Saudis Preparing For Nuclear Fallout From US Attack on Iran, 1 Day After Cheney Visit

[LoungeMachine]

Saudi Shura council to discuss plan for sudden radioactive hazards
(DPA)

22 March 2008



RIYADH - The Saudi Shura council will secretly discuss national plans to deal with any sudden nuclear and radioactive hazards that may affect the kingdom following experts’ warnings of possible attacks on Iran’s Bushehr nuclear reactors, media reports said Saturday.


The Saudi-based King Abdul-Aziz City for Science and Technology has prepared a proposal that encapsulates the probabilities of leaking nuclear and radiation hazards in case of any unexpected nuclear attacks in Iran, the Okaz Saudi newspaper said.

The Saudi Shura or consultative council plans to debate the proposal on Sunday.

The power plants in the south-western Iranian port of Bushehr were built with German assistance in 1974 and resumed with Russian aid in 1992, after it had been stopped by the Islamic revolution.



Subscribe | Write to Us | About Us | Advertise |
Copyright © 2008 Khaleej Times All Rights Reserved.
http://www.khaleejtimes.com/darticlen.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2008/March/middleeast_March340.xml&section=middleeast&col=

[LoungeMachine]

Headlined on 3/29/08:
Saudi Newspaper: Prepare for radioactive fallout from US nuclear attack on Iran

by Richard Clark Page 1 of 2 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com








Bush sends nuclear sub and more warships to the Gulf


Mon Mar 24, 2008 at 11:57:23 PM PDT



According to Chris Floyd at the Empire Burlesque web site:


The Saudi government is now preparing plans to deal with "any sudden nuclear and radioactive hazards" that may arise from an attack on Iran's nuclear reactors. This was reported by a top Saudi newspaper, Okaz, and relayed by a leading German news service, DPA -- one day after Dick Cheney paid a visit to the kingdom. As we noted, no one knows exactly what was said at that confab of allied authoritarians -- but something sure lit a fire under the Saudis, and convinced them that urgent action is needed to brace for the lethal overspill from a strike on Iran.


Floyd points out that nothing in Saudi Arabia becomes the top news story without government approval. That such a story should be released the day after Cheney's visit, sends a message to everyone about what’s on Cheney's mind.


This, combined with the dismissal of Centcom chief, Admiral Fallon, Petreus' claim to have evidence (which he doesn't produce) that Iran was responsible for the recent shelling of the Green Zone,


. . and the Egyptian report that a nuclear sub has been ordered by Bush into the Gulf, the bleak picture in both Pakistan and Afghanistan (accelerating collapse of Musharraf's power and strategy, the coming spring offensive in the Taliban's announced drive for Kabu),


. . plus the oft-stated desire of Bush and Cheney to attack Iran, and, as noted by former mideast policy official William K. Polk at Juan Cole's site just a few days ago, the last time Cheney visited the nations he visited this time was right before the Iraq attack,


. . then only a moron would deny that Bush and Dick have nothing but contempt for the will of the people, congress and the courts, and that they crave war like a junkie craves his fix.


http://soldiervoices.net/svfor/showthread.php?p=4883


============


Cheney Visits them, and Saudis then Prepare for "Sudden Nuclear Hazards"


One Tick Closer to Midnight


Last Friday, Dick Cheney was in Saudi Arabia for high-level meetings with the Saudi king and his ministers. On Saturday, it was revealed that the Saudi Shura Council -- the elite group that implements the decisions of the autocratic inner circle -- is preparing "national plans to deal with any sudden nuclear and radioactive hazards that may affect the kingdom following experts' warnings of possible attacks on Iran's Bushehr nuclear reactors," one of the kingdom's leading newspapers, Okaz, reports. The German-based DPA news service relayed the paper's story.


Simple prudence -- or ominous timing? We noted here last week that an American attack on Iran was far more likely than most people suspect. We pointed to the mountain of evidence for this case gathered by scholar William R. Polk, one of the top aides to John Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and to other indicators of impending war. The story by Okaz -- which would not have appeared in the tightly controlled dictatorship without approval from the top -- is yet another, very weighty piece of evidence laid on the scales, pointing toward a new, horrendous conflict.


We don't know what the Saudis told Cheney in private -- or even more to the point, what he told them. But the release of this story now, just after his departure, would seem to be a clear indication that the Saudis have good reason to fear a looming attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, and that they are actively preparing for it.

1 | 2 continued at

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_richard__080328_saudi_newspaper_3a__pr.htm

[knuckleboner]

damn, dude! i thought i already won. you trying to make me nervous?...;)

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
damn, dude! i thought i already won. you trying to make me nervous?...;)

:D

I got nervous the minute they anounced Darth Cheney going to the Saudis.

And then THEY got nervous.

:gulp: - Drinking YOUR beer

[kwame k]

I was convinced when I saw the CNN footage of the supposed “Iranian” speedboat confrontation that Bush had created his Gulf of Tonkin.
Quick link to The Gulf of Tonkin lie:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2261

What surprised me the most about the Iranian incident was how swift their response was with video evidence that it was faked. I was surprised that CNN ran the counter story and I was surprised at how fast the story died.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011108J.shtml

Cheney visiting Saudi Arabia and the leaking of the meeting and what was discussed is suspect. Saudi Arabia has a tightly control media and if the story was leaked there are a couple of possible scenarios.
One, it was statesmanship. Leak the information about a possible US nuclear attack to scare Iran into submission over their nuclear program. Two, the leak could be what Cheney was actually discussing. We know that Bush wants a war with Iran, The US has the invasion plan set in place and can be implemented at a moments notice, and Bush’s war on terror is not limited to any one country or group of people.

The problems with attacking Iran is the American people and the rest of the world, for that matter, are not going to accept anything this Administration says as far as a justification for the attacks. After being mislead about the Iraq invasion Bush is going to have a nearly impossible task of justifying the Attacks, especially if Iran does not provoke the US. It will be impossible for Bush to get away with an attack without provocation. I know he’s never needed “permission” for his past invasions but he doesn’t have the political muscle he once had. He’s too close to the end of his presidency and it would all but guarantee McCain will not be elected if he strikes against Iran. The republicans would risk 4 more years on the gravy train over an attack that could be accomplished during McCain’s presidency.

Bush has got himself a conundrum. He already has the plan to attack Iran and he’s all dresses up with no place to bomb. He has all the necessary components in place in Iraq to jump over and bomb the shit out of Iran.
The biggest problem Bush has is to effectively destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities he may need to use nuclear weapons, hence Cheney’s little trip to our “Sponsors/Councilors”, “Saudi Servitude Field Trip ’08“, sponsored by OPEC. I don’t know enough about our bombs to understand why Nukes would be necessary. I thought our bunker busters could destroy a nuclear facility or some of those big ass bombs that we used to destroy caves in Afghanistan.

What’s fucking scary about all of this is this was planned out several years ago. The rhetoric Bush is spewing about Iran sponsoring terrorist elements is a self -fulfilling prophecy. I am torn whether or not to believe The Iranian’s are sponsoring terrorist elements in Iraq. It fits with Iran’s ideology and there is compelling evidence but when you have Government Reports stating that this is one of the scenarios we need in order to justify attacking Iran and that is from the Reports from as early as 2003 .


“Senior American intelligence and defense officials believe that President George W Bush and his inner circle are taking steps to place America on the path to war with Iran, …Pentagon planners have developed a list of up to 2,000 bombing targets in Iran, …
Pentagon and CIA officers say they believe that the White House has begun a carefully calibrated programme of escalation that could lead to a military showdown with Iran.
In a chilling scenario of how war might come, a senior intelligence officer warned that public denunciation of Iranian meddling in Iraq - arming and training militants - would lead to cross border raids on Iranian training camps and bomb factories.
A prime target would be the Fajr base run by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds Force in southern Iran, where Western intelligence agencies say armour-piercing projectiles used against British and US troops are manufactured.
The intelligence officer said that the US military has “two major contingency plans” for air strikes on Iran.
“One is to bomb only the nuclear facilities. The second option is for a much bigger strike that would - over two or three days - hit all of the significant military sites as well. This plan involves more than 2,000 targets.” (quoted in The Sunday Telegraph, 16 September 2007)

"Theater Iran Near Term" (TIRANNT) was ordered in 2003 and basically you don’t need a Nostradamus Quatrain to see Bush is following the old playbook verbatim.


"In early 2003, even as U.S. forces were on the brink of war with Iraq, the Army had already begun conducting an analysis for a full-scale war with Iran. The analysis, called TIRANNT, for "theater Iran near term," was coupled with a mock scenario for a Marine Corps invasion and a simulation of the Iranian missile force. U.S. and British planners conducted a Caspian Sea war game around the same time. And Bush directed the U.S. Strategic Command to draw up a global strike war plan for an attack against Iranian weapons of mass destruction. All of this will ultimately feed into a new war plan for "major combat operations" against Iran that military sources confirm now exists in draft form. [This contingency plan entitled CONPLAN 8022 would be activated in the eventuality of a Second 9/11, on the presumption that Iran would be behind it]”

More on CONPLAN 8022-02 http://www.fas.org/ssp/docs/GlobalStrikeReport.pdf

“Consistent with CENTCOM's 1995 "sequencing" of theater operations, the plans to target Iran were activated under TIRANNT in the immediate wake of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Confirmed by Arkin, the active component of the Iran military agenda was launched in May 2003 "when modelers and intelligence specialists pulled together the data needed for theater-level (meaning large-scale) scenario analysis for Iran." (Arkin, op cit). In October 2003, different theater scenarios for an Iran war were contemplated:
"The US army, navy, air force and marines have all prepared battle plans and spent four years building bases and training for "Operation Iranian Freedom". Admiral Fallon, the new head of US Central Command, has inherited computerized plans under the name TIRANNT (Theatre Iran Near Term)." (New Statesman, 19 Feb 2007)”

“The Pentagon's Second 9/11

What is now being contemplated by Washington is an overwhelming use of military force in retaliation to Iran's alleged non-compliance. This of course is the pretext, the justification for waging war. The Pentagon has also contemplated retaliating against Iran in the case of a second 9/11 attack:
"A third plan sets out how the military can both disrupt and respond to another major terrorist strike on the United States. It includes lengthy annexes that offer a menu of options for the military to retaliate quickly against specific terrorist groups, individuals or state sponsors depending on who is believed to be behind an attack. Another attack could create both a justification and an opportunity that is lacking today to retaliate against some known targets, according to current and former defense officials familiar with the plan.
This plan details "what terrorists or bad guys we would hit if the gloves came off. The gloves are not off," said one official, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. (emphasis added, WP 23 April 2006)
The presumption of this military document, is that a Second 911 attack "which is lacking today" would usefully create both a "justification and an opportunity" to wage war on "some known targets [Iran and Syria]".
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20070221&articleId=4888

I would be surprised if Bush Inc., LLC would attack Iran. I can not believe they would now. As I stated before, an attack on Iran would cripple McCain’s chance at the White house and I don’t think the Republicans are stupid enough to risk losing the White House. McCain would have 4 years to instigate a favorable scenario to justify attacking Iran. If it looks like he will lose the election then I’m sure the Administration’s final coup de grace for the American way of life might be plausible.

[kwame k]

Originally posted by kwame k

I don’t know enough about our bombs to understand why Nukes would be necessary. I thought our bunker busters could destroy a nuclear facility or some of those big ass bombs that we used to destroy caves in Afghanistan.


Just to clarify, I read somewhere to destroy a nuclear facility Nukes would be more effective. Can’t find the article I was reading about that but it had to do with the construction of the structure.

I understand that by destroying the nuclear facility with non-nuclear weapons it would have an environmental impact from the resulting destruction and may cause other nasty shit that the Saudis may want to protect themselves from.

[Little Texan]

Originally posted by kwame k
I don’t know enough about our bombs to understand why Nukes would be necessary. I thought our bunker busters could destroy a nuclear facility or some of those big ass bombs that we used to destroy caves in Afghanistan.

Aren't bunker buster bombs produced using depleted uranium?

[kwame k]

Originally posted by Little Texan
Aren't bunker buster bombs produced using depleted uranium?

The US Air Force's BLU-113 "bunker buster" warhead was originally developed in a hurry during the 1991 Gulf War to attack fortified Iraqi command centres deep underground.
It is a 4,500 lb (2,041 kg) penetrating warhead, later used in Serbia and in Afghanistan, and now in the Iraqi capital, Baghdad.

It is carried in the form of the GBU-28 laser-guided bomb by the B-2 stealth bomber and F-15E fighter-bomber, or the GBU-37 satellite-guided bomb by the B-2 alone.

Satellite guidance means the bomb can be used even through cloud or smoke - because laser guidance, though highly accurate, is degraded by those.

The warhead includes more than 600 lb (272 kg) of high explosive - the rest is believed to be dense depleted uranium.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2895081.stm

[Nitro Express]

The Russians are saying their military intelligence shows a huge US buildup on the Iranian border. Something is up.

[Nitro Express]

March 29, 2008
Russian military intelligence services are reporting a flurry of activity by U.S. Armed Forces near Iran’s borders, a high-ranking security source said Tuesday.
“The latest military intelligence data point to heightened U.S. military preparations for both an air and ground operation against Iran,” the official said, adding that the Pentagon has probably not yet made a final decision as to when an attack will be launched.



He said the Pentagon is looking for a way to deliver a strike against Iran “that would enable the Americans to bring the country to its knees at minimal cost.”
He also said the U.S. Naval presence in the Persian Gulf has for the first time in the past four years reached the level that existed shortly before the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
Col.-Gen. Leonid Ivashov, vice president of the Academy of Geopolitical Sciences, said last week that the Pentagon is planning to deliver a massive air strike on Iran’s military infrastructure in the near future.
A new U.S. carrier battle group has been dispatched to the Gulf.
The USS John C. Stennis, with a crew of 3,200 and around 80 fixed-wing aircraft, including F/A-18 Hornet and Superhornet fighter-bombers, eight support ships and four nuclear submarines are heading for the Gulf, where a similar group led by the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower has been deployed since December 2006.
The U.S. is also sending Patriot anti-missile systems to the region.

[Nitro Express]

. . then only a moron would deny that Bush and Dick have nothing but contempt for the will of the people, congress and the courts, and that they crave war like a junkie craves his fix.




<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0BeFCOUqsWA&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0BeFCOUqsWA&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[Blackflag]

Idiot conspiracy theories aside... I knew this crazy motherfucker just couldn't resist starting this shit before he has to leave.

Only a few months left for this maniac to make an even bigger mess of things. Oh, fuck.

[knuckleboner]

we're not attacking iran.

bush may not be the brightest bulb in the bunch, but at this point, even he and his most hawkish advisors know that there really isn't enough funding to cover the iraq and afghanistan operations successfully. there's no chance we could engage iran in anything more than highly limited strikes on a few specific targets. but even that will be highly opposed by virtually the entire congress and my guess is most of the military who recognize the logistic nightmare of a 3-fronted middle east war.

[LoungeMachine]

Funding?

Are you high? ;)

The billions for Iraq and Afghanistan are off-budget.

You really think money is the reason they wont bomb?

And you cannot say "we're not attacking" but then say we might engage in some "limited strikes"

Limited strikes = attacking Iran.

Get off the fence. :D

:gulp:

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by knuckleboner


but even that will be highly opposed by virtually the entire congress and my guess is most of the military who recognize the logistic nightmare of a 3-fronted middle east war.

Most of congress, the military brass, and hell the NATION recognize the 2-front nightmare.....

what's one more to Bush/Cheney???

[knuckleboner]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Funding?

Are you high? ;)

The billions for Iraq and Afghanistan are off-budget.

You really think money is the reason they wont bomb?

And you cannot say "we're not attacking" but then say we might engage in some "limited strikes"

Limited strikes = attacking Iran.

Get off the fence. :D

:gulp:

yep, limited air strikes DEFINITELY mean an attack. no question. i don't believe that will happen, but i think it's possible. (and then i lose...;))


but as for funding, yeah, i DO think that's an issue. in no way will congress ever approve a defense bill or special appropriation that includes significant funding increases for military conflict with iran. not going to happen.


one can argue that while they were blinded by arrogance, the administration believed that iraq would be doable. the congress, itself, was compliant in the scenario until too late. at this point, they are conflicted with respect to iraq funding. they will not be so for iran.


now, do i think the administration WANTS to attack iran? um...yeah, probably. do i think they're looking for ANY avenue through which to do so? again, probably they are.

is there any scenario by which they actually at this point believe that congress/the country will let them do it? nope. even this administration knows that. so, i'm not lauding the administration for finally becoming rational. i just believe that even irrational actors can't help but see that attacking iran now can ONLY lead to tremendous failure.

and with iraq in doubt and no question of a complete lack of support in either the country, military, congress, or international community for an iranian war, this administration will not push for a guaranteed failure.

[kwame k]

Happy Fools Day, Everyone! Or Bush’s National Holiday!!!

I think it will just be massive bombings on Iran’s Nuclear Facilities, Missile Sites, and strategic Military Installations. I don’t think we’ll invade or occupy Iran. I think Messiah Bush will just want to destroy Iran’s Nuclear Capabilities. He has stated for several years he wants regime change but he’s out of time and if the best he can do is bomb the fuck out of them, he’ll be disappointed but that will satiate his appetite.

There is a lot discrepancy between Bush’s Administration and the Generals. Totally ass backwards from what you’d think. The Generals are trying to dissuade Bush Inc from using Nukes. Using Nuclear weapons isn’t even an option, I don’t think. Cheney and Bush wanted to leave the Nuclear option out there as threat to Iran.

For the obvious reasons Nuking Iran would cause:

1. A ripple effect throughout The Middle East.
Moderate Arab’s would be alienated from the US and would destroy any credibility we have left in that region.

2. A human factor of massive loss of life in the first strikes and long term radiation caused illnesses/deaths.
A Non-issue for Bush but an issue for everyone else in the US and our Allies.

3. Countries on the fringes of obtaining Nuclear weapons will be scrambling to achieve Nuclear Capabilities, seeing that as the only deterrent from America’s Imperialistic ambitions. Bush never allowing Sanctions or The UN or International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) a chance to do their jobs sends a clear message that negotiations will not work with the US.

There was a big deal made about an article in The New Yorker:

“A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was “absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb” if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do “what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,” and “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”

“Seymour M. Hersh makes some bold actuations about Bush’s plans for Iran. The above article uses the same unnamed sources and The House member said that no one in the meetings “is really objecting” to the talk of war.”

“The people they’re briefing are the same ones who led the charge on Iraq. At most, questions are raised: How are you going to hit all the sites at once? How are you going to get deep enough?” (Iran is building facilities underground.) “There’s no pressure from Congress” not to take military action, the House member added. “The only political pressure is from the guys who want to do it.” Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/04/17/060417fa_fact

This article seems to have had a lot of legs around the Washington Media. Hersh had appearances on CNN and other News outlets defending his point of view. It’s problematic when a writer use unnamed sources but when these type of accusations are made it’s hard to tell if it’s true or a guy trying to sell his story.

Why would we Nuke Iran?
Apparently, when the strategic planners where developing war strategies, during the Cold War, Nukes were the only viable option for destroying underground facilities.
As to our planning of Air Strikes against Iran and using Nuclear Weapons some of the tactical theories are based on 30 year old reports.

Currently we have no “Bunker Buster” or other bomb that can penetrate the underground Facilities to effectively destroy them. They will not reach those depths. They are only effective at a shallow depth. Some of Iran’s Nuclear processing plants are estimated to be at 75 to 1,000 feet. We could precision bomb the entrances and exits thus sealing up the Facilities. This would be less environmentally disastrous then blowing huge holes in the earth that wouldn't contain Nuclear debris.

The Israelis came up with a strategy to use conventional bombs first and then use a bunker buster type bomb or a straight up Nuke. The problem with those type of bombings is the fallout and meltdown

The Iranian President has said that the Holocaust was faked/blown out of proportion and he wants to wipe Israel off the map. America bombing Iran will be less likely to turn the entire Middle East into a powder keg but if Israel does it. Wow!!!

Bush has stated the biggest threat to our National Security is Iran having a Nuclear bomb. He already has more support from Congress and more countries around the world for a bombing in Iran then he ever had for invading Iraq.

I still stand by the assumption that whatever Bush does it will be after the Presidential elections. He will achieved what he deems as the most important threat to the US and whether it’s a Democrat or Repuke in office he’ll have already set in motion policies that can not be reversed. It will keep us in Iraq.

Here is a cute animation regarding a Bunker Buster. What’s ironic about this short film is it uses a Nuclear Site in Iran as it’s example.

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/nuclear_weapons/nuclear-bunker-buster-rnep-animation.html

[Guitar Shark]

I agree with kb - it ain't happening.

[packoo]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Most of congress, the military brass, and hell the NATION recognize the 2-front nightmare.....

what's one more to Bush/Cheney???

Iraq is the second front... Iran is and has been the target since 2003... Quite frankly, this will be the beginning of the end of this era... The Arab world will once again get creamed in a war... Yes, there will be terrorist attacks but that will never stop...

Iran has been the problem since 1979... The killing of the Shaw was spitting in the face of the US... Guess who help put the Shaw of Iran in power? Daddy Bush... This has been a 30 year, low intensity war about to reach the climax and end all at the same time... This is the Old Guard (USA Cold War Military leaders and their protoge'z) mopping up the tinkering they have been doing in the Mid East since the Korean War... Study Cold War world politics...

America has manipulated this area for 50 years to control those who control the oil... If the Mid East was united, America and her allies would not have had such a great run these past 50 years, think about it...

This final chapter will dictate the next 100 years in the Mid East... Which, will be the last 100 years with crude oil as the fuel of choice... The old guard wants to ensure its legacy and the only way to do that is to maintain the power throughout OIL ERA...

Now, as for the will of the people... This is America, he who is willing to spend money gets what they want...

On Money, the "FED" who is getting praised for the great work to stave off a bad recession is making things worse in the future... First, recessions are a normal, healthy and needed to have a long term prosperous economy... 2 The printing presses are printing money 24/7/365 which means your dollars ( not money but actually "notes", read the cash) is worth less and less each day....

Do not blame oil companies for the price of fuel... Oil is traded in dollars, with dollars worth a third of what they were worth 15 years ago, finally gas has caught up to the value the commodity is worth... Eventually oil will go up, and has a little, due to supply... It is the dollar that causing the pain...

It looks great now that we are going to avoid the recession but the depression will come again... It has too, we have put ourselves on the road to it by avoiding the lil bumps in the road. Instead, we wanna drive right off the cliff...

[packoo]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Most of congress, the military brass, and hell the NATION recognize the 2-front nightmare.....

what's one more to Bush/Cheney???

Iraq is the second front... Iran is and has been the target since 2003... Quite frankly, this will be the beginning of the end of this era... The Arab world will once again get creamed in a war... Yes, there will be terrorist attacks but that will never stop...

Iran has been the problem since 1979... The killing of the Shaw was spitting in the face of the US... Guess who help put the Shaw of Iran in power? Daddy Bush... This has been a 30 year, low intensity war about to reach the climax and end all at the same time... This is the Old Guard (USA Cold War Military leaders and their protoge'z) mopping up the tinkering they have been doing in the Mid East since the Korean War... Study Cold War world politics...

America has manipulated this area for 50 years to control those who control the oil... If the Mid East was united, America and her allies would not have had such a great run these past 50 years, think about it...

This final chapter will dictate the next 100 years in the Mid East... Which, will be the last 100 years with crude oil as the fuel of choice... The old guard wants to ensure its legacy and the only way to do that is to maintain the power throughout OIL ERA...

Now, as for the will of the people... This is America, he who is willing to spend money gets what they want...

On Money, the "FED" who is getting praised for the great work to stave off a bad recession is making things worse in the future... First, recessions are a normal, healthy and needed to have a long term prosperous economy... 2 The printing presses are printing money 24/7/365 which means your dollars ( not money but actually "notes", read the cash) is worth less and less each day....

Do not blame oil companies for the price of fuel... Oil is traded in dollars, with dollars worth a third of what they were worth 15 years ago, finally gas has caught up to the value the commodity is worth... Eventually oil will go up, and has a little, due to supply... It is the dollar that causing the pain...

It looks great now that we are going to avoid the recession but the depression will come again... It has too, we have put ourselves on the road to it by avoiding the lil bumps in the road. Instead, we wanna drive right off the cliff...

[LoungeMachine]

Welcome to the forum, packoo....

Good post.

With the software the way it is, sometimes you may get the white screen, and think your post didnt submit, hence the double post.

Not to worry, you can always go in and edit out the dupe.

Again, welcome to the forum, and keep up the posts.

:gulp:

[kwame k]

Since packoo brought up the Fiat Money System.
Ron Paul wrote a very good piece Before the U.S. House of Representatives.

February 15, 2006

It's a great read and he foretells most of the problems we face now.

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr021506.htm

[LoungeMachine]

Ron Paul wasn't the only prophet...

Anyone remember Ross Perot?


We really need to revamp our 2-party system that is bought and paid for by lobbyists and corporate interests, including DEFENSE.

Just ask the ghost of Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Our current form of "democracy" is anything but....

:gulp:

[kwame k]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Ron Paul wasn't the only prophet...

Anyone remember Ross Perot?


We really need to revamp our 2-party system that is bought and paid for by lobbyists and corporate interests, including DEFENSE.

Just ask the ghost of Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Our current form of "democracy" is anything but....

:gulp:

That was the main reason I voted for old Ross. I really thought we could of had a viable third party.
Plus that crazy fucker would of scared the hell out of the rest of the world.

[LoungeMachine]

At least Ross kept us from another 4 years of Poppy.

:gulp:

I'd still love to know the story behind his daughter and the blackmailing....

[kwame k]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
At least Ross kept us from another 4 years of Poppy.

:gulp:

I'd still love to know the story behind his daughter and the blackmailing....

No shit on George Sr....

Never really heard about the blackmail story.

[kwame k]

Oh, wait the nude photos???

[Nitro Express]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Funding?

Are you high? ;)

The billions for Iraq and Afghanistan are off-budget.

You really think money is the reason they wont bomb?

And you cannot say "we're not attacking" but then say we might engage in some "limited strikes"

Limited strikes = attacking Iran.

Get off the fence. :D

:gulp:

They will just print more dollars until they become worhless and with China already financing the war, hey why the heck not. We are going to bail out Wall Street and provide socialized medicine for everybody. I figure the value added tax and inflation coming with make a Happy Meal at McDonalds cost $35.00

[Nitro Express]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
Most of congress, the military brass, and hell the NATION recognize the 2-front nightmare.....

what's one more to Bush/Cheney???

Just like uncle Adolf Hitler. Their mouths are ready to take a bigger bite. Some new weapon gizmo must be inspiring the fake confidence.

[Nitro Express]

I actually have some Confederate notes and they are worth more than the current US Dollar because of the collectors value. The govt. no longer can lie to us and tell us there is no more inflation. Take a trip to Europe. The plane ticket will cost a fortune and once you get there you dollar won't buy shit.

[kwame k]

Originally posted by Nitro Express
Just like uncle Adolf Hitler. Their mouths are ready to take a bigger bite. Some new weapon gizmo must be inspiring the fake confidence.

It's fucking scary when you can equate Bush to Hitler and get no argument.

[knuckleboner]

i haven't liked (george) bush since 2000. but i definitely wouldn't go so far as to call him hitler.

the guy's made a number of bad decisions and in other areas been largely ineffective.

still, i think comparing him with hitler forces people to point out why that's NOT the case, rather than more properly focusing on why bush is still a bad president.

[kwame k]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
i haven't liked (george) bush since 2000. but i definitely wouldn't go so far as to call him hitler.

the guy's made a number of bad decisions and in other areas been largely ineffective.

still, i think comparing him with hitler forces people to point out why that's NOT the case, rather than more properly focusing on why bush is still a bad president.

You're right!

Really he's not anywhere near Hitler!

More Tounge and Cheek on my part.

[ODShowtime]

hitler was a WAY better orator

[kwame k]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
hitler was a WAY better orator

Good point:D

[knuckleboner]

oh, come on now! you guys are just biased against bush because he doesn't quite understand the english language...;)

[ODShowtime]

Originally posted by knuckleboner
oh, come on now! you guys are just biased against bush because he doesn't quite understand the english language...;)


FUCK! This slowness is throwing my timing off. Anyway


Yeah, I tend to think people who can't command our language are stupid. Couple that with stupid decisions and I start to get biased about someone. My bad.

;)

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
FUCK! This slowness is throwing my timing off. Anyway



As if you had timing to begin with, skinbasher....

:D