Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You won't. That's the idea.According to the script that controls the sociopaths of the world, it will be Syria.
"Damascus turned to rubble".
Why? Syria has no oil, why would we help them?
I'm quite confident he'll be in office for another 5 years, and I'm even more confident that he'll bomb another country in that time period.
So on his watched we've had military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya to this point.
Who will be next? Iran? Palestine? Syria? If the new Egyptian government won't play ball will it be Egypt?
What do you think?
Iran has a strong, blooded military. So Obama won't do this "right thing" some place where he will have to read KIA reports.
Palestine has an ally in obama.
Syria? pfft, no oil and the government hates Israel. They are hands off. The UN, NATO, The Arab League have all decided that having Israel boxed in by hate is the best way to go.
Egypt will drop it's neutral stance twards Israel unless we keep bribing them to play nice.
By the standards set by Lybia for us to war on another country we should be in;
NOrth Korea
China
Ivory coast
Most of the rest of Africa
Somalia
Yemen
Iran
Saudia Arabia
Mexico
Columbia
On and on. Endless world war.
You won't. That's the idea.According to the script that controls the sociopaths of the world, it will be Syria.
"Damascus turned to rubble".
Why? Syria has no oil, why would we help them?
Read the scripts the scribes scribbled those thousands of years ago. Once it's destroyed ( likely by IsNtReal) the real fun begins and they introduce what they want you to know as the antichrist. Then you are 100% enslaved waiting for someone.......... who will never come.
Your masters follow the script to a T.
It really is a brilliant piece of work but once you see it for what it REALLY is. You can win.
I'm quite confident he'll be in office for another 5 years, and I'm even more confident that he'll bomb another country in that time period.
So on his watched we've had military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya to this point.
Who will be next? Iran? Palestine? Syria? If the new Egyptian government won't play ball will it be Egypt?
What do you think?
Egypt will be fine as long as they stick the agreements we had with them and don't mess around with Israel. Its hard to say, Iran has oil but we won't do anything to them as long as they don't fuck up royally.
Yeah my best guess is Syria, we attacked them in a small way a few years ago but that was right before Obama took office. So can't really pin that attack on him but we can the next one.
It's such a tough thing to figure out, who would've thought a month ago that we'd be bombing the hell out of Libya?
Egypt will be fine as long as they stick the agreements we had with them and don't mess around with Israel. Its hard to say, Iran has oil but we won't do anything to them as long as they don't fuck up royally.
Yeah my best guess is Syria, we attacked them in a small way a few years ago but that was right before Obama took office. So can't really pin that attack on him but we can the next one.
It's such a tough thing to figure out, who would've thought a month ago that we'd be bombing the hell out of Libya?
Thing is; We don't know who we are helping. And obama has declared gadaffi to not be on the 'to do' list. How do you make war with no intention of winning?
Yeah my best guess is Syria, we attacked them in a small way a few years ago but that was right before Obama took office. So can't really pin that attack on him but we can the next one.
It's such a tough thing to figure out, who would've thought a month ago that we'd be bombing the hell out of Libya?
Thing is; We don't know who we are helping. And obama has declared gadaffi to not be on the 'to do' list. How do you make war with no intention of winning?
We have done that twice so far in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I'm quite confident he'll be in office for another 5 years, and I'm even more confident that he'll bomb another country in that time period.
So on his watched we've had military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya to this point.
Who will be next? Iran? Palestine? Syria? If the new Egyptian government won't play ball will it be Egypt?
What do you think?
Iran has a strong, blooded military. So Obama won't do this "right thing" some place where he will have to read KIA reports.
Palestine has an ally in obama.
Syria? pfft, no oil and the government hates Israel. They are hands off. The UN, NATO, The Arab League have all decided that having Israel boxed in by hate is the best way to go.
Egypt will drop it's neutral stance twards Israel unless we keep bribing them to play nice.
By the standards set by Lybia for us to war on another country we should be in;
NOrth Korea
China
Ivory coast
Most of the rest of Africa
Somalia
Yemen
Iran
Saudia Arabia
Mexico
Columbia
On and on. Endless world war.
I wouldn't worry much about the rhetoric that could be taken as the US not supporting Israel coming from the administration.
As long as US taxpayer dollars and weapons paid for by the US taxpayer keep getting funneled into Israel than you can rest assured we'll still do everything they need and ask of us.
Thing is; We don't know who we are helping. And obama has declared gadaffi to not be on the 'to do' list. How do you make war with no intention of winning?
We have done that twice so far in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Third time's a charm!!!
Iraq to me is already a total failure.
What even is "winning" in Afghanistan now? We've already agreed to let some Taliban back in (who the leader didn't even know Osama was planning or executed 9/11) and Al-Qaeda is still alive and well they've just moved along as anyone with common sense would've anticipated.
Yeah my best guess is Syria, we attacked them in a small way a few years ago but that was right before Obama took office. So can't really pin that attack on him but we can the next one.
It's such a tough thing to figure out, who would've thought a month ago that we'd be bombing the hell out of Libya?
Thing is; We don't know who we are helping. And obama has declared gadaffi to not be on the 'to do' list. How do you make war with no intention of winning?
We have done that twice so far in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Iran has a strong, blooded military. So Obama won't do this "right thing" some place where he will have to read KIA reports.
Palestine has an ally in obama.
Syria? pfft, no oil and the government hates Israel. They are hands off. The UN, NATO, The Arab League have all decided that having Israel boxed in by hate is the best way to go.
Egypt will drop it's neutral stance twards Israel unless we keep bribing them to play nice.
By the standards set by Lybia for us to war on another country we should be in;
NOrth Korea
China
Ivory coast
Most of the rest of Africa
Somalia
Yemen
Iran
Saudia Arabia
Mexico
Columbia
On and on. Endless world war.
I wouldn't worry much about the rhetoric that could be taken as the US not supporting Israel coming from the administration.
As long as US taxpayer dollars and weapons paid for by the US taxpayer keep getting funneled into Israel than you can rest assured we'll still do everything they need and ask of us.
Obama can't cut of the money to Israel. If he did he would completly lose the media, or such a large chunk that is would be useless to run for re-election.
Thing is; We don't know who we are helping. And obama has declared gadaffi to not be on the 'to do' list. How do you make war with no intention of winning?
We have done that twice so far in Iraq and Afghanistan.
That's not 100%
there were plans, not very good one's in the 20-20 hindsight. But Iraq is done, aside from the painfully slow pull out. and Afg does have an end game idea. A nearly impossible idea of killing off the taliban.
but
They beat the idea of blowing up flying buildings and leaving a murdering dictator, that's wanted here, in charge should he 'win'.
We have done that twice so far in Iraq and Afghanistan.
That's not 100%
there were plans, not very good one's in the 20-20 hindsight. But Iraq is done, aside from the painfully slow pull out. and Afg does have an end game idea. A nearly impossible idea of killing off the taliban.
but
They beat the idea of blowing up flying buildings and leaving a murdering dictator, that's wanted here, in charge should he 'win'.
We never had enough troops to truly pacify either country, when one of our Generals told Rumsfeld that we needed 250,000 US troops minimum to successfully occupy Iraq, that General got put on retirement, everyone was so convinced the Iraqis were pussies and would be no match for our boys, and they would fall to their knees and welcome American Democracy, nobody envisioned that bloody struggle this would be in their country. In Afghanistan now we are giving up control of certain areas to the Taliban because basically, we don't have enough boots on the ground to control these areas and we know it. Thats a recipe for failure.
That's not 100%
there were plans, not very good one's in the 20-20 hindsight. But Iraq is done, aside from the painfully slow pull out. and Afg does have an end game idea. A nearly impossible idea of killing off the taliban.
but
They beat the idea of blowing up flying buildings and leaving a murdering dictator, that's wanted here, in charge should he 'win'.
We never had enough troops to truly pacify either country, when one of our Generals told Rumsfeld that we needed 250,000 US troops minimum to successfully occupy Iraq, that General got put on retirement, everyone was so convinced the Iraqis were pussies and would be no match for our boys, and they would fall to their knees and welcome American Democracy, nobody envisioned that bloody struggle this would be in their country. In Afghanistan now we are giving up control of certain areas to the Taliban because basically, we don't have enough boots on the ground to control these areas and we know it. Thats a recipe for failure.
It's all the PC bullshit!
War is brutal, ugly and the first victim is innocense, the next is the innocent.
You can't wage war in a nice way, no one in history has ever done so. EVERYONE uses overwhelming numbers giving their opponent no choice.
I can't recall the names. But the Persian leader of the famous 300 battle had an army that took 3 days to pass by.
Imagine that.
Most people that marched with him were defeated armies that never fought, they saw the size, did the math, and waved the white flag, then got in line.
We have done that twice so far in Iraq and Afghanistan.
That's not 100%
there were plans, not very good one's in the 20-20 hindsight. But Iraq is done, aside from the painfully slow pull out. and Afg does have an end game idea. A nearly impossible idea of killing off the taliban.
but
They beat the idea of blowing up flying buildings and leaving a murdering dictator, that's wanted here, in charge should he 'win'.
We never had enough troops to truly pacify either country, when one of our Generals told Rumsfeld that we needed 250,000 US troops minimum to successfully occupy Iraq, that General got put on retirement, everyone was so convinced the Iraqis were pussies and would be no match for our boys, and they would fall to their knees and welcome American Democracy, nobody envisioned that bloody struggle this would be in their country. In Afghanistan now we are giving up control of certain areas to the Taliban because basically, we don't have enough boots on the ground to control these areas and we know it. Thats a recipe for failure.
I'd watch Syria closely. If Obama doesn't want to get the OilWhore rep, something will need to be done because of the same atrocities being committed.
Syria has no oil, so they won't get any help.
The Debate: Did oil influence America's decision to invade Afghanistan? Were the true motives for war declared? Read our detailed report and sign the online petition for a public statement from the American government. TheDebate.org - Debating curren
They don't always have to have a direct connection to oil, an indirect one can be just as good.
The link has some frightening stuff on it for those who weren't already aware.
Syria has no oil, so they won't get any help.
The Debate: Did oil influence America's decision to invade Afghanistan? Were the true motives for war declared? Read our detailed report and sign the online petition for a public statement from the American government. TheDebate.org - Debating curren
They don't always have to have a direct connection to oil, an indirect one can be just as good.
The link has some frightening stuff on it for those who weren't already aware.
Afghanistan doesn't even have oil...
Syria has no oil, so they won't get any help.
The Debate: Did oil influence America's decision to invade Afghanistan? Were the true motives for war declared? Read our detailed report and sign the online petition for a public statement from the American government. TheDebate.org - Debating curren
They don't always have to have a direct connection to oil, an indirect one can be just as good.
The link has some frightening stuff on it for those who weren't already aware.
Afghanistan doesn't even have oil...
WASHINGTON The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.
The previously unknown deposits including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.
An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the Saudi Arabia of lithium, a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and BlackBerrys.
The vast scale of Afghanistans mineral wealth was discovered by a small team of Pentagon officials and American geologists. The Afghan government and President Hamid Karzai were recently briefed, American officials said.
While it could take many years to develop a mining industry, the potential is so great that officials and executives in the industry believe it could attract heavy investment even before mines are profitable, providing the possibility of jobs that could distract from generations of war.
There is stunning potential here, Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the United States Central Command, said in an interview on Saturday. There are a lot of ifs, of course, but I think potentially it is hugely significant.
The value of the newly discovered mineral deposits dwarfs the size of Afghanistans existing war-bedraggled economy, which is based largely on opium production and narcotics trafficking as well as aid from the United States and other industrialized countries. Afghanistans gross domestic product is only about $12 billion.
This will become the backbone of the Afghan economy, said Jalil Jumriany, an adviser to the Afghan minister of mines.
American and Afghan officials agreed to discuss the mineral discoveries at a difficult moment in the war in Afghanistan. The American-led offensive in Marja in southern Afghanistan has achieved only limited gains. Meanwhile, charges of corruption and favoritism continue to plague the Karzai government, and Mr. Karzai seems increasingly embittered toward the White House.
So the Obama administration is hungry for some positive news to come out of Afghanistan. Yet the American officials also recognize that the mineral discoveries will almost certainly have a double-edged impact.
Instead of bringing peace, the newfound mineral wealth could lead the Taliban to battle even more fiercely to regain control of the country.
The corruption that is already rampant in the Karzai government could also be amplified by the new wealth, particularly if a handful of well-connected oligarchs, some with personal ties to the president, gain control of the resources. Just last year, Afghanistans minister of mines was accused by American officials of accepting a $30 million bribe to award China the rights to develop its copper mine. The minister has since been replaced.
Endless fights could erupt between the central government in Kabul and provincial and tribal leaders in mineral-rich districts. Afghanistan has a national mining law, written with the help of advisers from the World Bank, but it has never faced a serious challenge.
No one has tested that law; no one knows how it will stand up in a fight between the central government and the provinces, observed Paul A. Brinkley, deputy undersecretary of defense for business and leader of the Pentagon team that discovered the deposits.
