Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
who didn't say "jackshit" whilst your hero SADDAM gassed kurds? -----I read all
about it in the jewish controlled media. It could be---joeb1 %#% that you do not
read the jewish controlled media. Did you read about the killing of Shiites in the
southern part of Iraq in the wasp-weekly-reader?
Actually, I put the thing in context. IN the 1980, when Saddam gassed the Kurds for collaborating with Iran, Ronnie Reagan was selling them weapons, and generally turning a blind eye to what he was doing against them and Iran because we considered Iran to be the real threat.
And then we also supplied the Iranians with weapons in exchange for hostages. We were essentially playing both sides against each other.
When Iran decided to knock Iraq out of the war by blowing up tankers in the Gulf, cutting off the revenue to Saddam and his Saudi and Kuwaiti sponsors, we sent in the Navy to keep the shipping lanes open.
Now, all this time the Zionists were screaming loudly about Saddam, because he was building weapons that could hit the Zionist Entity. But Reagan largely ignored them. (One of the few things I liked about Reagan was he was the last American presidents who'd stand up to the Jews. Obama was a regular lickspittle by comparison.)
all irrelevant as my point is he was a threat--he did what hitler did--...so to take him out was the right thinginvade ? SAVING you mean
saddam was like hitler:
1. gassed his OWN people
2. invaded innocent, tiny Kuwait
3. violated the ceasefire
1) We didn't say jack shit when Saddam gassed the Kurds. IN fact, Ronnie Reagan actually denied it and sold them the chemicals.
2) Kuwait was hardly innocent. They were sponsoring Saddam when he was attacking Iran for years.
3) He really didn't violate the cease fire..
The reason why we took Saddam out was because the Zionists saw him as a threat.
Not our fucking problem.
You have proven time and again that you are a non-White person sympathizer.When you are dealing with a "religion" that passes their children through the fire"?
Yes, you bomb them wherever they are.
Only if you are a complete racist asshole who doesn't actually understand their religion.
Our problem with the Middle east have nothing to do with religion, buddy.
JoeB131...If you ain't White, you're the best!No wonder they slaughter so many muslims. I guess you have to be a fair-minded liberal to understand their religion.When you are dealing with a "religion" that passes their children through the fire"?
Yes, you bomb them wherever they are.
Only if you are a complete racist asshole who doesn't actually understand their religion.
Our problem with the Middle east have nothing to do with religion, buddy.
all irrelevant as my point is he was a threat--he did what hitler did--...so to take him out was the right thinginvade ? SAVING you mean
saddam was like hitler:
1. gassed his OWN people
2. invaded innocent, tiny Kuwait
3. violated the ceasefire
1) We didn't say jack shit when Saddam gassed the Kurds. IN fact, Ronnie Reagan actually denied it and sold them the chemicals.
2) Kuwait was hardly innocent. They were sponsoring Saddam when he was attacking Iran for years.
3) He really didn't violate the cease fire..
The reason why we took Saddam out was because the Zionists saw him as a threat.
Not our fucking problem.
if oil is critical to our economy--YES we should fight for it if a nutcase like hitler-saddam ILLEGALLY invade another countrybombing is certainly ok,--even ok by the Geneva Convention--when you are bombing enemy combatants
why wouldn't it be??
So government make the rules, and the mean old "terrorists" aren't following the rules.
No fair. No Fair. You keep fighting back after we've "won". No fair!
This isn't even an old story, I'm old enough to remember all the whining about Vietnam and how those damned Viet Cong didn't follow "the rules".
Okay then.
So instead of whining about who is and is not following "the rules', let's have a sensible discussion about why we are fighting over there to start with.
1) We want their oil.
2) the Jews have a hammerlock on our politics in the US
3) Therefore we are constantly balancing the interests of hte Zionist Entity vs. the interests of the Oil Companies.
Does this make sense to you?
Under Saddam thry celebrated and were just like everyone else. Thanks to US invasion thousands of them fled Iraq...we did great job.They erected a 30-foot tall Christmas tree in Iraq in appreciation for what Trump has done to ISIS. At least they know who the real murderers are.you must have about 0 knowledge on warwe don't directly target innocent civilians as policy--that's it --plain as day--that's the big differenceBla bla bla we are so angelic. We never bomb innocents, we never invaded countriee, we spread love and prosperity. We didnt gas Vietnamese, we didnt carpet bomb Iraq and afghanistan. Our soldiers didnt commit war crimes. We have dozens of bases around the world that distribute candy and chocolate I guess.
Tell me how many terrorist groups were axtive in Iraq/Lybia and Syria before we intervened? .....a big ass 0 , thats right.
Even we aided the colombians in their traffickng...we also armed the narcos in Mexico. And thr list goes on.
We even aided Bin Laden....didnt we?
Bullshit...directly or any directly we have been responsible for killing millions of people since day one...from the natives, Vietnamese, Iraqis to the Palestinians ect....
Most wars and conflicts where people suffer, we have in either toppling the regime, invading, supplying arms or aiding one party on another. Is not up to us to judge ourselves, we are known to be the thugs of the of the world.
do you know many times in wars some units fire and kill their OWN troops??
accidents happen for many reasons
in PG1 and the Afghan war, the US killed their own and Aliied troops..--accidents happen
please read some history on war--for you seem to have 0 knowledge on it
stop please---the terrorists shooting up/knifing innocent civilians is a huge difference
you must not understand the English language and the words ''directly''/''policy''
Dude.....The french, The brits said the same shit when they went around the world occupying and killing people. The history and people won't be kind as you to the American interventions. Go to any given country right now and ask them what they think about the US role in the world. Hitler thought he was right too. the Latestt vote in the UN is a good indication where we stand.....we have Israel, Guatemala, Micronesia in our sides......doesn't that tell you that we are fucking wrong?
Fuck your war that claims thousands of lives create safe heaven to thrive, while you seating on your fat ass somewhere in midwest eating chips and watching Prison break. Go to the refugee camps ask them what they think of the US and who caused them to be refugees in the first place. Wake the fuck up, and stop this obnoxious attitude.
It must be ISIS who are honoring Christianity.Under Saddam thry celebrated and were just like everyone else. Thanks to US invasion thousands of them fled Iraq...we did great job.They erected a 30-foot tall Christmas tree in Iraq in appreciation for what Trump has done to ISIS. At least they know who the real murderers are.you must have about 0 knowledge on warwe don't directly target innocent civilians as policy--that's it --plain as day--that's the big difference
Bullshit...directly or any directly we have been responsible for killing millions of people since day one...from the natives, Vietnamese, Iraqis to the Palestinians ect....
Most wars and conflicts where people suffer, we have in either toppling the regime, invading, supplying arms or aiding one party on another. Is not up to us to judge ourselves, we are known to be the thugs of the of the world.
do you know many times in wars some units fire and kill their OWN troops??
accidents happen for many reasons
in PG1 and the Afghan war, the US killed their own and Aliied troops..--accidents happen
please read some history on war--for you seem to have 0 knowledge on it
stop please---the terrorists shooting up/knifing innocent civilians is a huge difference
you must not understand the English language and the words ''directly''/''policy''
Dude.....The french, The brits said the same shit when they went around the world occupying and killing people. The history and people won't be kind as you to the American interventions. Go to any given country right now and ask them what they think about the US role in the world. Hitler thought he was right too. the Latestt vote in the UN is a good indication where we stand.....we have Israel, Guatemala, Micronesia in our sides......doesn't that tell you that we are fucking wrong?
Fuck your war that claims thousands of lives create safe heaven to thrive, while you seating on your fat ass somewhere in midwest eating chips and watching Prison break. Go to the refugee camps ask them what they think of the US and who caused them to be refugees in the first place. Wake the fuck up, and stop this obnoxious attitude.
Under Saddam thry celebrated and were just like everyone else. Thanks to US invasion thousands of them fled Iraq...we did great job.They erected a 30-foot tall Christmas tree in Iraq in appreciation for what Trump has done to ISIS. At least they know who the real murderers are.you must have about 0 knowledge on warwe don't directly target innocent civilians as policy--that's it --plain as day--that's the big difference
Bullshit...directly or any directly we have been responsible for killing millions of people since day one...from the natives, Vietnamese, Iraqis to the Palestinians ect....
Most wars and conflicts where people suffer, we have in either toppling the regime, invading, supplying arms or aiding one party on another. Is not up to us to judge ourselves, we are known to be the thugs of the of the world.
do you know many times in wars some units fire and kill their OWN troops??
accidents happen for many reasons
in PG1 and the Afghan war, the US killed their own and Aliied troops..--accidents happen
please read some history on war--for you seem to have 0 knowledge on it
stop please---the terrorists shooting up/knifing innocent civilians is a huge difference
you must not understand the English language and the words ''directly''/''policy''
Dude.....The french, The brits said the same shit when they went around the world occupying and killing people. The history and people won't be kind as you to the American interventions. Go to any given country right now and ask them what they think about the US role in the world. Hitler thought he was right too. the Latestt vote in the UN is a good indication where we stand.....we have Israel, Guatemala, Micronesia in our sides......doesn't that tell you that we are fucking wrong?
Fuck your war that claims thousands of lives create safe heaven to thrive, while you seating on your fat ass somewhere in midwest eating chips and watching Prison break. Go to the refugee camps ask them what they think of the US and who caused them to be refugees in the first place. Wake the fuck up, and stop this obnoxious attitude.
hhahahinvade ? SAVING you mean
saddam was like hitler:
1. gassed his OWN people
2. invaded innocent, tiny Kuwait
3. violated the ceasefire
1) We didn't say jack shit when Saddam gassed the Kurds. IN fact, Ronnie Reagan actually denied it and sold them the chemicals.
2) Kuwait was hardly innocent. They were sponsoring Saddam when he was attacking Iran for years.
3) He really didn't violate the cease fire..
The reason why we took Saddam out was because the Zionists saw him as a threat.
Not our fucking problem.
The South Vietnamese may disagree with you, but it doesn't change history. Slaughter and re-education camps were their payback for resisting.
Many muslim countries have felt the blessings of ISIS for eight long years. They're educated enough.
factually in error. DA KURDS WERE NOT HELPING THE IRANIANS. da kurds do not like
da Iranians-------ever meet a kurd? Saddam was killing kurds for the same reason he killed
Shiites-----
Saddam did not build weapons that could hit
"DA ZIONIST ENTITY" da ruskies made da scuds.
joe does what hitler supporters did------I have a credential-----I read Nazi propaganda---
little flimsy booklets fluttered in the breeze in my childhood town----some dating all the way
back to the mid 1930s -----the word "ZIONISTS" constituted something like 3 % of the words
You have proven time and again that you are a non-White person sympathizer.
Need I say more.
I'm only quoting you, the guy who feels sorry for anybody who's not White.You have proven time and again that you are a non-White person sympathizer.
Need I say more.
That you are a silly little man who thinks that because you are white, the One Percenters care about you?
Here's the thing. The ONLY real divide is between rich and poor. Not between Christian and Muslim or white and brown.
all irrelevant as my point is he was a threat--he did what hitler did--...so to take him out was the right thing
you are CORRECT
so we have Kuwait helping saddam--then he attacks Kuwait
add ANOTHER point to my many points I have stated that saddam was crazy, a threat, etc --
another reason to take him out
o--another point on saddam--he invaded Iran before Kuwait!
add that to the other points---he was definitely a threat!
I'm only quoting you, the guy who feels sorry for anybody who's not White.
Do you only express that sentiment when it's convenient for the Thread at hand?
factually in error. DA KURDS WERE NOT HELPING THE IRANIANS. da kurds do not like
da Iranians-------ever meet a kurd? Saddam was killing kurds for the same reason he killed
Shiites-----
Sigh...
A Look at the Operation Anfal Campaign
-- Saddam Hussein's military carried out the Anfal campaign from 1987-1988, aiming to purge large areas of northern Iraq of Kurdish guerrillas with ties to Iran amid a war between the two countries. The name Anfal is Arabic for "spoils of war" and is the name of the eighth chapter of the Quran, Islam's holy book.
Saddam did not build weapons that could hit
"DA ZIONIST ENTITY" da ruskies made da scuds.
Project Babylon - Wikipedia
Very large cannon, which would be capable of being elevated and trained, were also planned. The first was to have a bore of 350 mm (13.8 inches) and a barrel length of about 30 metres (100 feet), and it was expected to have a range of up to 1000 kilometers (about 625 miles),[2] making Israel and central Iran well within reach of Iraqi artillery fire; some sources indicate that there was a second cannon planned, with a bore of 600 mm (23.6 inches) and a barrel length of about 60 metres
joe does what hitler supporters did------I have a credential-----I read Nazi propaganda---
little flimsy booklets fluttered in the breeze in my childhood town----some dating all the way
back to the mid 1930s -----the word "ZIONISTS" constituted something like 3 % of the words
That wasn't a credential, that was your medical report from the insane asylum.
The South Vietnamese may disagree with you, but it doesn't change history. Slaughter and re-education camps were their payback for resisting.
So? Hey, civil wars suck, especially for the losers. You still miss my point. South Vietnam lost because most people didn't support the Quislings we propped up in Saigon. They were gone as soon as the checks stopped coming.
Many muslim countries have felt the blessings of ISIS for eight long years. They're educated enough.
There wouldn't be an ISIS if we hadn't toppled Saddam to start with.
you are a joke-----Saddam never made his LONG RANGE CANNON ---he tried-----he tried to
make lots of things including innovations in biological warfare------but did not succeed----he
contented himself with old time poisons including nitrogen mustard gas and INNOVATIVELY he
put electrical currents into swampy areas to murder Shiites wholesale for the BAATHIST CAUSE----
think NASSER, ASSAD, SADDAM----they are of the same family and RUSSIA loves them
