hear that everywhere. American Dad uses it all the time.


It doesn't bother me as much as the woman's scream that is used all the time.  That one annoys the fark out of me, yet no one seems to mention it.  I'm guessing it doesn't have a catchy name.
 
2013-05-05 01:55:32 AM
Infernalist: 

The attack on the Liberty was 'called' accidental, but the evidence for it being a deliberate attack is considerable.  Look it up.

Israel attacked the Liberty with both air craft and naval vessels in a coordinated attack that lasted for a good long while.

So, yeah.  Nice guys, those Israelis.  Real solid dependable allies.


Conspiracy theorists believe all sorts of things.  Whack job theories aside, there is no motive for Israel to have purposefully fired on a US ship.  Being surrounded by hostile forces the last thing any sane nation would do would be to attack their closest ally.
 
2013-05-05 01:57:05 AM

Gyrfalcon: Ghastly: Tatsuma: Ghastly: If the US actually practiced what it preached there'd be very few people pissed with them and Wahabism wouldn't have taken hold in the Muslim world to begin with.

Sighing so hard right here. The rise of Wahhabism had nothing to do with America. Time to go to bed.

Riiiiiiiiight.

Salafism (Or Wah'habism) was founded in the 1740's as the teachings of ibn al-Wahhab, and gained popularity in the late 1800's when the house of Saud began its rise to dominance of the Arabian Peninsula. Militant Wahhabism became the religion of choice in the 1960's as a way of protesting both the West and the decadent House of Saud's alliance with same, without actually severing ties with all the decadent money that came with their alliance with Saud; but to say "Wahhabism is the fault of America" is a bit like saying "drug cartels in Mexico are the fault of the Catholic Church".


Wahabism was on the decline in the middle east  until the 1950s and would have been just something followed by the Muslim equivalent of "red necks" if it weren't for the US continually propping up puppet dictatorships for the sake of cheap oil. Like it or not radical Islamists are the result of US interference in the middle east. Had they actually practiced true capitalism instead of economic imperialism after WWII we wouldn't have the problem with Muslim fundamentalists. The more comfortable and affluent a society becomes the more secular it becomes. When people's lives are miserable they tend to become more extremist in their religious beliefs.

And I don't buy the defeatist argument that "well it's too late now, we've already farked shiat up" argument. The US could begin pulling back it's military influence in the world. If people don't want to buy/sell from you then fine, find someone else who does. That's the way capitalism is supposed to work. You don't bomb the shiat out of them and take their stuff or support dictators who rape their citizenry on your behalf.

For the US and Israel to sit back and shrug their shoulders and say "well it's not our fault Muslims are just an ignorant sub-species that only live to kill infidels" is ridiculous. This is a mess the West created and they're not going to be able to bomb their way out of this problem despite what the military/industrial complex says.
 
xcv
2013-05-05 01:58:33 AM

Infernalist: The attack on the Liberty was 'called' accidental, but the evidence for it being a deliberate attack is considerable. Look it up.

Israel attacked the Liberty with both air craft and naval vessels in a coordinated attack that lasted for a good long while.

So, yeah. Nice guys, those Israelis. Real solid dependable allies.


Just like the time the US strafed the shiat out of that Canadian convoy despite having the most modern air command and intelligence gathering force in military history. Or when the US smart-bombed that Chinese embassy, cause all those embassies look alike or something.
 
2013-05-05 01:58:59 AM

TuteTibiImperes: Infernalist: 

The attack on the Liberty was 'called' accidental, but the evidence for it being a deliberate attack is considerable.  Look it up.

Israel attacked the Liberty with both air craft and naval vessels in a coordinated attack that lasted for a good long while.

So, yeah.  Nice guys, those Israelis.  Real solid dependable allies.

Conspiracy theorists believe all sorts of things.  Whack job theories aside, there is no motive for Israel to have purposefully fired on a US ship.  Being surrounded by hostile forces the last thing any sane nation would do would be to attack their closest ally.


The crew of the Liberty are/were conspiracy theorist whackjobs?

fark you, dude.
 
2013-05-05 02:01:47 AM

xcv: Infernalist: The attack on the Liberty was 'called' accidental, but the evidence for it being a deliberate attack is considerable. Look it up.

Israel attacked the Liberty with both air craft and naval vessels in a coordinated attack that lasted for a good long while.

So, yeah. Nice guys, those Israelis. Real solid dependable allies.

Just like the time the US strafed the shiat out of that Canadian convoy despite having the most modern air command and intelligence gathering force in military history. Or when the US smart-bombed that Chinese embassy, cause all those embassies look alike or something.


Notice the part where I mentioned that the Israeli attack on the Liberty went on for a considerable amount of time.

It wasn't a single torpedo or strafing or bombing run.  It was a sustained attack that went on for a bit while the Liberty crew frantically radioed their identity openly.

And then there's the fact that it happend in INTERNATIONAL waters.

But, yeah, I'm sure it was all big misunderstanding.
 
2013-05-05 02:03:55 AM

Infernalist: TuteTibiImperes: Infernalist: 

The attack on the Liberty was 'called' accidental, but the evidence for it being a deliberate attack is considerable.  Look it up.

Israel attacked the Liberty with both air craft and naval vessels in a coordinated attack that lasted for a good long while.

So, yeah.  Nice guys, those Israelis.  Real solid dependable allies.

Conspiracy theorists believe all sorts of things.  Whack job theories aside, there is no motive for Israel to have purposefully fired on a US ship.  Being surrounded by hostile forces the last thing any sane nation would do would be to attack their closest ally.

The crew of the Liberty are/were conspiracy theorist whackjobs?

fark you, dude.


I can't even imagine what a hellish nightmare it must have been to have been aboard that ship when it happened.  That being said, an experience like that can also make you want to believe all sorts of things to try to justify the events.

Both the US and the Israeli investigations ruled it an accident.
 
2013-05-05 02:06:43 AM

TuteTibiImperes: Conspiracy theorists believe all sorts of things.  Whack job theories aside, there is no motive for Israel to have purposefully fired on a US ship.  Being surrounded by hostile forces the last thing any sane nation would do would be to attack their closest ally.


I have a battle fragment from that attack (piece of the ship) framed in my den. It was given to me by one of the ship's surviving officers. Spoke to him at length about it. He believes very firmly the evidence is clear it was the Israelis who attacked the ship.
 
Displayed 50 of 374 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report