• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US military pilots complain hands tied in ‘frustrating’ fight against ISIS

Status
Not open for further replies.
Montecresto said:
Whoa buddy, hold on one ****ing minute there. I never said anybody was "calling for the targeting of civilians".
Click to expand...

And I quote: "Advocating killing civilians to stop the Islamic State is your pipe dream" ... you make the disgusting claim that those who oppose you are advocating the death of civilians.

If telling you what you have said upsets you then I suggest being more careful with your language in the future.



The complaint seems to be that engaging targets is limited by the proximity of civilians to it, WHICH IS THE WAY IT OUGHT TO BE!! So I don't care if the Iraqi army doesn't like it, or if US pilots don't like it, I just hope that we continue to consider civilians when targeting Islamic fighters, and that these complainers don't get their way.
Click to expand...

The complaint "seems to be" nothing of the sort. The complaint is that the decision making process for clearance is slow as molasses because it is being fed through political channels. Their complain is that this dithering means that they are losing good opportunities even if they get clearance because the opportunity has passed by the time the political decision has been made.
 
jmotivator said:
And I quote: "Advocating killing civilians to stop the Islamic State is your pipe dream" ... you make the disgusting claim that those who oppose you are advocating the death of civilians.

If telling you what you have said upsets you then I suggest being more careful with your language in the future.





The complaint "seems to be" nothing of the sort. The complaint is that the decision making process for clearance is slow as molasses because it is being fed through political channels. Their complain is that this dithering means that they are losing good opportunities even if they get clearance because the opportunity has passed by the time the political decision has been made.
Click to expand...

To the bolded. Those are not the same. You are indeed advocating killing civilians to stop the Islamic State!!!!! I didn't say by targeting them, the target will be the Islamic State fighter standing right next to the group of civilians. Clever attempt young man, but no cigar.
 
Montecresto said:
To the bolded. Those are not the same. You are indeed advocating killing civilians to stop the Islamic State!!!!! I didn't say by targeting them, the target will be the Islamic State fighter standing right next to the group of civilians. Clever attempt young man, but no cigar.
Click to expand...

No, I am not advocating any such thing.

Also, do you have a comment on the second half of my statement?
 
Last edited:
Montecresto said:
Oh I'm very aware of the Jewish element involved in USFP in the region, seems to transcend administrations too. Paul Wolfowitz, along with Cheney, Kristol, and several other neo-conservatives put together PNAC which is explicit in USFP in the Middle East to shape the 21st century. Do you remember the policy paper that Wesley Clark shared with us back in 2003?
Click to expand...

It's been refreshing to get "Notifications" from you rather than another snarling Hasbarat whining about "Conspiracy sites" & not so veiled accusations of being an "anti Semite". They never answer questions as they're apparently programmed to evade, insult & obfuscate.

Yes, I remember he said that was an existing Israel-centric plan concocted by our treasonous gaggle of Ziono-Cons but I didn't know it had an official name......does it?

Long ago, I read about JINSA's "A Clean Break; A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" which is another plan which calls for the dismantling of those countries and Balkanization of the Region for easier domination.

Israel's "Oded Yinon Plan" / "Greater Israel" (1) agenda calls for the same thing. of course our gaggle of Hasbara Sock Puppets call it all a "conspiracy theory" As you already know, our Hasbarats are programmed to revile all Facts about criminal Zionist machinations as either a "conspiracy theory" from a "Hate site" used only by "anti Semites".

All of the psychological gargoyles behind these grisly & chilling plans all expect America's military to do the "Heavy Lifting" while Israel reaps the benefits.............what else is new.


Please let me know if the madness described by Wesley Clark has a name

Many thanks







(1) “The Yinon Plan, “Greater Israel”, Syria, Iraq, and ISIS: the Connection”
http://www.timesofpol.com/the-yinon-plan-greater-israel-syria-iraq-and-isis-the-connection/

EXCERPT "The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region."CONTINUED

(1) “The Yinon Plan and the role of the ISIS”
The Yinon Plan and the role of the ISIS | The Daily Star
EXCERPT “Like the western manufactured “Arab Spring” in North Africa, the ISIS project is a deception at its worst designed with hateful intentions to cause horrendous regional mayhem and destruction with military might for the creation of a “New Middle East” with Israel as the regional power in control of the region's oil, gas and water resources.

The present ISIS lightning war in Iraq is the creation of an illusion to initiate the fulfillment of a pre-planned agenda of the West in close alliance with Israel to redraw the map of the entire region as the “New Middle East.”

This is the Yinon Plan at work, which aims at the balkanisation of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region into smaller and weaker entities or states in order to ensure the dominant position of Israel in the region and the control of its oil, gas and water resources by the US-Israel nexus.
 
Montecresto said:
If we'd just accept the fact that we need to kill one civilian for every Islamic State fighter we could knock this out in half the time!
Click to expand...

Why don't you just accept that you're willing to trade a lot of dead civilians killed by ISIS for a considerably smaller number of civilians killed by coalition forces:

F-18 Pilot: "There were times I had groups of ISIS fighters in my sights and couldn't get clearance to engage. They probably killed innocent people and spread evil because of my inability to kill them, it was frustrating"

The Right Pundit: U.S. Air Force Pilots Not Being Given Permission To Engage ISIS Targets in Iraq (VIDEO REPORT)
Click to expand...

I'm sure you think you're a humanitarian, but in actuality you're misguided.
 
B'smith said:
It's been refreshing to get "Notifications" from you rather than another snarling Hasbarat whining about "Conspiracy sites" & not so veiled accusations of being an "anti Semite". They never answer questions as they're apparently programmed to evade, insult & obfuscate. Yes, I remember he said that was an existing Israel-centric plan concocted by our treasonous gaggle of Ziono-Cons but I didn't know it had an official name......does it? Long ago, I read about JINSA's "A Clean Break; A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" which is another plan which calls for the dismantling of those countries and Balkanization of the Region for easier domination. Israel's "Oded Yinon Plan" / "Greater Israel" (1) agenda calls for the same thing. of course our gaggle of Hasbara Sock Puppets call it all a "conspiracy theory" As you already know, our Hasbarats are programmed to revile all Facts about criminal Zionist machinations as either a "conspiracy theory" from a "Hate site" used only by "anti Semites". All of the psychological gargoyles behind these grisly & chilling plans all expect America's military to do the "Heavy Lifting" while Israel reaps the benefits.............what else is new. Please let me know if the madness described by Wesley Clark has a name Many thanks (1) “The Yinon Plan, “Greater Israel”, Syria, Iraq, and ISIS: the Connection” http://www.timesofpol.com/the-yinon-plan-greater-israel-syria-iraq-and-isis-the-connection/ EXCERPT "The Atlantic, in 2008, and the U.S. military’s Armed Forces Journal, in 2006, both published widely circulated maps that closely followed the outline of the Yinon Plan. Aside from a divided Iraq, the Yinon Plan calls for a divided Lebanon, Egypt, and Syria. The Yinon Plan also calls for dissolution in North Africa and forecasts it as starting from Egypt and then spilling over into Sudan, Libya, and the rest of the region."CONTINUED (1) “The Yinon Plan and the role of the ISIS” The Yinon Plan and the role of the ISIS | The Daily Star EXCERPT “Like the western manufactured “Arab Spring” in North Africa, the ISIS project is a deception at its worst designed with hateful intentions to cause horrendous regional mayhem and destruction with military might for the creation of a “New Middle East” with Israel as the regional power in control of the region's oil, gas and water resources. The present ISIS lightning war in Iraq is the creation of an illusion to initiate the fulfillment of a pre-planned agenda of the West in close alliance with Israel to redraw the map of the entire region as the “New Middle East.” This is the Yinon Plan at work, which aims at the balkanisation of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region into smaller and weaker entities or states in order to ensure the dominant position of Israel in the region and the control of its oil, gas and water resources by the US-Israel nexus.
Click to expand...
Did you run out of space for your ridiculous conspiracy theories in the ME forum? What does any of this "Jews run the US for their shady business" horse**** have to do with this thread, exactly?
 
Apocalypse said:
Did you run out of space for your ridiculous conspiracy theories in the ME forum? What does any of this "Jews run the US for their shady business" horse**** have to do with this thread, exactly?
Click to expand...

You would understand if you weren't... A JEW!!

Dun DUN Duuuuuuuuuuuu!
 
jmotivator said:
No, I am not advocating any such thing.

Also, do you have a comment on the second half of my statement?
Click to expand...

Then you do support commanders taking civilians into consideration, even if it means that the pilot has to idle for command, which may mean that the target can't be engaged that time, right.

The "politics" in the decision is the prudence of engaging the target given the proximity of civilians. It no doubt takes a number of people weighing in on the odanance to be deployed, what effect it may have on an adjacent fuel container, and what effect that adjacent fuel container blowing up may have on the dorm across the street with 50 Iraqi children in it. I would prefer to see people aiming before they pull the trigger.
 
Last edited:
Montecresto said:
Then you do support commanders taking civilians into consideration, even if it means that the pilot has to idle for command, which may mean that the target can't be engaged that time, right.
Click to expand...

Of course you take civilians into consideration, I never said otherwise. What you fail to comprehend is that the consideration doesn't stop at the blast radius of the bomb, but continues to the threat from the target to civilians. The pilot's complaint is that the decisions aren't being made fast enough due to the absurd layers of politics in the process in the engagement.

What you advocate would be like a police officer arriving on the scene of a school shooting, locating the shooter, calling in for authorization to engage, and then waiting while the mayor contemplates how an accidental errant bullet might effect his administration all while the shooter keeps moving from room to room shooting people.

The "politics" in the decision is the prudence of engaging the target given the proximity of civilians. It no doubt takes a number of people weighing in on the odanance to be deployed, what effect it may have on an adjacent fuel container, and what effect that adjacent fuel container blowing up may have on the dorm across the street with 50 Iraqi children in it. I would prefer to see people aiming before they pull the trigger.
Click to expand...

No, the politics is the indecision that ensures any conclusion will not be timely.
 
jmotivator said:
Of course you take civilians into consideration, I never said otherwise. What you fail to comprehend is that the consideration doesn't stop at the blast radius of the bomb, but continues to the threat from the target to civilians. The pilot's complaint is that the decisions aren't being made fast enough due to the absurd layers of politics in the process in the engagement.

What you advocate would be like a police officer arriving on the scene of a school shooting, locating the shooter, calling in for authorization to engage, and then waiting while the mayor contemplates how an accidental errant bullet might effect his administration all while the shooter keeps moving from room to room shooting people.



No, the politics is the indecision that ensures any conclusion will not be timely.
Click to expand...

As usual, you misrepresented what I advocate, which is that those responsible for target engagement follow protocol and not the pilots criticisms!!
 
Gaius46 said:
You ever hear of a soldier who didn't complain? Of course the guy on the ground is going to want more airstrikes. The more people on the other side that the air forces kill the less people he has to worry about. That doesn't mean it's the proper strategy. It may be - it may not be.

I agree with each of your statements. I would point out that, while I don't know for sure, I expect ISIS has little in the way of meaningful AA capability so our pilots probably aren't in a whole lot of danger. Our ground forces on the other hand should not be involved. It's an Iraqi problem. Their military needs to step up and take care of it's own problems.
Click to expand...

Of course complaints don't by themselves necessarily mean something but we have something called context. In context-ALL sides are complaining about the lack of US involvement. In context, we are losing ground daily. You don't have to be Napoleon to see theres a problem.

Lack of AA isn't the point-if something goes wrong up there and one of our pilots ends up in ISIS territory-he's going to end up in a ****ing video. You and I both know this.
 
Montecresto said:
Too ****ING BAD. IF We're going to kill civilians, to save civilians, then stop the god damn operation, now!!!!!!
Click to expand...

War has pretty much always meant civilians were going to be harmed. The US highly values the lives of innocents, and goes through great pains (and deaths) to minimize collateral damage. We could fight by Russian rules and bomb entire cities. We could fight by the arguably even more brutal Arab rules-and we'd be effective-but we dont.

But the FACT, is that war is dangerous for everyone.

If you are advocating for a theoretical ideal that has never existed, good luck with that.
 
US Conservative said:
If only we had a president who didn't surrender to terrorists,
Click to expand...

Good lord. Bombing terrorists is the same thing as surrendering simply because they won't bomb them in the way that you want them to?

What an asinine comment.
 
This is a logic fail, why do you have to engage in such mental gymnastics to make things "fit"?

Granted im no military general, here are the options that I see.

Continue with what we are doing-subjecting our own troops to risk, while losing to ISIS.
Withdraw completely-losing to ISIS.
Increase our air campaign-may slow ISIS, but by definition can't win without boots on the ground.
Place ground troops-which will increase the effectiveness of all forces, and will win if sustained.

Thats it-unless you can explain what other options we have (and they must be logical) this is where we are at.
 
If hiding among civilians is all it takes to avoid attack, then ISIS already won this war.
 
Apocalypse said:
Did you run out of space for your ridiculous conspiracy theories in the ME forum? What does any of this "Jews run the US for their shady business" horse**** have to do with this thread, exactly?
Click to expand...

American and european lefties always seem to have these bizzare conspiracy theories where its TEH JOOOOZE fault. :roll:

Serious question-are there Israelis who come up with this crap as well?
 
roughdraft274 said:
Good lord. Bombing terrorists is the same thing as surrendering simply because they won't bomb them in the way that you want them to?

What an asinine comment.
Click to expand...

When you choose to lose by responding with the only option that will fail (unless you are suggesting that air wars win conflicts) you are surrendering.
 
Gaius46 said:
The article is pretty much worthless as proof that we need to be bombing ISIS more even if it means more civilian deaths.

As evidence that we should bomb more the only quoted source is an Iraqi major. As I've pointed out before people on the ground do not have the entire picture and while from their standpoint decisions from above appear wrong when looked at in the context of the overall mission they, the folks on the ground, often are wrong.

There are no statements from senior Iraqi policy makers or even senior military people. Just vague statements which cannot be easy proved or disproved.

The article then goes on to point out that US experience has been that killing lots of civilians is counter productive. It angers the locals and is the cause for taking extra precautions now. That is a verifiable fact. It's one of the few that are actually in the article.

Looked at in that light - that is objectively picking apart the arguments it does not support your claim, rather it refutes it.
Click to expand...
__________________


I assume in your saying: "we need to be bombing ISIS more even if it means more civilian deaths."

1. That you mean "civilian deaths" of people far away whom you've never met and not your family

2. "We" implies that you are among those doing the bombing & will have to live with the memory of having killed unarmed, innocent children, women & men.

When I was in Iraq long before (1973) the Iraq War, I enjoyed the kindness & generous hospitality of the Iraqi civilians whose lives you consider so easily expendable. One young man sharing a Mosul city bus "kidnapped" me by insisting that I not leave until I'd memorized the Arabic symbols for the numbers we use. I spent about a week with his family while he showed me little known archeological sites in the area.

We used to write back & forth until the Iraqi War broke out & the Iraqi people were "liberated" primarily from life & limb. Well over 1 million Iraqi civilians have been "liberated" from life in this world & countless have been burned, mutilated & traumatized since the beginning of this ongoing carnage.

If anything, the US should be more careful not to become just as deadly to them as ISIS. If the US bombs them, then we know they'll be dead; if we forgo an opportunity to kill ISIS members, they have a chance of surviving.


I hope you'll reconsider your sentiments Re: "we need to be bombing ISIS more even if it means more civilian deaths."



Thanks
 
Apocalypse said:
Did you run out of space for your ridiculous conspiracy theories in the ME forum? What does any of this "Jews run the US for their shady business" horse**** have to do with this thread, exactly?
Click to expand...
_____________

I was responding to another writer on the ways in which the US got involved in Iraq in the first place but its' rather revealing that you would take offense at my disdain for "snarling Hasbarats whining about "conspiracy sites"

What does YOUR comment have to do with Americans in Iraq?

And

Where did I say: "Jews run the US for their shady business"?

Nobody honestly denies that foreign, Zionist lobbies are heavily influential in U.S. Mid-East policy. For example:

“QUIETLY LOBBYING CONGRESS TO APPROVE THE USE OF FORCE IN IRAQ WAS ONE OF AIPAC’S SUCCESSES OVER THE PAST YEAR.” AIPAC Executive Director Howard Kohr; N.Y. SUN JAN. ’03

If you're so desperate to slander loyal American critics of America's meddlesome Zionist lobbies, you should consider how you would feel if foreign lobbies were "Quietly lobbying" your Knesset to go to Wars not in Israel's best interest..


You need to freshen up your inventory of Hasbara Handbook responses from "that's just a conspiracy", "that's just a Hate site" & relentlessly howling "anti Semite"......The White Flag of debate.
 
Last edited:
B'smith said:
__________________


I assume in your saying: "we need to be bombing ISIS more even if it means more civilian deaths."

1. That you mean "civilian deaths" of people far away whom you've never met and not your family

2. "We" implies that you are among those doing the bombing & will have to live with the memory of having killed unarmed, innocent children, women & men.

When I was in Iraq long before (1973) the Iraq War, I enjoyed the kindness & generous hospitality of the Iraqi civilians whose lives you consider so easily expendable. One young man sharing a Mosul city bus "kidnapped" me by insisting that I not leave until I'd memorized the Arabic symbols for the numbers we use. I spent about a week with his family while he showed me little known archeological sites in the area.

We used to write back & forth until the Iraqi War broke out & the Iraqi people were "liberated" primarily from life & limb. Well over 1 million Iraqi civilians have been "liberated" from life in this world & countless have been burned, mutilated & traumatized since the beginning of this ongoing carnage.

If anything, the US should be more careful not to become just as deadly to them as ISIS. If the US bombs them, then we know they'll be dead; if we forgo an opportunity to kill ISIS members, they have a chance of surviving.


I hope you'll reconsider your sentiments Re: "we need to be bombing ISIS more even if it means more civilian deaths."



Thanks
Click to expand...

My friend I think you need to reread what I've written. I am not advocating that we increase our attacks on ISIS at the expense of the deaths of innocents. I'm arguing exactly the opposite. I'm arguing that the rules of engagement that keep pilots from firing without authorization, rules that save civilian life are necessary and proper.

I have not ever and do not now advocate that we kill ISIS at the expense of civilians.
 
B'smith said:
_____________

I was responding to another writer on the ways in which the US got involved in Iraq in the first place but its' rather revealing that you would take offense at my disdain for "snarling Hasbarats whining about "conspiracy sites"

What does YOUR comment have to do with Americans in Iraq?

And

Where did I say: "Jews run the US for their shady business"?

Nobody honestly denies that foreign, Zionist lobbies are heavily influential in U.S. Mid-East policy. For example:

“QUIETLY LOBBYING CONGRESS TO APPROVE THE USE OF FORCE IN IRAQ WAS ONE OF AIPAC’S SUCCESSES OVER THE PAST YEAR.” AIPAC Executive Director Howard Kohr; N.Y. SUN JAN. ’03

If you're so desperate to slander loyal American critics of America's meddlesome Zionist lobbies, you should consider how you would feel if foreign lobbies were "Quietly lobbying" your Knesset to go to Wars not in Israel's best interest..


You need to freshen up your inventory of Hasbara Handbook responses from "that's just a conspiracy", "that's just a Hate site" & relentlessly howling "anti Semite"......The White Flag of debate.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, AIPAC takes pride in their influence on US politics. I thought Obama was going to do a better job stepping on that scorpion. I thought he was going to do more when he came right out of the shoot with his early criticism of Israeli settlement expansion. Or when he promised to run the lobbyists out of Washington, damn has he been a disappointment.
 
Gaius46 said:
My friend I think you need to reread what I've written. I am not advocating that we increase our attacks on ISIS at the expense of the deaths of innocents. I'm arguing exactly the opposite. I'm arguing that the rules of engagement that keep pilots from firing without authorization, rules that save civilian life are necessary and proper.

I have not ever and do not now advocate that we kill ISIS at the expense of civilians.
Click to expand...

That was an unfortunate case of misunderstanding your position. I'm sure he'll correct it.
 
Gaius46 said:
My friend I think you need to reread what I've written. I am not advocating that we increase our attacks on ISIS at the expense of the deaths of innocents. I'm arguing exactly the opposite. I'm arguing that the rules of engagement that keep pilots from firing without authorization, rules that save civilian life are necessary and proper.

I have not ever and do not now advocate that we kill ISIS at the expense of civilians.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the misunderstanding & Thanks for your clarification. The last think the U.S. needs in that region is more bad P.R.

Unfortunately, there are still a few psychological gargoyles who believe in "Kill them all & let God sort them out" especially when it comes to Ops in the Islamic world.

“..... most Palestinians “were born to die—we just have to help them.”
Amiram Levin, former head of the Israeli army’s northern command


*Re: Palestinian Mothers "They have to die and their houses should be demolished so that they cannot bear any more terrorists.”
Ayelet Shaked Israeli MK



Thanks
 
US Conservative said:
American and european lefties always seem to have these bizzare conspiracy theories where its TEH JOOOOZE fault. :roll:

Serious question-are there Israelis who come up with this crap as well?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess. There is no country that is empty of these... 'special' folk, be sure of that.

B'smith said:
_____________

I was responding to another writer on the ways in which the US got involved in Iraq in the first place but its' rather revealing that you would take offense at my disdain for "snarling Hasbarats whining about "conspiracy sites"

What does YOUR comment have to do with Americans in Iraq?

And

Where did I say: "Jews run the US for their shady business"?

Nobody honestly denies that foreign, Zionist lobbies are heavily influential in U.S. Mid-East policy. For example:

“QUIETLY LOBBYING CONGRESS TO APPROVE THE USE OF FORCE IN IRAQ WAS ONE OF AIPAC’S SUCCESSES OVER THE PAST YEAR.” AIPAC Executive Director Howard Kohr; N.Y. SUN JAN. ’03

If you're so desperate to slander loyal American critics of America's meddlesome Zionist lobbies, you should consider how you would feel if foreign lobbies were "Quietly lobbying" your Knesset to go to Wars not in Israel's best interest..


You need to freshen up your inventory of Hasbara Handbook responses from "that's just a conspiracy", "that's just a Hate site" & relentlessly howling "anti Semite"......The White Flag of debate.
Click to expand...

Your comment per usual is nothing but a bunch of bizarre anti-Semitic/anti-Israeli conspiracy theories piled up together in a single post. Notice how you never use any mainstream source to back up your nonsense? Last time it was WRMEA and globalresearch and now it's Daily Star. These conspiracy theories are all made up by deranged poor souls sitting in their mother's basement and yelling about Jews, they have nothing to do with this thread. AIPAC is a lobby group just like every other lobby group in the US, it doesn't control the US and the US administration decides its foreign policies on its own as I hoped Obama's term would have proven to your type but I guess "Hasbara Jews Zionists yadda yadda yadda" eh.
 
Apocalypse said:
Yeah, I guess. There is no country that is empty of these... 'special' folk, be sure of that.



Your comment per usual is nothing but a bunch of bizarre anti-Semitic/anti-Israeli conspiracy theories piled up together in a single post. Notice how you never use any mainstream source to back up your nonsense? Last time it was WRMEA and globalresearch and now it's Daily Star. These conspiracy theories are all made up by deranged poor souls sitting in their mother's basement and yelling about Jews, they have nothing to do with this thread. AIPAC is a lobby group just like every other lobby group in the US, it doesn't control the US and the US administration decides its foreign policies on its own as I hoped Obama's term would have proven to your type but I guess "Hasbara Jews Zionists yadda yadda yadda" eh.
Click to expand...
------------------
Wrong again.

Since there's not a "Puerile, Fact-Free Personal Attack" Thread, this belongs in the Mid East, I/P threads from which you just slithered :

http://www.debatepolitics.com/middl...se-4-billion-per-year-starting-2017-a-11.html


My last sources used THERE were: Newsweek, Defense Tech, NBC News & US News which sent you scurrying over here with your Off Topic character slurs

“Israel Won’t Stop Spying on the U.S. - Newsweek”
http://www.newsweek.com/israel-wont-...49757***Cached
E

“Report: Israel Passes U.S. Military
Technology to China”
http://defensetech.org/2013/12/24/re...logy-to-china/

“Record number of Americans living in poverty”
Census Bureau says 43.6 million people in 2009, up near 4 million in a year
More Americans living in poverty - US news - Life | NBC News

“Netanyahu Has Rejected a Two-State Solution”
Netanyahu Has Rejected a Two-State Solution - US News
. . . . . . . . .

My last post HERE had to do with the difficulties faced by US pilots in Iraq & collateral damage


Now, either get On-Topic or respond to:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/middl...se-4-billion-per-year-starting-2017-a-11.html
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom