Iran threatens UAE over Israel deal

[Fledermaus]

The last sentence is just more of your propensity to invent in order to fudge and thus will be ignored. It's noted you ignored everything else on the list accept for the US assistance in targeting those about to be gassed. They knew he would use gas because that what they knew from early on he was using.

Your link supports what I said. We gave him Intel. Saddam CHOSE to use gas.

What dual-use technology aided that use of chemical weapons?

 

[Trippy Trekker]

Keeping it simple, as an American, I consider even the smallest hint or suggestion American military malfeasance currently exists or ever existed analogous to yelling "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater!
GW Bush popularized the terms "Axis of Evil" and "Coalition of the Willing".
I took a mandatory course in a Florida public high school 1971-72 called "Americanism vs. Communism". I know my stuff!

God Bless America! We keep the world safe with our military bases on foreign soil and our nuclear arsenal/stockpile as a deterrent. No one does military bases on foreign soil like the United States! No one does nuclear weapons like the United States!

Praise Trump's worldwide peace initiatives, particularly those in the Middle East! Stop making a fuss about a Saudi Prince sending a goon squad out with a bone saw. Oil makes the world go around! And the thing with Turkey, most Americans care little about Kurds. God chose the Jews as his favorite people. The addition of ACB on the USSC provides added protection to Israel's survival! USA USA USA USA!

Axis of evil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Coalition of the willing - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Despite recently closing hundreds of bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States still maintains nearly 800 military bases in more than 70 countries and territories abroad—from giant “Little Americas” to small radar facilities. Britain, France and Russia, by contrast, have about 30 foreign bases combined.

Where in the World Is the U.S. Military?

Over there.

www.politico.com

.

List of countries with overseas military bases - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not LOSERS and SUCKERS! Nope. Just saying..... you just might want to show American Military Might a bit of gratitude!

 

[oneworld2]

Your link supports what I said. We gave him Intel. Saddam CHOSE to use gas.

What dual-use technology aided that use of chemical weapons?

You fail again in reading comprehension.

The link states that the " intel " was given with the full knowledge that gas would be almost certainly used. It refers to a CIA cache of documents and statements from US service people that were involved and who confirm that the use by SH of gas attacks against Iranians had been documented throughout the war and were known to the US intelligence/military/govt etc etc. So you can CHOOSE to bury your head in the sand and try to dupe people into somehow believing these gas attacks, assisted by US satellite info, must have come as a shock and reasonable people can dismiss your ridiculous attempts at defending those that played a role in them and see you for the partisan hack you are,

Added to the list of things you are prepared to support/defend.............................. those involved in the successfulness of gas attacks on people. Ironic having read your comments on the use of gas attacks in the Syrian conflict .

 

[oneworld2]

Keeping it simple, as an American, I consider even the smallest hint or suggestion American military malfeasance currently exists or ever existed analogous to yelling "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater!
GW Bush popularized the terms "Axis of Evil" and "Coalition of the Willing".
I took a mandatory course in a Florida public high school 1971-72 called "Americanism vs. Communism". I know my stuff!

God Bless America! We keep the world safe with our military bases on foreign soil and our nuclear arsenal/stockpile as a deterrent. No one does military bases on foreign soil like the United States! No one does nuclear weapons like the United States!

Praise Trump's worldwide peace initiatives, particularly those in the Middle East! Stop making a fuss about a Saudi Prince sending a goon squad out with a bone saw. Oil makes the world go around! And the thing with Turkey, most Americans care little about Kurds. God chose the Jews as his favorite people. The addition of ACB on the USSC provides added protection to Israel's survival! USA USA USA USA!

Axis of evil - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Coalition of the willing - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Where in the World Is the U.S. Military?

Over there.

www.politico.com

.

List of countries with overseas military bases - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Not LOSERS and SUCKERS! Nope. Just saying..... you just might want to show American Military Might a bit of gratitude!

Where's the sick bucket when you need it?

 

[oneworld2]

Imperialists....

What a laugh.

Post WWII the US stood on the majority of Western Europe and most of the Pacific....

And how did our "Empire" expand during that time?

It didn't.

The Philippines was already on its way to liberty before the Japanese invaded. Every Western European nation restored same for Germany which remained occupied for some time. Japan restored.

Worst "Empire" building ever.

Ignorance of the age of empire in the 20th/21st century acknowledged as is the willful avoidance of the subject of US meddling and shaping of the carnage of the ME over the last 70 or so years.

Where we differ is that I don't try to defend or obscure the roles Europeans have played in this mess because I have no allegiance to flags/nations. You on the otherhand are compelled by blind nationalism to defend and support the actions of your nation and it's proxies free from any moral considerations

 

[Fledermaus]

Ignorance of the age of empire in the 20th/21st century acknowledged as is the willful avoidance of the subject of US meddling and shaping of the carnage of the ME over the last 70 or so years.

Where we differ is that I don't try to defend or obscure the roles Europeans have played in this mess because I have no allegiance to flags/nations. You on the otherhand are compelled by blind nationalism to defend and support the actions of your nation and it's proxies free from any moral considerations

Your speak of ignorance while using terms and phrases ignorantly.

You fail again in reading comprehension.

The link states that the " intel " was given with the full knowledge that gas would be almost certainly used. It refers to a CIA cache of documents and statements from US service people that were involved and who confirm that the use by SH of gas attacks against Iranians had been documented throughout the war and were known to the US intelligence/military/govt etc etc. So you can CHOOSE to bury your head in the sand and try to dupe people into somehow believing these gas attacks, assisted by US satellite info, must have come as a shock and reasonable people can dismiss your ridiculous attempts at defending those that played a role in them and see you for the partisan hack you are,

Added to the list of things you are prepared to support/defend.............................. those involved in the successfulness of gas attacks on people. Ironic having read your comments on the use of gas attacks in the Syrian conflict .

The link says we gave him Intel on troop movements. Yes.

Exactly what I said.

Intel on Iranian force location.....

Yep.

Now.... Dual use. How did dual use factor into this?

And please.... Show where I defended Saddam USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS. Especially in Halabja...

And my criticism in the Syrian conflict is the use of chemical agents on THE CIVILIAN POPULATION.

Ignorance of the age of empire in the 20th/21st century acknowledged as is the willful avoidance of the subject of US meddling and shaping of the carnage of the ME over the last 70 or so years.

Where we differ is that I don't try to defend or obscure the roles Europeans have played in this mess because I have no allegiance to flags/nations. You on the otherhand are compelled by blind nationalism to defend and support the actions of your nation and it's proxies free from any moral considerations

Your speak of ignorance while using terms and phrases ignorantly.

 

[Trippy Trekker]

Where's the sick bucket when you need it?

Sadly, what I consider parody shapes the decision-making policy of the United States government. I did a thread years ago on Diego Garcia.

This Tiny Island Shelters a History of Human Rights Abuse (Promoted)

One of America’s most important military bases came at the cost of forcing out an entire local population.

www.takepart.com

Sad too, that Congress authorized an invasion of Iraq. Crazy crazy crazy!

 

[oneworld2]

Sadly, what I consider parody shapes the decision-making policy of the United States government. I did a thread years ago on Diego Garcia.

This Tiny Island Shelters a History of Human Rights Abuse (Promoted)

One of America’s most important military bases came at the cost of forcing out an entire local population.

www.takepart.com

Sad too, that Congress authorized an invasion of Iraq. Crazy crazy crazy!

You are right, it is crazy and it matters not which particulat stripe is in office at the time. I am familiar with the plight of the Chagossians via the work of Mark Curtis and John Pilger. Dreadful and such a beautiful place once upon a time.

Respect to you for having the independence of mind to appear to be at odds with your own states propaganda system. Viva Trippy Trekker!!

 

[oneworld2]

Your speak of ignorance while using terms and phrases ignorantly.



The link says we gave him Intel on troop movements. Yes.

Exactly what I said.

Intel on Iranian force location.....

Yep.

Firstly, it's actually what I said that you cannot disagree with so you deserve no credit for the above agreeing and thinking you somehow do is just bizarre.

Secondly it ends without any acknowledgement that the US intelligence/military/govt were well aware throughout the war that SH was and continued to use gas attacks during the conflict. IE the likelihood he would use the information given him by the US to successfully gas his opponents in their thousands would have been no surprise to them. That's what the link confirms by using the documentation of the CIA itself. You continue to try to dupe people that the use of gas would have come as a surprise to US personnel involved in a bid to absolve them from the critical role in the attacks themselves.

Now.... Dual use. How did dual use factor into this?

Ah yes the common or garden ruse tactics you employ so frequently here

I allowed this to run without response because it is yet another ruse of yours. A distraction, a deflection etc etc. Nowhere did I claim that the dual use tech offered/supplied to SH was involved in prosecuting the gas attacks on his enemies. That's just your latest misrepresentation. Challenge for you............... show post where I claim such ? Failure to do so confirms my assertion that is a misrepresentation.

It was mentioned in the list of OTHER assistance given to SH by the US during the time he was throwing gas around like confetti. Along with credits that allowed him to buy arms. The assistance with third parties to supply weapons to him. His removal from the list of states sponsoring terrorism etc etc

And please.... Show where I defended Saddam USE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS. Especially in Halabja...

Another ruse/misrepresentation designed to fudge any discussion. They are coming thick and fast. Challenge two for you............ show post where I claim you defend SH's use of chemical weapons ? Failure to do so will , again , confirm your claim as yet another misrepresentation.

I said you are defending those that played a role in making those gas attacks on Iranian soldiers so successful IE US intelligence personnel that were actually telling him where they where and how they were moving. Your defence is , as ridiculous as it is , that they wouldn't have thought he would have used gas in those attacks. That has since been rubbished by the link provided by me.

And my criticism in the Syrian conflict is the use of chemical agents on THE CIVILIAN POPULATION.

Which infers you don't mind the use of gas so long as it is on soldiers/combatants............ wow, ....it's like listening to some early 20th century Stalin era military commissar.

Call me a radical but I am opposed to the use of gas on anyone and everyone



Your speak of ignorance while using terms and phrases ignorantly.
[/QUOTE]

 

[Fledermaus]

Firstly, it's actually what I said that you cannot disagree with so you deserve no credit for the above agreeing and thinking you somehow do is just bizarre.

Secondly it ends without any acknowledgement that the US intelligence/military/govt were well aware throughout the war that SH was and continued to use gas attacks during the conflict. IE the likelihood he would use the information given him by the US to successfully gas his opponents in their thousands would have been no surprise to them. That's what the link confirms by using the documentation of the CIA itself. You continue to try to dupe people that the use of gas would have come as a surprise to US personnel involved in a bid to absolve them from the critical role in the attacks themselves.


Ah yes the common or garden ruse tactics you employ so frequently here

I allowed this to run without response because it is yet another ruse of yours. A distraction, a deflection etc etc. Nowhere did I claim that the dual use tech offered/supplied to SH was involved in prosecuting the gas attacks on his enemies. That's just your latest misrepresentation. Challenge for you............... show post where I claim such ? Failure to do so confirms my assertion that is a misrepresentation.

It was mentioned in the list of OTHER assistance given to SH by the US during the time he was throwing gas around like confetti. Along with credits that allowed him to buy arms. The assistance with third parties to supply weapons to him. His removal from the list of states sponsoring terrorism etc etc


Another ruse/misrepresentation designed to fudge any discussion. They are coming thick and fast. Challenge two for you............ show post where I claim you defend SH's use of chemical weapons ? Failure to do so will , again , confirm your claim as yet another misrepresentation.

I said you are defending those that played a role in making those gas attacks on Iranian soldiers so successful IE US intelligence personnel that were actually telling him where they where and how they were moving. Your defence is , as ridiculous as it is , that they wouldn't have thought he would have used gas in those attacks. That has since been rubbished by the link provided by me.


Which infers you don't mind the use of gas so long as it is on soldiers/combatants............ wow, ....it's like listening to some early 20th century Stalin era military commissar.

Call me a radical but I am opposed to the use of gas on anyone and everyone



Your speak of ignorance while using terms and phrases ignorantly.

[/QUOTE]

I support giving nations Intel on enemy movement and locations...

As we have done for allies for generations.

Saddam chose to use gas.

Saddam.

We merely saved Saddam a reconnaissance flight or two.

And you brought in the dual-use technology as if it mattered.

Now you wish once again move goalposts....

But since you ask... I find the use of chemical weapons on the people of Syria and Halabja heinous acts....

Less so the Iranian Army because not innocent civilians and they are trained and (later) equipped for chemical warfare.

The difference between targeting civilians and targeting military is a foreign concept to you, eh?

 

[Luce]

Who initiated Gulf War 1 and 2 ? Saddam Hussein.

One for attacking Kuwait.

The other for refusing to live up to the surrender agreements made at the end of Gulf War 1.

#1, you're correct.

#2 was Donald Rumsfeld making things up.

 

[oneworld2]

I support giving nations Intel on enemy movement and locations...

As we have done for allies for generations.

Saddam chose to use gas.

Saddam.

We merely saved Saddam a reconnaissance flight or two.

And you brought in the dual-use technology as if it mattered.

Now you wish once again move goalposts....

But since you ask... I find the use of chemical weapons on the people of Syria and Halabja heinous acts....

Less so the Iranian Army because not innocent civilians and they are trained and (later) equipped for chemical warfare.

The difference between targeting civilians and targeting military is a foreign concept to you, eh?

Your ongoing defence of US personnel that assisted SH to prosecute successful gas attacks against his enemy is as expected as it is consistant.

Your attempts at misrepresentations of my words here have failed , epically ,and your avoidance of the challenges to back them were always destined to failure by definition of their falsity.

We get it , you cannot back your claims because they are built on falsehoods, so the only thing left to do is a good old fashioned dose of projection. You are ok with people being gassed too, says it all really.

 

[Fledermaus]

#1, you're correct.

#2 was Donald Rumsfeld making things up.

Donald Rumsfeld blocked the weapons inspectors time and again?

 

[Fledermaus]

Your ongoing defence of US personnel that assisted SH to prosecute successful gas attacks against his enemy is as expected as it is consistant.

Your attempts at misrepresentations of my words here have failed , epically ,and your avoidance of the challenges to back them were always destined to failure by definition of their falsity.

We get it , you cannot back your claims because they are built on falsehoods, so the only thing left to do is a good old fashioned dose of projection. You are ok with people being gassed too, says it all really.

I support the sharing of intelligence.

But please continue to intentionally misinterpret what I say.

But since you ask... I find the use of chemical weapons on the people of Syria and Halabja heinous acts....

Less so the Iranian Army because not innocent civilians and they are trained and (later) equipped for chemical warfare.

The difference between targeting civilians and targeting military is a foreign concept to you, eh?

 

[Court Jester]

Since Iran is so interested in nukes.... we ought to give them some.

 

[oneworld2]

I support the sharing of intelligence.

But please continue to intentionally misinterpret what I say.

But since you ask... I find the use of chemical weapons on the people of Syria and Halabja heinous acts....

Less so the Iranian Army because not innocent civilians and they are trained and (later) equipped for chemical warfare.

The difference between targeting civilians and targeting military is a foreign concept to you, eh?

Projection, as already shown. I challenged you to back your claims and you refused. There has been no " misinterpretations " of what you have said , that is your domain.


I would ask where you think you have been misinterpreted but given your track record of completely ignoring these types of challenge it would be a waste.

 

[Fledermaus]

Projection, as already shown. I challenged you to back your claims and you refused. There has been no " misinterpretations " of what you have said , that is your domain.


I would ask where you think you have been misinterpreted but given your track record of completely ignoring these types of challenge it would be a waste.

Intentionally misrepresenting what I say does not look good for you.

 

[oneworld2]

Intentionally misrepresenting what I say does not look good for you.

Doubling down on the projection only confirms that you cannot actually argue/defend your points and are thus forced to resort to misrepresentations yourself.

I have asked you to provide evidence to support your claim that you have been misrepresented by me and you have failed to provide it. Alongside that I have asked you , on numerous occasions , to show where I have accused you of certain things throughout the discussion.

On both counts you have failed to provide any evidence and continue with the childish/desperate tactic of projection.

#A man who has no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform is in no position to lecture others on what " looks bad "


. I'm sure anyone who has followed this exchange will understand, exactly , what has gone on and none of it looks good on you.

 

[Fledermaus]

Doubling down on the projection only confirms that you cannot actually argue/defend your points and are thus forced to resort to misrepresentations yourself.

I have asked you to provide evidence to support your claim that you have been misrepresented by me and you have failed to provide it. Alongside that I have asked you , on numerous occasions , to show where I have accused you of certain things throughout the discussion.

On both counts you have failed to provide any evidence and continue with the childish/desperate tactic of projection.

#A man who has no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform is in no position to lecture others on what " looks bad "


. I'm sure anyone who has followed this exchange will understand, exactly , what has gone on and none of it looks good on you.

Why lie about what I write?

Where have I stated i have "no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform" ?

I haven't.

My words......

I support the sharing of intelligence.

But please continue to intentionally misinterpret what I say.

But since you ask... I find the use of chemical weapons on the people of Syria and Halabja heinous acts....

Less so the Iranian Army because not innocent civilians and they are trained and (later) equipped for chemical warfare.

The difference between targeting civilians and targeting military is a foreign concept to you, eh?

Simple English.....

Syria and Halabja heinous acts.... Less so the Iranian Army

Less heinous =/= Not heinous

In other words... Gassing military BAD. Gassing innocent civilians BADDER.

Why do you lie?

 

[oneworld2]

Why lie about what I write?

Where have I stated i have "no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform" ?

I haven't.

My words......

I support the sharing of intelligence.

But please continue to intentionally misinterpret what I say.

But since you ask... I find the use of chemical weapons on the people of Syria and Halabja heinous acts....

Less so the Iranian Army because not innocent civilians and they are trained and (later) equipped for chemical warfare.

The difference between targeting civilians and targeting military is a foreign concept to you, eh?

Simple English.....

Syria and Halabja heinous acts.... Less so the Iranian Army

Less heinous =/= Not heinous

In other words... Gassing military BAD. Gassing innocent civilians BADDER.

Why do you lie?

Without misrepresentations and projection your posts are just a collection of bridging words to join the two.

You have made a whole raft of complaints in this and other threads about alleged misrepresentations but neglect to back them up when challanged while continuing to shout from a distance that you are somehow being wronged. It's hilarious to watch

I find the use of gas, whether that be on civilians of soldiers , to be a vile and dispicable act because I am consistant in my applications whereas you are forced, by base allegiances , to hop , skip and jump throughout. That too is amusing to watch.

Are you seriously still going to carry on trying to promote the ridiculous idea that the US people didn't suspect that he would use gas in the attacks they were helping him carry out ? Tens of thousands of Iranians, both civilian and military, were killed or injured by those attacks in case you were unaware of it and yet you have never even mentioned them, sticking only with what the propaganda system of your own nation compelled you to think about in Halabja or Syria and you expect to be seen as consistant on this subject ? lol

I have not tried do defend anyone who has used gas or taken part in the planning and execution of gas attacks, you cannot claim the same. Trying fo defend the crucial role the US intelligence agencies played in the successful prosecution of SHs gas attacks on Iranians on the grounds that they wouldn't have expected gas to have been used only shows the ridiculous levels you will go to try to absolve them from any cuplibility for the acts themselves.

Now you have been exposed, once again , for this type of faux moral posturing that is virtually always based on developing , in your own mind , the image you wish people to have about you being a consistant supporter of all things moral, you resort to your usual fudging and projection, interspersed with notions that you have somehow been poorly treated. Pathetic doesn't actually do it justice

 

[Fledermaus]

Without misrepresentations and projection your posts are just a collection of bridging words to join the two.

You have made a whole raft of complaints in this and other threads about alleged misrepresentations but neglect to back them up when challanged while continuing to shout from a distance that you are somehow being wronged. It's hilarious to watch

I find the use of gas, whether that be on civilians of soldiers , to be a vile and dispicable act because I am consistant in my applications whereas you are forced, by base allegiances , to hop , skip and jump throughout. That too is amusing to watch.

Are you seriously still going to carry on trying to promote the ridiculous idea that the US people didn't suspect that he would use gas in the attacks they were helping him carry out ? Tens of thousands of Iranians, both civilian and military, were killed or injured by those attacks in case you were unaware of it and yet you have never even mentioned them, sticking only with what the propaganda system of your own nation compelled you to think about in Halabja or Syria and you expect to be seen as consistant on this subject ? lol

I have not tried do defend anyone who has used gas or taken part in the planning and execution of gas attacks, you cannot claim the same. Trying fo defend the crucial role the US intelligence agencies played in the successful prosecution of SHs gas attacks on Iranians on the grounds that they wouldn't have expected gas to have been used only shows the ridiculous levels you will go to try to absolve them from any cuplibility for the acts themselves.

Now you have been exposed, once again , for this type of faux moral posturing that is virtually always based on developing , in your own mind , the image you wish people to have about you being a consistant supporter of all things moral, you resort to your usual fudging and projection, interspersed with notions that you have somehow been poorly treated. Pathetic doesn't actually do it justice

A whole lot of typing that doesn't answer the question....

Why do you lie about what I post?

Where have I stated i have "no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform" ?

 

[oneworld2]

A whole lot of typing that doesn't answer the question....

Why do you lie about what I post?

Where have I stated i have "no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform" ?

Scurrying away from questions people ask you to answer while demanding your own be answered, even if they are the result of outright misrepresentations of the views and comments of others is what you offer this forum and it is to its complete detriment imo

 

[Fledermaus]

Scurrying away from questions people ask you to answer while demanding your own be answered, even if they are the result of outright misrepresentations of the views and comments of others is what you offer this forum and it is to its complete detriment imo

Why do you lie about what I post?

Where have I stated i have "no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform" ?

Support or retract.














Crickets.....

 

[oneworld2]

Why do you lie about what I post?

Where have I stated i have "no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform" ?

Support or retract.

Okay let's go through this from the off instead of you demanding your own way again. Sound ok?

You mean Kuwait that was profiting from Iraqi oil by slant drilling into it's reserves ? The subject of Kuwaiti slant drilling was never addressed or even mentioned in the reply ...............only the mantra" it was Saddam". This is to be seen at every turn

another question/theme you have failed to address on numerous occasions........ " Nothing to say about the illegality of the second attack on Iraq ? "

Nothing to say on the differing rap sheets of Iran compared to the USA

All from the opening reply of mine to your opening post here.

There's a whole lot more of them same before you claim you have been misrepresented or your questions are being ignored. So........... off you go.........what of the above?

 

[Fledermaus]

Okay let's go through this from the off instead of you demanding your own way again. Sound ok?

You mean Kuwait that was profiting from Iraqi oil by slant drilling into it's reserves ? The subject of Kuwaiti slant drilling was never addressed or even mentioned in the reply ...............only the mantra" it was Saddam". This is to be seen at every turn

another question/theme you have failed to address on numerous occasions........ " Nothing to say about the illegality of the second attack on Iraq ? "

Nothing to say on the differing rap sheets of Iran compared to the USA

All from the opening reply of mine to your opening post here.

There's a whole lot more of them same before you claim you have been misrepresented or your questions are being ignored. So........... off you go.........what of the above?

Where have I stated i have "no problem with people being gassed so long as they are wearing uniform" ?

Support or retract.