lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Feb 23, 2006 18:32:54 GMT -4
...and Rusty Lander correctly predicted that we would invade Iran in the near future. Correctly? Has there been an invasion in the last couple days I didn't hear about? Furthermore, I believe Rusty's prediction was that Iran would be attacked, not invaded. And making such a prediction isn't really going too far out on a limb considering Iran is one of the major problem areas in the world right now. When did we attack Iran? Maybe she confused Iran with Iraq. Or maybe she confused fantasy with reality.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 23, 2006 22:00:10 GMT -4
The US has invaded, but is keeping it quiet from the Media so that no one knows about it.That's why they invaded Afganistan and Iraq, so they could hit Iran from both sides at then same time. {/removes CT hat]
|
|
|
Post by Dead Hoosiers on Feb 24, 2006 1:23:41 GMT -4
The depleted uranium deaths conspiracy is starting to spring leaks, Rex 84 is alive and well under a new name (Halliburton was just awarded a contract to build internment camps in the U.S.) and Rusty Lander correctly predicted that we would invade Iran in the near future. You should be grateful we even bother to post here. I didn't say we invaded Iran. I said [referring to Rusty's previous posts] that we're going to in the near future. I think that was on the old board, but at the time, the notion of our attacking/invading (what's the difference?) Iran was generally pooh-poohed.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Feb 24, 2006 2:35:38 GMT -4
"Attacking" might mean a single bombing run to destroy a nuclear power plant. "Invading" implies moving troops in and keeping them there for an extended period of time, and taking over control of it's government... at least that's how I differentiate between the two terms.
An attack seems like a possibility, but an invasion on the scale of Iraq seems to be too big a task for even the US, they would be spreading themselves too thin.
|
|
|
Post by rustylander on Feb 24, 2006 3:24:50 GMT -4
By attack I meant invade just to clarify the matter.
And yes...they will spread themsevles too thin, that is the whole point.
So then, in order for America to defend itself from "terrorists", they will have the excuse they need to invite in foreign troops to "protect" them - and so brainwashed are Amercian citizens that they will actually welcome these troops as a good thing -and that's when all hell will break loose.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Feb 24, 2006 5:06:25 GMT -4
Ummmm, how can he have correctly have predicted something that has still yet to happen? You can't say it's correct until it happens, even if it looks like it might happen, it still hasn't so it's not yet correct.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Feb 24, 2006 9:53:19 GMT -4
By attack I meant invade just to clarify the matter.
Well, this changes things. I agree with LO that an attack may not be beyond the realm of possibility, but an invasion seems highly improbably.
And yes...they will spread themsevles too thin, that is the whole point.
Your point doesn’t mean much unless you clearly define what “soon” means. In a couple years the demands on our military may ease enough that a large scale operation on a new front may be possible, but by that time your point is mute because we will no longer be spread too thin. Give us a specific date by which this invasion will occur, not just some vague reference to “soon”.
…and so brainwashed are Amercian citizens that they will actually welcome these troops as a good thing -and that's when all hell will break loose.
This is hardly the case. Most Americans are fed up with these military operations and just want to see our troops back home as soon as possible. The last thing they’ll do is embrace a new war. If all hell breaks out it will likely come from the throngs of Americans protesting the new operations.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Feb 24, 2006 11:12:46 GMT -4
By attack I meant invade just to clarify the matter. And yes...they will spread themsevles too thin, that is the whole point. So then, in order for America to defend itself from "terrorists", they will have the excuse they need to invite in foreign troops to "protect" them - and so brainwashed are Amercian citizens that they will actually welcome these troops as a good thing -and that's when all hell will break loose. Rusty, I'm sure you're aware I disagree with your last paragraph quite strongly (though "being spread too thin" is a legitimate concern), so I won't belabor that point. Just curious, though, do you still think there's a bunch of Chinese soldiers under NYC?
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Feb 24, 2006 11:20:13 GMT -4
The depleted uranium deaths conspiracy is starting to spring leaks, Rex 84 is alive and well under a new name (Halliburton was just awarded a contract to build internment camps in the U.S.) and Rusty Lander correctly predicted that we would invade Iran in the near future. You should be grateful we even bother to post here. I didn't say we invaded Iran. I said [referring to Rusty's previous posts] that we're going to in the near future. I think that was on the old board, but at the time, the notion of our attacking/invading (what's the difference?) Iran was generally pooh-poohed. The "woo-woos" operate by a logic all their own!!! Len
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Feb 24, 2006 11:23:31 GMT -4
…and so brainwashed are Amercian citizens that they will actually welcome these troops as a good thing -and that's when all hell will break loose.This is hardly the case. Most Americans are fed up with these military operations and just want to see our troops back home as soon as possible. The last thing they’ll do is embrace a new war. If all hell breaks out it will likely come from the throngs of Americans protesting the new operations. and their grip on reality is rather tenuos
|
|
|
Post by Retrograde on Feb 24, 2006 12:20:20 GMT -4
Just curious, though, do you still think there's a bunch of Chinese soldiers under NYC? I like that one. They can't take Taiwan, so they decided to invade New York instead.
|
|
|
Post by Retrograde on Feb 24, 2006 12:22:22 GMT -4
Correctly? Has there been an invasion in the last couple days I didn't hear about? Furthermore, I believe Rusty's prediction was that Iran would be attacked, not invaded. And making such a prediction isn't really going too far out on a limb considering Iran is one of the major problem areas in the world right now. When did we attack Iran? Maybe she confused Iran with Iraq. Or maybe she confused fantasy with reality. The thing I've noticed in my time here is, if a prediction comes true, then obviously it is correct. If it does not come true, it remains equally correct, it just hasn't happened yet.
|
|