US threatens to take actions against Iran

[[email protected]]

US threatens to take actions against Iran


http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=30888

[Rob Arndt]

No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
would like to see Damascus up in smoke?

Rob

[Tiger]

Rob Arndt wrote:

>No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
>would like to see Damascus up in smoke?
>
>Rob
>
>
>
Wouldn't miss it a bit...... ;-)

[Jack Linthicum]

Rob Arndt wrote:
> No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
> would like to see Damascus up in smoke?
>
> Rob

As I understand it Assad is from Aleppo, the usual back and forth is
between Homs and Aleppo. Damacus is like Washington, DC the rulers only
go there to rule their power base is in the home town. Nuke Aleppo and
see how that works.

[meta man]

Why would it be OK to nuke Aleppo or Damascus but not Washington DC or
New York?


Jack Linthicum wrote:
> Rob Arndt wrote:
>
>>No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
>>would like to see Damascus up in smoke?
>>
>>Rob
>
>
> As I understand it Assad is from Aleppo, the usual back and forth is
> between Homs and Aleppo. Damacus is like Washington, DC the rulers only
> go there to rule their power base is in the home town. Nuke Aleppo and
> see how that works.
>

[Jack Linthicum]

meta man wrote:
> Why would it be OK to nuke Aleppo or Damascus but not Washington DC
or
> New York?
>
>
> Jack Linthicum wrote:
> > Rob Arndt wrote:
> >
> >>No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
> >>would like to see Damascus up in smoke?
> >>
> >>Rob
> >
> >
> > As I understand it Assad is from Aleppo, the usual back and forth
is
> > between Homs and Aleppo. Damacus is like Washington, DC the rulers
only
> > go there to rule their power base is in the home town. Nuke Aleppo
and
> > see how that works.
> >



We have a large number of people who post regularly on this thread
whose basic theme is either kick the **** out an individual, bomb his
home town or eradicate the country/people he professes to be a part of.
I just though it would be fun to see if any of the idiocy was valid. I
used to work with an Air Force Colonel who usually wore civilian garb
to work. He had a very stylish lapel pin in the shape of the old peace
sysmbol, slightly modified with little jet engines to make it resemble
a B-52, his airplane. The slogan on the pin was "drop it".

[Rob Arndt]

Just for you personal enlightenment let me comment on the "Peace"
symbol history.
First of all it doesn't represent peace at all. It was the CND
(Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) symbol and the artist who drew it
came upon the idea one night of a "stick man" bowing down in tortured
submission (arms spread out before him) before he was killed. That's
what the symbol is- it represents hopelessness.
To Christians it represents an upside-down cross with the arms broken,
symbolizing Jesus love for humanity at the cross with his arms
outstretched for humanity turned upside down- rejected, anti-christ.
To early war demonstartors the symbol DID represent SAC's B-52s minus
the engines. They were the nuclear bombers that would end humanity.
And to gun owners the symbol now represents the "Footprint of the
American Chicken"- a dumb, ignorant animal (liberal) who is yellow
(coward). An animal that needs to be slaughtered. Popular with
survivalists, especially those in Texas (Waco) and Idaho (Weaver
Incident).
Thought you might want to take a course in symbology...

Rob

[Tiger]

Rob Arndt wrote:

>Just for you personal enlightenment let me comment on the "Peace"
>symbol history.
>First of all it doesn't represent peace at all. It was the CND
>(Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) symbol and the artist who drew it
>came upon the idea one night of a "stick man" bowing down in tortured
>submission (arms spread out before him) before he was killed. That's
>what the symbol is- it represents hopelessness.
>To Christians it represents an upside-down cross with the arms broken,
>symbolizing Jesus love for humanity at the cross with his arms
>outstretched for humanity turned upside down- rejected, anti-christ.
>To early war demonstrators the symbol DID represent SAC's B-52s minus
>the engines. They were the nuclear bombers that would end humanity.
>And to gun owners the symbol now represents the "Footprint of the
>American Chicken"- a dumb, ignorant animal (liberal) who is yellow
>(coward). An animal that needs to be slaughtered. Popular with
>survivalists, especially those in Texas (Waco) and Idaho (Weaver
>Incident).
>Thought you might want to take a course in symbology...
>
>Rob
>
>
>
Now I can answer the $500,000 question on "Who wants to be a
Millionaire." :-D C, is my final answer......

[old hoodoo]

Rob Arndt wrote:
> No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
> would like to see Damascus up in smoke?
>
> Rob
>

We're off on the road to Damascus! Would make a great Bob Hope/Bing
Crosby sequel to the road movies. Story of two imbedded correspondent's
who find adventure, romance, and comedy on the road to Damascus while
searching for the dread WMD's. The dry Wolf Blitzer could reprise the
Bing Crosby role ...and who is funny enough to play Bob Hope?
Geraldo???? Maybe Khadafi could put in a cameo role as a sidekick or a
camel.

No, Tony Blair and George Bush cannot be in the film. That would be too
much ham in one movie. Ok, I guess they could be in one or two scenes
for additional comic relief. They could be running hither and there
turning up stones at random, saying, "Just one more stone and we will
find them."

As a sequel can have the Road to Tehran, then the Road to Pyongyang
(that's a mouthfull)....then the crowning sequel....the Road to Peking!

[Komin]

I thought the Pakistani fighter pilots are working for the Syrian and
the Jordanian Air force,

May be they have changed ?

The US will have lots of problems recruiting new human spies fro the
CIA, and NSA, in the Arab countries,

these new spies , if they are Arabes,
will be controlled by the Jewish elements inside the US administration
..
Arabes , if they are really Arabs, don' t like to work for a Pro-Jewish
government of USA

[Jack Linthicum]

old hoodoo wrote:
> Rob Arndt wrote:
> > No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
> > would like to see Damascus up in smoke?
> >
> > Rob
> >
>
> We're off on the road to Damascus! Would make a great Bob Hope/Bing

> Crosby sequel to the road movies. Story of two imbedded
correspondent's
> who find adventure, romance, and comedy on the road to Damascus while

> searching for the dread WMD's. The dry Wolf Blitzer could reprise the

> Bing Crosby role ...and who is funny enough to play Bob Hope?
> Geraldo???? Maybe Khadafi could put in a cameo role as a sidekick
or a
> camel.
>


I have never heard Wolf sing, although I have heard wolves sing. How
about the ever-nominated Jon Stewart as the Bob Hope role? And he has a
background in fake news. He would fit in with this news group, as he
told Brian Williams the other night his group never checks facts.

> No, Tony Blair and George Bush cannot be in the film. That would be
too
> much ham in one movie. Ok, I guess they could be in one or two scenes

> for additional comic relief. They could be running hither and there
> turning up stones at random, saying, "Just one more stone and we will

> find them."

What would an overdose of ham do to a Moslem-themed picture? I am
appalled that the Coalition, which my Rogets' tells me can be in
cahoots, haven't come up with a WMD even if they had to bring it in
from outside.
>
> As a sequel can have the Road to Tehran, then the Road to Pyongyang
> (that's a mouthfull)....then the crowning sequel....the Road to
Peking!

Perhaps we could outsource and pay the Chinese to invade themselves.

[Kevin Brooks]

"Jack Linthicum" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> old hoodoo wrote:
>> Rob Arndt wrote:
>> > No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
>> > would like to see Damascus up in smoke?
>> >
>> > Rob
>> >
>>
>> We're off on the road to Damascus! Would make a great Bob Hope/Bing
>
>> Crosby sequel to the road movies. Story of two imbedded
> correspondent's
>> who find adventure, romance, and comedy on the road to Damascus while
>
>> searching for the dread WMD's. The dry Wolf Blitzer could reprise the
>
>> Bing Crosby role ...and who is funny enough to play Bob Hope?
>> Geraldo???? Maybe Khadafi could put in a cameo role as a sidekick
> or a
>> camel.
>>
>
>
> I have never heard Wolf sing, although I have heard wolves sing. How
> about the ever-nominated Jon Stewart as the Bob Hope role? And he has a
> background in fake news. He would fit in with this news group, as he
> told Brian Williams the other night his group never checks facts.

With you apparently leading the charge, having just told us that the 2001
QDR resulted in our having reduced the requirement for "armored divisions"
and that having a detrimental effect on our security posture--when in fact
no "armored divisions" or for that matter any other kind of divisions, have
been eliminated or reduced in size/capability since 2001. In fact, with the
"Unit of Action" concept, we are seeing *more* ground maneuver elements
being fielded than we had in 2001!

Brooks

<snip>

[old hoodoo]

Jack Linthicum wrote:

> old hoodoo wrote:
>
>>Rob Arndt wrote:
>>
>>>No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
>>>would like to see Damascus up in smoke?
>>>
>>>Rob
>>>
>>
>>We're off on the road to Damascus! Would make a great Bob Hope/Bing
>
>
>>Crosby sequel to the road movies. Story of two imbedded
>
> correspondent's
>
>>who find adventure, romance, and comedy on the road to Damascus while
>
>
>>searching for the dread WMD's. The dry Wolf Blitzer could reprise the
>
>
>>Bing Crosby role ...and who is funny enough to play Bob Hope?
>>Geraldo???? Maybe Khadafi could put in a cameo role as a sidekick
>
> or a
>
>>camel.
>>
>
>
>
> I have never heard Wolf sing, although I have heard wolves sing. How
> about the ever-nominated Jon Stewart as the Bob Hope role? And he has a
> background in fake news. He would fit in with this news group, as he
> told Brian Williams the other night his group never checks facts.
>
>
>>No, Tony Blair and George Bush cannot be in the film. That would be
>
> too
>
>>much ham in one movie. Ok, I guess they could be in one or two scenes
>
>
>>for additional comic relief. They could be running hither and there
>>turning up stones at random, saying, "Just one more stone and we will
>
>
>>find them."
>
>
> What would an overdose of ham do to a Moslem-themed picture? I am
> appalled that the Coalition, which my Rogets' tells me can be in
> cahoots, haven't come up with a WMD even if they had to bring it in
> from outside.
>
>>As a sequel can have the Road to Tehran, then the Road to Pyongyang
>>(that's a mouthfull)....then the crowning sequel....the Road to
>
> Peking!
>
> Perhaps we could outsource and pay the Chinese to invade themselves.
>

Are you bucking to be the director with all of these very good
suggestions? I feel terrible that I mentioned the pork merely by
accident when I should have done so intentionally.

What bothers me about Jon Stewart is that he often gets closer to the
basic truth than the "real" media who supposedly checks facts.

[Peter Skelton]

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:43:39 -0600, old hoodoo
> wrote:

>
>
>Jack Linthicum wrote:
>
>> old hoodoo wrote:
>>
>>>Rob Arndt wrote:
>>>
>>>>No, Syria first. Let's see a show of hands of how many people here
>>>>would like to see Damascus up in smoke?
>>>>
>>>>Rob
>>>>
>>>
>>>We're off on the road to Damascus! Would make a great Bob Hope/Bing
>>
>>
>>>Crosby sequel to the road movies. Story of two imbedded
>>
>> correspondent's
>>
>>>who find adventure, romance, and comedy on the road to Damascus while
>>
>>
>>>searching for the dread WMD's. The dry Wolf Blitzer could reprise the
>>
>>
>>>Bing Crosby role ...and who is funny enough to play Bob Hope?
>>>Geraldo???? Maybe Khadafi could put in a cameo role as a sidekick
>>
>> or a
>>
>>>camel.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I have never heard Wolf sing, although I have heard wolves sing. How
>> about the ever-nominated Jon Stewart as the Bob Hope role? And he has a
>> background in fake news. He would fit in with this news group, as he
>> told Brian Williams the other night his group never checks facts.
>>
>>
>>>No, Tony Blair and George Bush cannot be in the film. That would be
>>
>> too
>>
>>>much ham in one movie. Ok, I guess they could be in one or two scenes
>>
>>
>>>for additional comic relief. They could be running hither and there
>>>turning up stones at random, saying, "Just one more stone and we will
>>
>>
>>>find them."
>>
>>
>> What would an overdose of ham do to a Moslem-themed picture? I am
>> appalled that the Coalition, which my Rogets' tells me can be in
>> cahoots, haven't come up with a WMD even if they had to bring it in
>> from outside.
>>
>>>As a sequel can have the Road to Tehran, then the Road to Pyongyang
>>>(that's a mouthfull)....then the crowning sequel....the Road to
>>
>> Peking!
>>
>> Perhaps we could outsource and pay the Chinese to invade themselves.
>>
>
>Are you bucking to be the director with all of these very good
>suggestions? I feel terrible that I mentioned the pork merely by
>accident when I should have done so intentionally.
>
>What bothers me about Jon Stewart is that he often gets closer to the
>basic truth than the "real" media who supposedly checks facts.

The only outright, unlabelled lie Jon tells is the one about not
checking.

Peter Skelton