|Bunghole| Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 This Iranian "flotilla" is the threat equivalent of a dinghy to the US Navy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted February 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 This Iranian "flotilla" is the threat equivalent of a dinghy to the US Navy. Yes, it may be a dinghy. Still capable of inflicting pain upon those whose guns, missiles, etc... it is aimed at. I remember that proverbial fly on the windshield off the coast of Libya. While there numerous attempts were made to fly a plane or sail a boat against us. Each time resulted in their ultimate failure. One of the more infamous pics from that day was the boat burning in the Gulf of Sidra... What is not mentioned often is the "other" lives lost. Ask me about sometime... I'm tired. I'm old. and I no longer give a shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted March 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 22, 2014 http://www.nationaljournal.com/global-security-newswire/could-the-u-s-face-a-cruise-missile-threat-from-the-gulf-of-mexico-20140321 March 21, 2014 Could the U.S. Face a Cruise Missile Threat from the Gulf of Mexico? The United States is puzzling over how to block cruise missiles that theoretically could be launched from the Gulf of Mexico, even after throwing some of its most advanced technologies at the problem... Russia and Iran have been cited as possible threats that might, at some point, lurk in the waters just off U.S. shores... One 2012 news article quotes U.S. government insiders asserting that a Russian submarine equipped with cruise missiles had evaded detection for weeks in the Gulf of Mexico. However, the Defense Department denied the contentions described in the Washington Free Beacon report... The article does not go into great depths but does address a weakness in homeland defense. Sometimes its not the fact that someone is capable of destroying cities but merely inflicting panic and over-reactions by the simple thought of mass destruction. See Tokyo bombing by Doolittle raiders, Japanese fire bombing forests on the west coast, Iraq's suspected WMD, Anthrax mailings, etc... The act does not need to be successful in its intended destruction but merely the threat of it will result in accomplishing the re-allocation of assets or further depletion of the defense budget, etc... Not sure if this idea is applicable but found it seems to be an interesting study of the way a mind works when threatened or feels threatened. Ever wonder why Hitler never used Chemical weapons in WW2 against invading armies even though he had the best chemical engineers and the best chemical weapons in the entire world ? Two trains of thought on this matter. One: The US and other nations shut down access to fertilizer technology prior to the beginning of WW2. Used to be pretty much an open access thing but when countries realized that many of the chemicals and technology found in fertilizer were precursors / ingredients / processes to chemical weapons, all of the openness stopped. Germany was suspicious of the US and as a result thought that the US had more and powerful versions even though in reality they did not ( until the end of WW2 when the majority of their chemical engineers went to work for the US ). Two: Hitler was hospitalized as a result of the chemical warfare that took place in WW1. He was reportedly traumatized because of the horrors he had seen and vowed never to use them. While it is odd coming from ( by all accounts ) a ruthless dictator, I think it is the most likely explanation of why he did not use them. Even in the last throes of the 3rd Reich, chemical weapons release authority was never given. A scorched earth policy was issued but no release of chemical weapons never truly made sense to me. I suppose one could ask why he used them on the Jewish population ( and others ). I might be given to think that the German hierarchy involved did not see them as human but something merely subhuman. Both one and two above would be how fear causes a reaction that is not IMHO a normal reaction. Could this threat of missiles in the Gulf of Mexico cause a fear or over-reaction to permeate within the US population / military structure ? Could this be fear induced by the defense industry to ensure their budget does not shrink ? Could this be fear induced by the politicians to tighten up our shores and bring defense products to use closer to home ? etc.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted March 22, 2014 Report Share Posted March 22, 2014 Just build a gigantic seawall from the coast of Mexico to the tip of southern Florida. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khatmandude Posted March 22, 2014 Report Share Posted March 22, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khatmandude Posted March 22, 2014 Report Share Posted March 22, 2014 But yeah....keep thinking that countries on the other side of the world who have no history of aggression are a direct threat to the US...who has more stockpiles of nukes than any country in the world, enough to end this planet several times over.....well played media, well played. In order for those in power to continue with their game, there has to be an external threat of some kind. And people keep falling for it. How sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Elflocko| Posted March 22, 2014 Report Share Posted March 22, 2014 Fantastic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rumble In the Jungle Posted March 22, 2014 Report Share Posted March 22, 2014 Quit dropping knowledge on these fools! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted March 23, 2014 Report Share Posted March 23, 2014 On the surface what Khatmandude posted is true, but Iran is certainly not guilt free of violence. Hell, they were killing their own people not long ago that were protesting the results of the last Presidential election. Iran's theocratic government is very oppressive and has direct ties to Hizbollah and their terroristic activities towards Israel and elsewhere. I'm not absolving Israel of anything, but violence begets more violence. And let's not forget Iran's puppet state Syria and what they've done to Lebanon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted March 23, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2014 On the surface what Khatmandude posted is true, but Iran is certainly not guilt free of violence. Hell, they were killing their own people not long ago that were protesting the results of the last Presidential election. Iran's theocratic government is very oppressive and has direct ties to Hizbollah and their terroristic activities towards Israel and elsewhere. I'm not absolving Israel of anything, but violence begets more violence. And let's not forget Iran's puppet state Syria and what they've done to Lebanon. Yes you are correct but you do not have a pretty woman pointing this out to us. Hezbollah typically does not target civilian targets. Israel has and did target civilians. Syria is less of an issue in Lebanon than Iran in regards to funding and training. Hezbollah has struck However, easy access used to be found in Syria along with ease of material transfer. Most countries can't even agree on what the definition of terrorist is much less a terrorist organization. EU only considers Hezbollah's military wing as terrorist while the US and a few others consider the entire organization as terrorists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah Lebanon, Syria, Israel, Bulgaria, near miss in Cyprus, Turkey, near miss in Egypt, Argentina, Panama, UK, Iraq, possibly Singapore, etc... While it is technically correct that Iran has not attacked anyone in 300 years ( extremely loose interpretation of the word attack and 300 years )... Their proxies might have a better record much like our proxies if added into the equation would literally be much higher than SIX. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted March 23, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2014 ...and lastly, the picture posted above was taken for the Iranian Green Movement. Odd that someone used this particular picture with the purpose of making the US look bad. As Bung has already pointed out that Iran killed their own people during the elections. Suspected to be approximately 32 died with exponentially higher than that arrested as a result of protesting the elections. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Green_Movement Iranian Green Movement The Iranian Green Movement refers to a political movement that arose after the 2009 Iranian presidential election, in which protesters demanded the removal of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from office. On 15 June, Mousavi[26] rallied, with anywhere from hundreds of thousands[27] to three million,[28] of his supporters in Tehran, despite being warned by state officials that any such rally would be illegal. 32 people had died protesting Iranian government prohibited any form of gathering by opposition-supporters http://payvand.com/blog/blog/2009/12/27/payvands-top-10-flickr-photos-of-2009/ 10- Peace and Freedom for IRAN by Negar Daneshfar http://www.flickr.com/photos/negar-d/3651907876/ June 21, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted March 23, 2014 Report Share Posted March 23, 2014 It was way more than 32 people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Numbers| Posted March 23, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2014 It was way more than 32 people. It is difficult to tell for sure. In some cases, family members were not allowed to receive the bodies of their loved ones until they certified that their loved ones died of natural causes. There is only a little bit of data available on the incidents and usually only for a few days of that time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%E2%80%9310_Iranian_election_protests#Casualties The Guardian is also maintaining a list of numerous other people who have ostensibly been either killed or arrested since the election.[122] The government has issued very little official information on who has been killed or arrested (except Neda Agha-Soltan, whose video circulated quickly on the internet). Hospitals were prohibited from registering the dead bodies or injured people, as a medical student at Rasoul-Akram hospital witnessed on the night of 15 June: "Nine people died at our hospital and another 28 had gunshot wounds... [the government] removed the dead bodies on back of trucks, before we were even able to get their names or other information... No one was allowed to speak to the wounded or get any information from them."[123] Hospital staff protested due to the restrictions.[124] The government admitted to at least 27 fatalities in Tehran, while CNN and other news organizations reported 150 unconfirmed casualties from 20 June protests.[125] International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran counted 34 of them, claiming to have eyewitness reports of much higher numbers.[126] Human rights activists in Iran called for independently collecting information about the killed, injured and arrested people. Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/jan/28/iran-dead-detained-protests-elections-spreadsheet#data Appx. 85. List is provided of names and information on the dead. List also includes names of the detained. ICHRI: http://www.iranhumanrights.org/2009/07/deathtoll/ Family members reportedly saw “hundreds” of corpses in makeshift morgue Three hospitals recorded 34 deaths in a single day alone, compared to government claim of 20 deaths during the past month Imagine just for a moment what would happen if our government treated one of our political protests here in the states like the Iranian election protests ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khatmandude Posted March 23, 2014 Report Share Posted March 23, 2014 US Government has tested toxic chemicals on its own citizens amongst so many other heinous acts.......you seriously don't want to get into a debate of morality because all countries and their leaders are corrupt. My point is that instead of worrying about the next "boogeyman", the focus should be on getting things fixed in this country. Unfortunately, the powers that be, aren't for getting things fixed....especially in the US. If you can't see the downward spiral things are going in, I don't know what else to tell you...maybe watch less TV. Defense industry can't make all this money if there is no external threat, enriching the bankers even more by giving out loans to countries. It's orchestrated with the assumption that people are dumb and too caught up in their own troubles to really care about others'. They're absolutely right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.