- Joined
- Nov 15, 2018
- Messages
- 875
- Reaction score
- 59
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Stupid answer shows you have nothing.
Why embarrass yourself like this?
You are the one who have nothing
Stupid answer shows you have nothing.
Why embarrass yourself like this?
You are the one who have nothing
Is this all what you have? You can do better.
You are incorrect.
What else is needed?
You are the one incorrect
Incorrect.
What weapons of mass destruction did the US and UK provide to Iraq?
The question should be directed to the UK and the U.S governments, not me. There were reports that Saddam used Chemical weapons against the Kurds, where did these weapons come from? Or was it a false report?
The question should be directed to the UK and the U.S governments, not me. There were reports that Saddam used Chemical weapons against the Kurds, where did these weapons come from? Or was it a false report?
What country made up the bulk of military supplies to Iraq.
The Kalashnikovs and T-72 tanks give you a clue ?
YOU claimed the US provided WMDs.
YOU should be able to back it up...
Always i back up my claims
Do you back up yours
Your first sentence is clearly a lie.
USA, Chemical Weapons.... Got evidence?
You should back your claims if you have any
You keep posting polls and Twitter links
Cite your sources for that claim, please.
Question: If the United States government was and remains so monstrously corrupt, cynical and ruthless, as you claim, why would they not have fabricated reports of finding Weapons of Mass Destruction and perhaps have planted evidence of such weaponry being found in order to maintain an airtight casus belli? I mean, might as well go all the way, right? Wouldn't that have been the FIRST thing that a bunch of evil war profiteers with half a brain have thought to do?
You made the claim.
And what "polls and Twitter links" are you babbling about?
You don't write threads, but keep posting polls and Twitter links. You don't write threads express certain numbers of views that people can discuss with you. You are a prepaid propagandist, pay as you go.
the US desire to control the sources of energy and its transmission lines for geopolitical goals within the framework of the new Cold War and its conflict with Russia. And China.End
Okay, let me play devil's advocate. How do you live? Do you drive a car? Do you use consumer goods that are transported by trucks?
Without oil, modern society would cease to exist. No more food coming in from other countries. Can you grow/raise your own food?
Without oil and natural gas, our society would go back to the 1800s. Can you live like they did back then? Are you willing to?
Like it or not, modern society is based on who has the money. If you say that your country should stop taking advantage of other countries,
you are volunteering your country to become a third world country. Sorry, that's just the way it is...
What polls and Twitter links?
You keep claiming that.
What "polls and Twitter links" are you babbling about?
The ones you are posting. Your posts in this forum genius. You don't bother to write threads because you got nothing to discuss with people. You have no views or opinions about any of the events going on in the world. Your brain size doesn't allow you to do it.
And what is the point of citing known facts? Does Hilary Clinton admit hanging out with ultra-orthodoxy Islam since cold war days?
Its called burden of proof bub.
And what is the point of citing known facts? Does Hilary Clinton admit hanging out with ultra-orthodoxy Islam since cold war days?
I have to definitely reject this idea that Syria was always about oil. It ignores a number of different things and interests and is much too narrow-minded to the point that it oversimplifies a situation.
There are a number of overlapping interests with regards to Syria. On the US front, Syria is a major ally of Iran and friendly to the Palestinian cause. The US, in wanting to aid Israel and Saudi Arabia, while at the same time attempting to suck Iran in, funded terrorists in order to destabilize Syria. Initially the goal was to overthrow Bashar Al Assad, but as time went on and the chances of that decreased, they moved to just continuing the bloodletting as to suck up the resources of Syria, Iran, Hezbollah. These reasons are pretty similar for Saudi Arabia and Israel differs only slightly as it also has the Golan Heights coming into play as well.