Iran in Mexico and the Caribbean: Building a Strategic Trampoline towards the US - Page 4




 
--
Boots
 
November 11th, 2011  
Yossarian
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seehund
Plato realizes that the general run of humankind can think, and speak, etc., without (so far as they acknowledge) any awareness of his realm of Forms. The allegory of the cave is supposed to explain this.

In the allegory, Plato likens people untutored in the Theory of Forms to prisoners chained in a cave, unable to turn their heads. All they can see is the wall of the cave. Behind them burns a fire. Between the fire and the prisoners there is a parapet, along which puppeteers can walk. The puppeteers, who are behind the prisoners, hold up puppets that cast shadows on the wall of the cave. The prisoners are unable to see these puppets, the real objects, that pass behind them. What the prisoners see and hear are shadows and echoes cast by objects that they do not see.

Such prisoners would mistake appearance for reality. They would think the things they see on the wall (the shadows) were real; they would know nothing of the real causes of the shadows. So when the prisoners talk, what are they talking about? If an object (a book, let us say) is carried past behind them, and it casts a shadow on the wall, and a prisoner says “I see a book,” what is he talking about? He thinks he is talking about a book, but he is really talking about a shadow. But he uses the word “book.”

If a prisoner says “That’s a book” he thinks that the word “book” refers to the very thing he is looking at. But he would be wrong. He’s only looking at a shadow. The real referent of the word “book” he cannot see. To see it, he would have to turn his head around.

The prisoners may learn what a book is by their experience with shadows of books. But they would be mistaken if they thought that the word “book” refers to something that any of them has ever seen. Likewise, we may acquire concepts by our perceptual experience of physical objects. But we would be mistaken if we thought that the concepts that we grasp were on the same level as the things we perceive.
I refuse to except all you say, as surely you are working with the conspirators. lol

But a good read indeed.
March 9th, 2012  
asma18
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zultra
Of course he would, any reason to stop the threats to Globalism, the US does not have the balls to Attack NK, perhaps, because they can fight back.
Who is NK?
March 9th, 2012  
asma18
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zultra
Indeed NK has 8 Nuclear missiles, thats why America won't, but it will happily bomb and kill civilians in Iraq and other poor countries, not Just America mind you, but the UK as well joined in on the massacure.
And do you think China will allow its client state North Korea to launch any nukes anywhere? They know if they do allow it the U.S. responses will go off course and hit Beijing and other major cities. Iran on the other hand does not have big brother to stop them launching.Strike now, destroy their ability to wage war and take their oil because thats what its about.OIL.If Iran tried to assassinate Saudis Ambassador why havent the Saudis retaliated?
--
Boots
March 9th, 2012  
asma18
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by brinktk
Why would we want to fight NK...we don't need to, within the next 20 years the US Army will be out of that country anyways. The ROK military can handle anything the North Koreans throw at them, trust me. Furthermore, we don't need to "attack them" they have a large military...that's it. I think the decision on who won the Korean war is pretty decisive. South Korea is one of the most prosperous countries on Earth, and they have the economy to back it up. NK is in shambles and can barely feed its' own people. Have you done ANY research into the NK regime over the past 20 years...they're one of the most oppressive countries in the world with a very bad human rights track record.

I think you need to check your facts about the US "happily" bombing and killing civilians in Iraq. Have civilians died as a result of US military action...yes...at the same time no other country spends the money and uses the resources that we do to prevent civilian loss of life. I have multiple combat deployments to Iraq and we never have gone out of our way to kill civilians, it's actually quite the contrary, we go out of our way to keep them alive, often to our detriment. A good example is the loss of a 1LT from our unit a few days ago. He got out of his vehicle to fix the wire mitigation kit on his MRAP. He was doing this so the vehicle didn't pull down Iraqi power lines the go across their streets like spider webs. He was shot and killed by a sniper while he was doing this. This sure doesn't look like the blood thirsty murder crazed US military it seems you are trying to portray. If we didn't care about the civilians we wouldn't even have the wire mitigation kits on our vehicles. Another example is from a while back when we were hit by complex IED ambush. We were about 90% sure that the guys in a reed line to our west were the perpetrators of the attack. Yet, we weren't 100% sure, so we held our fire, we took it. We knew that they could be civilians so we just recovered our vehicle and waited for our QRF to show up. Sure enough, when they arrived, they were hit by an IED that was set up about 400 meters up the road from where we were at. We later found out that the men we saw were in fact the bad guys...but we didn't know that then. I would venture to say that there aren't many other armies in the world outside of the West that would have taken that risk. We knew the village nearby was complicit in the attack, yet, we didn't have proof so we just continued our mission. Just another example...

The massacre is from these extremist a**holes that murder and kill entire families to instill fear in the people. The very people they claim they are trying to liberate yet they pack cars full of explosives and detonate them in civilian market places. Or crazies that drive around and pour acid on women who aren't wearing a hijab. Or breaking up wedding parties and raping the women, shooting the men, and drowning the children because they can. I have seen this. I have found the bodies of dozens of Shi'a murdered by Sunni extremist dumped into the Euphrates river. The only reason they were killed was because they were Shi'a. The same happened in the Tigris in Baghdad to Sunni's by Shi'a. That's the reason the Sunnis came to our side during the Sunni awakening, they were tired of the crazies going out of control with their twisted idea of Islam. This is what they want. They want the entire world under their dominion, in a world Wahabbi state. So please, check the attitude at the door and try not to pour blanket biased statements on here. Things are never what they seem, it's easy to judge from behind a computer screen in the luxury of your own home.
Well mate dont you think its time you changed your tactics,1. Our soldiers lives are more important than the civilians, while ensuring their lives our soldiers lives are further endangered. 2.Where are the no go zones /free fire zones why are they allowed access around the roads. 3.Where are the fortified villages ,where all the outlying villages are brought in cutting off the enemies activities at night it worked in Malaya with the Brits in the 60s.4. These villages curfewed dusk to dawn again cutting off the enemies access to the people5.If the roads are so important make your own,military traffic only No stopping patrolled by light armour which will make it difficult for the enemy to plant IEDs, you have drones use them to recce the roads.
March 9th, 2012  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by asma18
And do you think China will allow its client state North Korea to launch any nukes anywhere? They know if they do allow it the U.S. responses will go off course and hit Beijing and other major cities.
"Off course"? I dunno what you're smoking, but you really should give it up. Today, major powers can deliver weapon payloads either through the door or the window, or if need be down the chimney, never mind missing the city or country.
March 9th, 2012  
brinktk
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by asma18
Well mate dont you think its time you changed your tactics,1. Our soldiers lives are more important than the civilians, while ensuring their lives our soldiers lives are further endangered. 2.Where are the no go zones /free fire zones why are they allowed access around the roads. 3.Where are the fortified villages ,where all the outlying villages are brought in cutting off the enemies activities at night it worked in Malaya with the Brits in the 60s.4. These villages curfewed dusk to dawn again cutting off the enemies access to the people5.If the roads are so important make your own,military traffic only No stopping patrolled by light armour which will make it difficult for the enemy to plant IEDs, you have drones use them to recce the roads.

This is not Malaya, this is not Vietnam. There is no Jungle for these insurgents to hide. Our jungle is the cities. There IS a curfew. We do limit activity on roads. I'm not going to sit down and try to explain the changing tactics over the course of the entire war because you obviously have no clue as to what was going on in Iraq at any time. Beleive it or not, we actually know what we're doing, and all the things you've mentioned we addressed throughout the course of the war.

It's almost insulting for you to presume that you have the solution when it is so obvious your knowledge on the war is extremely limited.

Once again, another "expert" from behind the computer screen...sigh
March 9th, 2012  
George
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by asma18
And do you think China will allow its client state North Korea to launch any nukes anywhere? They know if they do allow it the U.S. responses will go off course and hit Beijing and other major cities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
"Off course"? I dunno what you're smoking, but you really should give it up. Today, major powers can deliver weapon payloads either through the door or the window, or if need be down the chimney, never mind missing the city or country.
I believe he's refering to the possiblility that has been brought up in the past that scientists aren't 100% sure ICBMs can fly over the North Pole & hit targets precisely.
March 14th, 2012  
Yossarian
 
 
Put ICBM's in space, then just drop em down, or is that not legalized yet?
March 18th, 2012  
LeEnfield
 
 
The one thing Russia was frightened of during the height of the cold war was information getting into the countries that they had under control about the difference in living standards between east and west. Now if the people in North Korea start to twig what life is like on the outside then the bigger problem that NK has. Even China could not contain this powder keg and the people have BIT more freedom now than they had before. The North Koreans that even cross into China must see the difference and they begin to question why they are starving and every one else is doing quite nicely, sooner or later the pot will boil over as it did all through eastern Europe and now the middle east.