Polemarchos wrote: |
war on terror = i doubt that exists....
911 should be seen only a populist outbreak of a conflict raging up to now. Not the clash of civ. theory or war on terror... the right definition is either post-cold war conflicts or nation versus non-state actors. 90% of the fight in afghanistan and iraq have nth. to do win war on terror, but against local revolutionary/insurgent forces. The little element of Al-Quaida (what a pygmalion) is not enough to baptize a conflict "war on terror" |
Blackstump wrote: |
Yes i suppose so, but to step back another thousand years to Herodotus. When it was the Greeks v every other bastard or more correctly barbarian(Persian) or who ever it was, it was hardly a holy war, more a land grab or mines bigger then yours thing, and remember Herodotus maybe called the father of history, but is also known as the father of lies (probably behind his back ) |
Blackstump wrote: |
Iraq dosnt support Al Queda.. well a certain Leftenent Colonel Shakir from Sadams hand picked, had a meeting in 2004 in Kuala Lumpur with one of the 9/11 "Pilots" that went on for 3 days(as far as i know that hasnt been disproven) they met at another Al Queda opperatives residence that was a knowed "money man".. well i suppose they could have been old friends who were getting together for beer and pretzels...
.. |
AT_Stalky wrote: | ||
meeting in 2004, Saddam was in Jail by then, from dec 2003. Saddam had not been in controll of Iraq since mid 2003. Saddam was no fool, and I doubt he funded Al Queda as they was anti secular dictators, as in against Saddam. Funds have never been a problem for Al Queda anyway, hidden behind sharety. Stalk |
southern_land wrote: |
A conspiracy theory is only a theory until it's proven right... |
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT