lichtgilphead Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 So the Pentagon should be called 'The Lorne'? No. The Lorne is a pub in Ardrishaig. Your idea would just cause confusion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longjohn Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 Thanks for the clarification on this point. I see now what you were getting at. Although it still doesn't explain how their passports were found on the ground after they had committed suicide. Dead people don't have passports - that's a fact that none of the sheeple can dispute. The passports could very well be found as they may be necessary to get the terrorists into their target area, such as on a commercial aircraft. Of course they could be false but maybe not as they guys might well like a bit of posthumous glory. The sheeples bite back 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamenitza Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 They should rename that pub The Square, you know. Is it a Masonic pub? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAFC Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 (edited) Rumsfeld met Saddam in the 1980s and sold him weapons (the enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that), I'm not sure what relevance that has to any point of mine. Shit, China has been trading oil in yuan since 2012 and there's been no war. As for the "benefit or gain" part - well what has the US gained from Iraq? The negatives outweigh the positives. Oil (and gas) are cornerstones of the world economy. They're really important and it was definitely beneficial to the world as a whole to have Saddam's sons' grubby hands not holding onto Iraq's oil production, but the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq weren't over oil. The USA hasn't particularly benefitted from either, bar a handful of private companies that made money (Halliburton primarily from logistics like they did in Bosnia but that doesn't fit the conspiracy nut agenda). So, we can sum this up as: "Middle East wars were for teh oil? Nah, they weren't". The Russians and Chinese must have also helped plan the war seeing as they have companies making money from oil. So the gulf war was nothing to do with oil? When you say the worlds economy are you being serious? Please tell me you dont actually beleive america went to war for the sake of the world and would sacrafice themselves to help Russia? Lolzers http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/ Edited September 6, 2013 by DAFC 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
el buitre Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 Saddam hussain had to be removed by the americans as he was wanting to start trading oil in euros not dollars, affecting the u.s dollar as a strong currency 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 So the gulf war was nothing to do with oil? When you say the worlds economy are you being serious? Please tell me you dont actually beleive america went to war for the sake of the world and would sacrafice themselves to help Russia? Lolzers http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/ The first Gulf War? If we want to be simplistic then yes it happened because Saddam invaded Kuwait for their oil to pay off debt. The US and UN got involved because Iraq refused to exit Kuwait. Saddam had to be kept in line over that. Oil is important to the world economy, this is a fact. No, I'm pointing holes in your flawed theory by showing that Russia has benefitted more than the US has from the Iraq War. Bring evidence to the table to show what benefits the US gained from invading Iraq in 2003. Saddam hussain had to be removed by the americans as he was wanting to start trading oil in euros not dollars, affecting the u.s dollar as a strong currency Iraq did this (stopped using dollars) in September 2000. Noises about wanting to remove Saddam were being made before then. Also, your point doesn't hold much weight seeing as war in Iraq led to the dollar losing value. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lofarl Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 Us government mind control stuff. They Live. Send in Rowdy Roddy Piper. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 No, I'm pointing holes in your flawed theory by showing that Russia has benefitted more than the US has from the Iraq War. Bring evidence to the table to show what benefits the US gained from invading Iraq in 2003. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/03/19/opinion/iraq-war-oil-juhasz 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garethbalesstupidface Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 without reading it are you having a laugh? what benefits did america get from the iraq war? why do you think they even did it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 without reading it are you having a laugh? what benefits did america get from the iraq war? why do you think they even did it? He's back. Hopefully with a new and improved tin-foil hat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracowjambo Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 without reading it are you having a laugh? what benefits did america get from the iraq war? why do you think they even did it? They got a foothold in the middle east 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garethbalesstupidface Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 lots of things like that, but mainly it was oil, its not coincidence when you invade the place home to the 2nd largest untapped oil reserve on the planet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracowjambo Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 lots of things like that, but mainly it was oil, its not coincidence when you invade the place home to the 2nd largest untapped oil reserve on the planet. That you can also place hundreds of thousands of troops to put pressure on the region. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 You would have thought that the thousands of people who worked there, and the thousands who lived in the area, might have noticed if someone was rigging up some explosives to collapse the towers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracowjambo Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 You would have thought that the thousands of people who worked there, and the thousands who lived in the area, might have noticed if someone was rigging up some explosives to collapse the towers. They could have done it at night when it was almost empty. Why did they not detonate the explosives when the plane hit they could have disguised it then and killed a lot more people. The more they killed the easier it would have been to sway the american public into accepting a war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 They could have done it at night when it was almost empty. Why did they not detonate the explosives when the plane hit they could have disguised it then and killed a lot more people. The more they killed the easier it would have been to sway the american public into accepting a war. Why not just plant bombs. Maybe the CIA thought that would be a bit boring. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cracowjambo Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 Why not just plant bombs. Maybe the CIA thought that would be a bit boring. It would have been about taking out a land mark to show the americans they were vunrable. I'm sure if they could have killed 3000+ taking out the statue of libarty they would have done that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAFC Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century I believe that the bush administration and associates had a hell of a lot to gain from 9/11 and the resultant wars. I like America and American people but maybe somewhat cynically believe that American foreign policy and imperialism is the number one route cause of pain and suffering to millions if not billions of people. Be it getting blown up, shot, exploited, robbed, enslaved or lied to. They're not the first empire but they're probably the first hidden empire. The sooner scotland gets away from the uk government the better. Isn't it funny that neutral or passive countries don't have problems with terrorism? We have been their bitches since ww2, maybe time to look towards Europe for allies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 Why not just plant bombs. Maybe the CIA thought that would be a bit boring. A truck bomb was detonated in 1993 and did next to no damage, there would have been a few arses kicked at Langley for that, for failing obviously. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 A truck bomb was detonated in 1993 and did next to no damage, there would have been a few arses kicked at Langley for that, for failing obviously.I knew that, but flying planes into to them to cover up controlled explosions is a bit much. It would have been easier to say that over a period of time hundreds of bombs had been strategically planted and then detonated on 9/11. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.