Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by patsfan13, Feb 12, 2007.
yeah, probably using computer parts from Hong Kong to communicate with eachother as well!!! ... let's send three carrier groups to surround Taiwan!!
Is Halliburton still doing business with Iran?
I say we send the 101st Airborne into Vienna and straighten out those American killin' Krauts!
a 50 cal can easily shoot down a helicopter
More than 100 of the.50 calibre weapons, capable of penetrating body armour, have been discovered by American troops during raids.
A Steyr HS50 rifle, Austrian supplied rifles, arms trade, Iran equipping Iraq insurgents
The guns were part of a shipment of 800 rifles that the Austrian company, Steyr-Mannlicher, exported legally to Iran last year.
The sale was condemned in Washington and London because officials were worried that the weapons would be used by insurgents against British and American troops.
Within 45 days of the first HS50 Steyr Mannlicher rifles arriving in Iran, an American officer in an armoured vehicle was shot dead by an Iraqi insurgent using the weapon.
Over the last six months American forces have found small caches of the Â£10,000 rifles but in the last 24 hours a raid in Baghdad brought the total to more than 100, US defence sources reported.
now you see why people come home in body bags?
The lefties think this sort of thing is a joke,.....and why not they and their friends don't join the military and serve their country they just ***** and whine.
it's a lot easier to crack a beer and b1tch at a message board.. or try to find a lawyer to sue someone on a board that made you look fooooooooolish... than do anything real. more than half of the problem comes from within; we all know who i mean.
The arms trade needs to be reigned in. Let's not pretend that the U.S. is not as guilty as anyone in this regard. Objectively speaking, Iran has as much right to be in Iraq as we do, i.e., none. When the American right wing has the guts to admit they were wrong, American troops will stop coming home in body bags. (Some right wingers, like Chuck Hagel, are finally coming around.)
Remember last year there was a post about how a whole C-130 that belonged to the US filled with AK-47's was missing I believe it was in turkey or somewhere and could not be found, somehow these rifles also flooded the market in this area. We have complicity in arming those who dissent against us in the mideast. It is always easy to blame another country, however the US has tremendous responsibility. I know this is a blog from the left, but cannot find the original article..
Baghdad - Fears have surfaced that as many as 200,000 AK-47s shipped by the U.S. to Iraqi security forces may have ended up in the hands of terrorists.
The Northern Ireland newspaper The Daily Mirror reports the 99-ton cache of AK47s was supposed to have been secretly flown out from a U.S. base in Bosnia. But the four planeloads of arms have since vanished.
Orders for the deal originated with the U.S. Department of Defense. But the work was contracted out via a complex web of private arms traders.
And the Moldovan airline used to transport the shipment was criticized by the United Nations in 2003 for smuggling arms to Liberia, a fact uncovered by human rights group Amnesty International.
Amnesty chief spokesman Mike Blakemore said: "It's unbelievable that no one can account for 200,000 assault rifles. If these weapons have gone missing it's a terrifying prospect." American defense chiefs hired an American firm to take the guns from the 90s Bosnian war, to Iraq. However, flights, which supposedly took off between July 2004 and July 2005 were not recorded by air traffic controllers in Baghdad.
A spokesman for the coalition forces confirmed they had not received "any weapons from Bosnia" and added they were "not aware of any purchases for Iraq from Bosnia". NATO and U.S. officials have already voiced fears that Bosnian arms - sold by US, British and Swiss firms - are being passed to insurgents.
Who cares about their 'rights' they are giving arms to people for the purpose of killing US troops that isn't alright.
Oh, for the love of...
American soldiers are probably getting shot at by some weapons that we sold to Iran in the Mid-1980's.
Countries deal arms to other countries. There are no loyalties.
You can apply the same standard to Bin Laden, whose mujehadeen we armed and trained to direct an insurrection in Afghanistan against the Soviets.
Well at the time the mujehadeen weren't attacking Americans that did' start for 5+ years after the Soviet's left Afghanistan. At the time I don't recall anyone objecting due to the possibility of an org like Al Queda forming.
20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing. Care to share with us some group that will exist and threaten the country in 10 years that doesn't currently exist?
Computer parts and .50 caliber smiper rifles. Yup. How's your rubber ducky doing?
I agree about weapons supply. We arms so many countries, therefore, we shouldn't ***** about countries arming everyone else. I agree there. The issue here, is that Austria sells them to Iran, and Iran sends them into Iraq to kill our soldiers. Ask yourself, would we be wrong to target Iran as a result? Iran is directly aiding in the death of American soldiers. There were some soldier blogs who felt the actual snipers were Iranian, certainly Chechnian. I don't want to attack Iran, and don't think we will, but wouldn't their aiding and abedding in our GI's deaths be justification for a ***** slap? That americans in here are not upset about this, is disturbing to me. It's as if you don't care how, or whom, is killing our soldiers.
Absolutely similar, the question is, had the Soviets decided to strike us for our meddling, would they have been justified?
Most of the weapons of the world say 'Made in USA' on them.
This thread is stupid. You are trying to create a link between Iranian weapons, when the United States does the exact same thing all over the world.
The issue here isn't where the weapon was made, but rather than the purchaser (IRAN) deploying those weapons to people attacking US troops.
In general one can differentiate between selling weapons to Iceland and North Korea for instance. I am sure there are situation where the US is selling weapons to disreputable people. THat isn't rigth.
IN THIS CASE, we have weapons sold to Iran, apparently these rifles are documented as being sold to Iran and then >10% seized in Iraq in the hands of people trying to kill US troops. You mean to say we don't have a justification to question the Iranian government on how those weapons ended up in the hands of 'insurgents'??????
Why are you so worried about American troops? Don't you want them over there?
America arms the enemies of their enemies all the time. In Central & South America, and in the Middle East. So who didn't think Iran would do the same? We invaded a country they share a border with, of course they're going to do everything they can to maintain their influence. Get our troops the hell out of Iraq and they won't be shot at.
Understanding why they are there doesn't equate to not being worried about their safety. I have friends who kids are over there.
That doesn't mean we should publicly call them out for it????
Especially when they also claim to not help people targeting Americans (their denial of suppling roadside bombs to insurgents).
No no, I have no problem calling them out, I'm just saying we shouldn't be surprised. And we sure as hell shouldn't use it as a pretext for military action.
I agree with your point here.
It's amazing in here how little some people care for our soldiers. Who cares if another country is purposely sending arms into a country to help kill our GI's. Nothing like supporting our troops!
So, needlessly sending our troops into harm's way is what you call supporting our troops?
You're just being stupid. Of course we care, but we knew it was going to happen. When you invade a country, countries with opposing interests are very likely to lend your opponent a hand. Maybe you're surprised by this, but nobody else is. Now, onto how we can protect our troops:
1. We can deal with the situation and accept a higher rate of casualty because of Iranian weapons.
2. We can withdraw our troops (accept defeat in Iraq) and reduce the casualties to zero.
3. We can retaliate against Iran. IMO, this option would only lead to more nations taking up arms against us.
So don't act like you foaming at the mouth over something that's an expected part of war is somehow good for our troops. Indignation isn't going to save lives. The only question worth asking is how do we deal with it?
Are our troops there? If you want to argue their being there go ahead, we do that all the time in here, so what's the difference. The bottom line is that our soldiers are in IRaq, and IRan is sending sniper rifles in for the express purpose of murdering them, and people in here are defending Iran, and saying "so, who cares?". I find that disturbing personally. Then again, I've been of the opinion that there are people in here who's disdain for this administration runs so deep, that they hope we fail in Iraq. I don't think I need to explain was parts make up failure. I think the "who cares" about Iranian weaponry pretty much helps explain it.
Earth to Pujo, I've been saying Iran is meddling in Iraq since I joined this forum. Their involvement is common sense. When have I demanded that we nuke Iran for being involved? Read my posts before you accuse me of foaming at the mouth. People in here told me Iran wasn't involved in Iraq, and now some of those people are saying "who cares". At any rate, I've stated my opposition to military action versus Iran (I don't think it's going to happen anyway), but am disturbed by the reaction of some posters in here. Of course, I'm not surprised by it, merely disturbed. When I brought up that Iran was helping to fuel the chaos in Iraq, people didn't agree. How about now? Think they're meddling? As "understandable" as their meddling is, does that mean we should ignore it?
Separate names with a comma.