Israeli Attack From Azerbaijan?

  1. As long as Obama is President we won't be drawn into a war over Iran. He doesn't have the balls.
  2. Iran knows if they launched a nuclear attack on Israel, the Israelis would turn their entire country into a flaming shish kabob.
 
  1. As long as Obama is President we won't be drawn into a war over Iran. He doesn't have the balls.
  2. Iran knows if they launched a nuclear attack on Israel, the Israelis would turn their entire country into a flaming shish kabob.

He doesn't have the balls? Gaddafi and Bin Laden are dead because of his orders to make them dead, dummy.
 
  1. As long as Obama is President we won't be drawn into a war over Iran. He doesn't have the balls.


  1. Dont count on that! Obama has Hillary buzzing in his ear, and she is the biggest warmonger there is....

    If Israel attacks Iran, fill the bathtub with water and put some money under the mattress.....all shit will break loose
 
US/western military occupation of Arab nations, as well as "the war with Iran" and other middle-eastern countries is motivated purely by seizing control of the oil assets within southwest Asia. Most political scientists and economists would probably agree with that observation.

Also remember that the profits of the military industrial complex and armaments industry depends heavily on a perpetual state of war. Much of the military actions we've seen throughout the world in the past 10 years is largely motivated by money and power.
 
Last edited:
Dont count on that! Obama has Hillary buzzing in his ear, and she is the biggest warmonger there is....

If Israel attacks Iran, fill the bathtub with water and put some money under the mattress.....all shit will break loose

Backing Israel in a war would piss off the Left. The Fraud isn't going to do that. He's a whore.
 
He doesn't have the balls? Gaddafi and Bin Laden are dead because of his orders to make them dead, dummy.

And never mind balls, what we need is a POTUS with brains enough to avoid a war with Iran. That would be an even worse, bloodier, more expensive quagmire than Iraq.
 
...
Also remember that the profits of the military industrial complex and armaments industry depends heavily on a perpetual state of war. Much of the military actions we've seen throughout the world in the past 10 years...

Spot on, Mike, but try about the last sixty years.

"Perpetual war for perpetual peace."
 
Spot on, Mike, but try about the last sixty years.

"Perpetual war for perpetual peace."

More than 70 years, if we start around the beginning of WWII. The M-IC is that old. The U.S. had a very undersized standing Army in the interwar period -- smaller than Poland's around 1930, I believe -- but, that had always been policy: Relatively small (for such a huge country) peacetime forces, readily expandable by recruits/draftees in wartime. But always a big Navy (comparable to the Royal Navy), and the USMC always ready for (and often engaged in) action. But, well, it seems now we've had the world's biggest, baddest, and most expensive standing Army and Navy and military establishment, continuously, ever since 1941. And it does seem to get (and need) occasional exercise, somehow.
 
More than 70 years, if we start around the beginning of WWII. The M-IC is that old. The U.S. had a very undersized standing Army in the interwar period -- smaller than Poland's around 1930, I believe -- but, that had always been policy: Relatively small (for such a huge country) peacetime forces, readily expandable by recruits/draftees in wartime. But always a big Navy (comparable to the Royal Navy), and the USMC always ready for (and often engaged in) action. But, well, it seems now we've had the world's biggest, baddest, and most expensive standing Army and Navy and military establishment, continuously, ever since 1941. And it does seem to get (and need) occasional exercise, somehow.

We have never had the worlds largest peace time army.
 
There have been plenty of profits for US-based and other multi-national companies in Iraq.

The major oil contracts in 2009 went to a range of non-American companies - BP, Shell, Italians, Russians and Chinese. The sub-contractors on the ground have, however, often been American. This article (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/17/business/energy-environment/17oil.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1#) outlines the involvement of Halliburton, Baker Hughes, Weatherford and Schlumberger, even where a Russian company has the upfront rights.

The first contract in the Kurdish region - in dispute between Kurds and central iraqi government - has gone to ExxonMobil.

During the rebuilding work in Iraq the Indepndent reported in 2007: 'The largest beneficiary of reconstruction work in Iraq has been KBR (Kellogg, Brown & Root), a division of US giant Halliburton, which to date has secured contracts in Iraq worth $13bn (£7bn), including an uncontested $7bn contract to rebuild Iraq's oil infrastructure. Other companies benefiting from Iraq contracts include Bechtel, the giant US conglomerate, BearingPoint, the consultant group that advised on the drawing up of Iraq's new oil legislation, and General Electric. According to the US-based Centre for Public Integrity, 150-plus US companies have won contracts in Iraq worth over $50bn.'

(http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...rom-iraqs-most-precious-commodity-431119.html)

It's not clear to me how anyone can say that US and multi-national firms have not profited from the invasion of Iraq.
 
Last year CNBC did a natty little slide show detailing the top ten earning companies from US government contracts - chiefly from defense. (http://www.cnbc.com/id/42494839/10_Companies_That_Make_Billions_From_The_U_S_Government?slide=2)

Heck, us Brits got a sort of a look in at 10th place with BAE Systems getting 6.1 billion dollars' of work. (The other nine got lots more than 6 Billion dollars' worth of work)

Of the others, while some like Boeing get more business in commercial work, some like Oshkosh and L-3 Communications are mostly reliant on US government contracts.
 
They better do it quick then because Putin is amassing troops in the South.



I posted something from the wiki dump of, oh gawd, what is that outfit's name..., that said that blown up rocket base was a joint Kurd and Israeli operation.
 
http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/02/the-wiki-stratfor-dump

On 11/7/11 7:54 AM, Benjamin Preisler wrote:

Code: IL701
Publication: for background
Attribution: none
Source Description - Confirmed Israeli Intelligence Agent
Source reliability: Still testing
Item credibility: untested
Source handler: Fred

Source was asked what he thought of reports that the Israelis
were preparing a military offensive against Iran. Response:

I think this is a diversion. The Israelis already destroyed
all the Iranian nuclear infrastructure on the ground weeks
ago. The current "let's bomb Iran" campaign was ordered by the
EU leaders to divert the public attention from their at home
financial problems. It plays also well for the US since
Pakistan, Russia and N. Korea are mentioned in the report.

The result of this campaign will be massive attacks on Gaza
and strikes on Hezbollah in both Lebanon and Syria.
 
Back
Top