Post: #76

"As of October 1, 2015, there have been 2,326 U.S. military deaths in the War in Afghanistan. 1,856 of these deaths have been the result of hostile action. 20,083 American servicemembers have also been wounded in action during the war. In addition, there were 1,173 U.S. civilian contractor fatalities.
United States military casualties in the War in Afghanistan - Wikipedia"

This is what happens when you limp-wrist dealing with your enemies. The casualties do not come from the invasion. They come from letting the invaded folks stay and hanging around to get shot at by people that happen to look just like the locals until it's too late. Ignoring the Saudis would not have stopped 9/11.

Big picture thinking. You take a bloody nose and be a bastard to make sure that nobody starts a fight with you in the future. It saves lives and conflict in the long run.

Post: #77

Some of 47R's statements sounds like a Muslim apologist.

I still see no evidence or sources claiming the PKK did that.

PKK usually hit military, police, or security targets.

Erdogan is a scumbag and so is his son.

Russian did right by bombing oil supplies ISIS was sending to his son to sell.

He looked the other way when ISIS was attacking the PKK and refused to help them. Now it's blowback time.

Did he not think ISIS wouldn't hit Turkey ? As if they already haven't ?

Post: #78

(06-29-2016 06:46 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  Worthless Secretary of State says this proves ISIS is desperate and hurting.

"If we kill them, they win."

Post: #79

(06-29-2016 11:08 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  "As of October 1, 2015, there have been 2,326 U.S. military deaths in the War in Afghanistan. 1,856 of these deaths have been the result of hostile action. 20,083 American servicemembers have also been wounded in action during the war. In addition, there were 1,173 U.S. civilian contractor fatalities.
United States military casualties in the War in Afghanistan - Wikipedia"

This is what happens when you limp-wrist dealing with your enemies. The casualties do not come from the invasion. They come from letting the invaded folks stay and hanging around to get shot at by people that happen to look just like the locals until it's too late. Ignoring the Saudis would not have stopped 9/11.

Big picture thinking. You take a bloody nose and be a bastard to make sure that nobody starts a fight with you in the future. It saves lives and conflict in the long run.

I'm a bleeding heart liberal that doesn't want to see anyone die unnecessarily. Sure, if the means justify the ends and there is a greater cause, I'm all in favour of nuking entire cities. For example, if the invasion of Japan would cost several million lives, absolutely nuke Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But when lives are lost in vain, any lives, on either side, it's a tragedy. It's a tragedy that all the coalition lives in Iraq and Afghanistan were lost is vain as there was no advantage to the invasion of those countries. And the millions of lives lost on the other sides, men women and children, are equally tragic.

I just look at the gigantic mess in the Middle East that the West has left, deposing strong leaders, killing millions of innocents, and no clear benefit as the result.

I can't see how any further military intervention can be of benefit to either the Middle East or the West.

Leave them alone. They are extremely unintelligent and wouldn't prosper without the outside world. Engaging with them causes more problems than they are worth, and left to their own devices, they are simply not a threat. Angry Bedouins on Toyota trucks are no match for Western steel.

Post: #80

Also, nuking Mecca might feel good in the short run, but it would also create a huge power vaccum in the Islamic world that could create something much worse than Saudi Arabia.

Currently, because of Mecca, Saudi Arabia is the center of the Islamic world. As long as we control the Sauds, we can control most of Islam. Mecca is a pillar of Islam and all Muslims are required to visit it once in their lifetime.

Taking away the Mecca would instantly make America the enemy of every Muslim on the planet, and Saudi Arabia would no longer be able to influence Islamic opinion.

It does not seem wise to destroy Mecca, it's more useful to co-opt Saudi Arabia. Keep the Sauds as controlled opposition, and we can control Islam with minimal war. Destroy Mecca, and you literally unleash the evil genie out of the bottle.

Post: #81

The BND, the central intelligence of Germany released a report where they prove and warn about Saudi Arabia. They finance radical Imans inside Europe and the biggest financer of islamic terrorist. Still western countries make deals with them but put sanctions on Iran. Isolate Saudi Arabia, don't buy their oil, what else do they sell? They have to import everything and just because we need the oil it give them money. Without the west and the demand for oil it would be worthless.
Also I agree by leave the middle east alone, they fight each other since 1400 years. Now they say the reason is the USA, the west, Israel and whatever. In the Islamic culture its always about denial and blame the other for the own mistakes. Let them deal with themselves and let them deal with Saudi Arabia.

Post: #82

(06-29-2016 12:20 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Taking away the Mecca would instantly make America the enemy of every Muslim on the planet, and Saudi Arabia would no longer be able to influence Islamic opinion.

And should that not be the goal? Because Saudi Arabia has driven this cancer for years, funded by oil revenues and protected by American interests. With 70 years of oil wealth, they have managed to infiltrate the West with the evil of Islam in ways that were unimaginable when they were commuting on camel and sipping sweet tea in their tents. The rest of the Islamic world doesn't matter - leave them alone.

I'm not so sure about Iran in this respect, but I suspect that they are less of a threat than the Arab world. In any case, I'm pretty confident that the Israelis could take care of their facilities if needed.

Post: #83

The relationship between UAE and the USA/UK is so deeply entwined and strange.

We buy their oil and they pretty much give us back all of the money for worthless govt bonds, weapons, property and shiny toys to facilitate shitting on whores.

What I can never understand is why they aren't told to sort the mess out.

Therefore I can only conclude that it's because we don't want them to.

For whatever reason.

Post: #84

(06-29-2016 12:20 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Also, nuking Mecca might feel good in the short run, but it would also create a huge power vaccum in the Islamic world that could create something much worse than Saudi Arabia.

I almost spit my coffee out after reading that haha, you're hardcore man!

Post: #85

Post: #86

Turkey's not in the EU, doesn't count

Don't worry, there'll be another attack in an EU Country.

Post: #87

(06-29-2016 12:43 PM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  The relationship between UAE and the USA/UK is so deeply entwined and strange.

We buy their oil and they pretty much give us back all of the money for worthless govt bonds, weapons, property and shiny toys to facilitate shitting on whores.

They believe they are shitting gold and the good times will last forever.

In otherwords it's standard low IQ low human development commodities country mentality.

They throw obligatory amounts into vanity projects and "ports" but Dubai was in serious economic trouble when their last bubble popped. They had to hit up their oil rich brother emirate (Abu Dhabi) for a loaner. Behind the scenes that deal probably also involved favorite whores being exchanged to be shat upon.

The long term strategy of the U.S. at least is to build up strategic reserves and preserve national oil supply. It's way better to spend fiat money to buy middle eastern oil and use it than it is to deplete the oil underneath your own ground.

After peak oil prices and the rise of fracking and alternative fuel the middle east led by Saudi Arabia is trying to flood the market now. This is leading to mass oil speculation and lower prices to bankrupt the competition.

Of course they say all this is happening for other reasons like the most common "weak global economy" excuse but what real reason would there to be to flood the market with oil?

Post: #88

PKK doesn't attack civilians, especially foreign tourists. This was ISIL. Now that their domain in Syria is disintegrating, they're trying to suicide-bomb their way to glory with all their perceived enemies before the rest of their territory caves in and they have to scatter like rats.

Post: #89

(06-29-2016 06:26 AM)Horus Wrote:  

(06-29-2016 05:34 AM)wi30 Wrote:  We need to completely obliterate this pedophilic death cult off the face of the earth.

I disagree, because obliterating Islam would mean lots of people dying, and I don't want lots of people to die. As much as I oppose the ideology of Islam, I don't want it's followers to die.

Who said anything about killing off almost a quarter of the world population? We didn't nuke Jonestown, but that cult is now solely squared away into history books. I know that isn't a great example, but no other cults come to mind off the top of my head. And besides, rational and intelligent individuals can be born into Islam and escape it (like kaotic and the other Muslim born RVFers).

I don't have a detailed solution in mind, but leaving them alone to their own devices is only going to exacerbate the problem. They will continue to out-breed the West in the long run. But to destroy a cult, one has to aim for the top.

Post: #90

Turkey an easy target cause they all live there but in reality all the Turks want is to tell a bunch of lies and make money.

Oh and they lie.

God bless the brexit and start mass deport! Bomb Calias too.

Post: #91

(06-29-2016 10:58 AM)Horus Wrote:  

(06-29-2016 10:28 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  I admit they might be a bit of a stretch for Australia to invade, but the U.S. would wipe the floor with them. Fancy weapons are all but irrelevant when the untested cowards manning them turn and run for the hills, as I suspect they would do.

And if you tried to simply isolate them then who's to say who's shoulder they would turn to? China? Russia? Cheap energy is power. Expending massive military and political power to isolate a nation while getting nothing back is a poor return on investment, as we've seen in North Korea.

War is hell, but neutering ourselves before our enemies has proven to be demonstrably worse. Our culture is superior, as is our technology and our fighting spirit. We needn't become bullies, but those who attack us should be dealt with mercilessly as a warning to those who would follow.

Of course the US would wipe the floor with them. But due to the billions of dollars of arms sold to them by the US and Europe, and invasion would come at the cost of thousands of lives. This is not hand to hand warfare and courage is not as important as the days when the British led the Oman Scouts into battle. These guys have the ability to shoot planes out of the sky and attack enemy forces at long range.

I don't think an invasion of Saudi Arabia would be as easy as Iraq. And the big lesson we have learned from years of intervention in the Middle East is that we tend to leave things worse off than when we arrived, and cause more discontent towards the West resulting in more terrorism.

Leave them alone, stop buying their stuff and stop giving them guns.

And if you're worried about them turning to Russia or China, well I'm confident that a competent leader (cough,,, Trump) could leverage slightly better deals with them than the Saudis.

Also, I don't think it's helpful comparing the Saudis to North Koreans. The North Koreans, while madmen, are highly, highly intelligent. There is no possible way that the Saudis could implement an indigenous missile or nuclear program like the North Koreans did despite isolation and economic sanctions - the Saudis simply lack the intelligence to achieve this.

Seriously, leave them alone and they will go away.

There are some serious misconceptions about the political nature of Saudi Arabia. The KSA plays "bad cop", but the ruling Saud clan is basically completely propped by the US. It pays us protection money in 3 main forms:

-The most important is in the Petrodollar system. When Japan or China buy oil from the Gulf Countries, they has to sell Yens or RMB to purchase US$. This props up the US trade deficit and helps the US maintain global financial hegemony. The GCC currencies are all pegged to the dollar, their exchg rate has not moved in decades. This system was set in place by Nixon, it is what allowed the US to shed the last remnants of a reserve system and to float the dollar. It's as if the US collects a hydrocarbon tax on Japan and Germany.

-Saudi and other oil sheikdoms buy hundreds of billions worth in expensive military hardware that they don't need. Saudi Arabia doesn't have much of a standing army because the ruling family doesn't trust its people, they would be vulnerable to a military coup. SA has to hire mercenaries from places like Pakistan or Egypt in order to invade Yemen, and they're having a hard time fighting the Yemenis, who are a hardy warlike people. They can't hold that country because they don't have boots on the ground.

US bases keep their watch. If you really wanted to destroy the Saud regime, no need to invade, all you'd need is to pull out the troops.

-As well, US construction and big oil corporations get preferential access to the infrastructure and hydrocarbon markets. Companies like Bechtel were literally built by arabian contracts.

-GCC capital is reinvested in US and UK capital and real estate markets, we get the lion's share.

That's basically why you will hear a lot of badmouthing about the Saudis but as long as their oil reserves are solid, they are more or less untouchable. Those reserves are going to run out in a few decades though, at which point the country will implode like Libya or Syria.

Post: #92

(06-29-2016 12:20 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Also, nuking Mecca might feel good in the short run, but it would also create a huge power vaccum in the Islamic world that could create something much worse than Saudi Arabia.

Currently, because of Mecca, Saudi Arabia is the center of the Islamic world. As long as we control the Sauds, we can control most of Islam. Mecca is a pillar of Islam and all Muslims are required to visit it once in their lifetime.

Taking away the Mecca would instantly make America the enemy of every Muslim on the planet, and Saudi Arabia would no longer be able to influence Islamic opinion.

It does not seem wise to destroy Mecca, it's more useful to co-opt Saudi Arabia. Keep the Sauds as controlled opposition, and we can control Islam with minimal war. Destroy Mecca, and you literally unleash the evil genie out of the bottle.

I remember having a conversation with a Pakistani about if Mecca would ever get attacked - he said it's impossible "because Allah will protect it with birds"!!!

If Mecca was ever destroyed, I think the following would happen:

- Some remaining Muslims would lose their faith and become atheists or change religion
- Other would become more devout and assume Mecca was destroyed because they had "strayed from the path" - their prayers would mention returning to Mecca and one day they would rebuild Mecca

Does that remind you any current middle eastern monotheistic religions?!


The Saudis have already destroyed most of historical Mecca

Quote:The “guardians” of the Holy City, the rulers of Saudi Arabia and the clerics, have a deep hatred of history. They want everything to look brand-new. Meanwhile, the sites are expanding to accommodate the rising number of pilgrims, up to almost three million today from 200,000 in the 1960s.

The initial phase of Mecca’s destruction began in the mid-1970s, and I was there to witness it. Innumerable ancient buildings, including the Bilal mosque, dating from the time of the Prophet Muhammad, were bulldozed. The old Ottoman houses, with their elegant mashrabiyas — latticework windows — and elaborately carved doors, were replaced with hideous modern ones. Within a few years, Mecca was transformed into a “modern” city with large multilane roads, spaghetti junctions, gaudy hotels and shopping malls.

The few remaining buildings and sites of religious and cultural significance were erased more recently. The Makkah Royal Clock Tower, completed in 2012, was built on the graves of an estimated 400 sites of cultural and historical significance, including the city’s few remaining millennium-old buildings. Bulldozers arrived in the middle of the night, displacing families that had lived there for centuries. The complex stands on top of Ajyad Fortress, built around 1780, to protect Mecca from bandits and invaders. The house of Khadijah, the first wife of the Prophet Muhammad, has been turned into a block of toilets. The Makkah Hilton is built over the house of Abu Bakr, the closest companion of the prophet and the first caliph.

Apart from the Kaaba itself, only the inner core of the Sacred Mosque retains a fragment of history. It consists of intricately carved marble columns, adorned with calligraphy of the names of the prophet’s companions. Built by a succession of Ottoman sultans, the columns date from the early 16th century. And yet plans are afoot to demolish them, along with the whole of the interior of the Sacred Mosque, and to replace it with an ultramodern doughnut-shaped building.

The only other building of religious significance in the city is the house where the Prophet Muhammad lived. During most of the Saudi era it was used first as a cattle market, then turned into a library, which is not open to the people. But even this is too much for the radical Saudi clerics who have repeatedly called for its demolition. The clerics fear that, once inside, pilgrims would pray to the prophet, rather than to God — an unpardonable sin. It is only a matter of time before it is razed and turned, probably, into a parking lot.

There was also a (probably fake) rumour that ISIS wants to destroy Mecca

Quote:"By Allah's leave our sheikh al-Baghdadi led Mecca stone for those who worship (pilgrims) will kill you and God ' I will tear down the Ka'ba, the place of worship,” the alleged ISIS militant said on the social media site, according to reports from Turkish media adding that those of the Islamic faith should not be worshipping 'stones.'"

ISIS' beef with Mecca seems to be that Muslims have lost touch with the true meaning of their faith, according to the threat.

“People are going to Mecca to touch the stones, not for God,” reads another tweet from the same account. “I swear to God, if you conquer Saudi Arabia as we worship, none but Allah will demolish the Ka'ba.”

Post: #93

Called it a few days ago:

Russia Today Wrote:As some bemoaned a lack of support for Turkey, landmarks from Europe to Australia have “wrapped” themselves in the colors of Turkey’s flag as soon as dusk fell. In New York City lights went dark in sympathy with 42 victims of the Turkish airport attack.
In the heart of German capital, Berlin’s famous Brandenburg Gate was illuminated with the Turkish national colors.

Some of the people gathered in front of the gate were waving Turkish banners and lighting candles to commemorate the victims of the Istanbul attack.

https://www.rt.com/viral/348945-cities-t...olidarity/

Post: #94

Un-fuhgucking-believable.

"Heartfelt" responses to terrorist atrocities have become as predictably banal as "press to like".

Post: #95

Apparently one of the main organizers of this bombing was on Russia's terrorist watchlist but was protected in Europe from extradition because he was a "refugee."

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-01...ted-europe

ZH has provided all relevant documents to prove this claim. Just more political correctness claiming innocent lives.