14-05-2004 00:56									#121
	Remove this text

Ethiopia!

	14-05-2004 00:57									#122
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I'm intrigued though. What does 38:5 actually say?

	14-05-2004 01:43									#123
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Ramo I'm intrigued though. What does 38:5 actually say?

Ezekiel 38

	14-05-2004 01:48									#124
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

What follows in Ezekiel 39 is even more intriguing. . .

	19-05-2004 23:38									#125
	Put an end to popups!

Why is it that you think this prophecy is going to occur in the near future. Whay not in 4004? Why could'nt this have already occured? Why would it occur at all? Because the bible tells me so?

	19-05-2004 23:40									#126
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by GePap Having Reagan as you avatar has greatly impared your thinking: ANY TIME YOU PLACE YOUR TROOPS UNINVITED INTO SOMEONE ELSES SOVERIGN TERRITORY YOU HAVE INVADED THEM. It does not matter what the purpose of that invasion is-that is not significant to the definition of the term.

That's great then - it's an "invasion" that provides NONE of the problems that Iraq or Afghanistan do, given that we're not actually trying to hold territory.

	19-05-2004 23:42									#127
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Pax Africanus Why is it that you think this prophecy is going to occur in the near future. Whay not in 4004? Why could'nt this have already occured? Why would it occur at all? Because the bible tells me so?

Got it in one, sadly

	19-05-2004 23:43									#128
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

The isreali of today is not a peace and won't be at peace anytime in the forseeable future. They have the most powerful military in the area. This prophecy is not talking about them in present form. Maybe they are talking about one of the other children of abraham.

	20-05-2004 01:05									#129
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich That's great then - it's an "invasion" that provides NONE of the problems that Iraq or Afghanistan do, given that we're not actually trying to hold territory.

I have no clue what you are trying to say here:

And you are also incorrect- of course we are trying to hold on to territory-in the name of the new regime we hope to install there.

	20-05-2004 09:48									#130
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

You missed my point - we AREN'T installing a new regime! You just send people in, they blow up the stuff you want gone, then they leave. You don't care about "liberating" Iran or anything, just removing certain targets that you may not be capable of destroying from the air.

	20-05-2004 16:25									#131
	Inflate your Upload Space

Do you understand the concept of sovereign territory. Attacking ANYTHING on foreign soil is an act of war. It's not good enough to do this sort of thing because you can. Do you wonder why people are flying planes into our buildings. It's because we think we can attack them at will. WAKE UP!!!!

	21-05-2004 03:04									#132
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich Didn't our Patriots have an easy time with Iraq's missiles in the first Gulf War?

all the high speed camera footage was classified, so we have no way of knowing. Since it was probably a violation of the abm treaty, and since we don't like to overtly state our capabilities, the official line is that the patriots were a complete failure.

The scuds were a proven weapons system though, they did some damage in Iran, so to have such a low death count against opposed launches(1 scud hit a barracks, neither patriot battery responded to the attack, ~30 people died) seems somewhat strange.

	21-05-2004 03:14									#133
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich You missed my point - we AREN'T installing a new regime! You just send people in, they blow up the stuff you want gone, then they leave. You don't care about "liberating" Iran or anything, just removing certain targets that you may not be capable of destroying from the air.

Purely from a practical point of view, Iran would smack you back. They've already been searching for a reason to interfere in south Iraq. What happens if, on June 30th they seize the al-Arab waterways? Or even just decide that US and Israeli 'belligerance' is enough to justify increased funding for insurrections in the north and south.

Or if they stir up Hezbollah again?

Bombing would probably be the worst thing to do in this situation.

	21-05-2004 03:51									#134
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Pax Africanus Do you understand the concept of sovereign territory. Attacking ANYTHING on foreign soil is an act of war. It's not good enough to do this sort of thing because you can. Do you wonder why people are flying planes into our buildings. It's because we think we can attack them at will. WAKE UP!!!!

When did I deny it was an act of war?

Where did you get the idea that I cared?

And yes, we can attack these countries at will. At least, we didn't seem to have any problems attacking Iraq or Afghanistan.

	21-05-2004 03:53									#135
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Evil Knevil Purely from a practical point of view, Iran would smack you back. They've already been searching for a reason to interfere in south Iraq. What happens if, on June 30th they seize the al-Arab waterways? Or even just decide that US and Israeli 'belligerance' is enough to justify increased funding for insurrections in the north and south.

If they can't get past the border, they can't do anything. We may have difficulties fighting insurgents, but do you really think US troops would do anything but completely PWN any conventional forces?

	21-05-2004 05:13									#136
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Evil Knevil Purely from a practical point of view, Iran would smack you back. They've already been searching for a reason to interfere in south Iraq. What happens if, on June 30th they seize the al-Arab waterways? Or even just decide that US and Israeli 'belligerance' is enough to justify increased funding for insurrections in the north and south. Or if they stir up Hezbollah again? Bombing would probably be the worst thing to do in this situation.

then we send weapons and aide to the revolutionaries in Iran. That can be played both ways, over 60% of the populations hates the mullahs.

	21-05-2004 07:47									#137
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich When did I deny it was an act of war? Where did you get the idea that I cared? And yes, we can attack these countries at will. At least, we didn't seem to have any problems attacking Iraq or Afghanistan.

That kind of thinking got us into the problems we are having today. Yes, there are problems. You don't care that thousands of lives have been lost. People are walking around without arms and legs. If you don't think it's a problem tell it to the guy whose head just got chopped off. Never mind he can't he hear you.

	21-05-2004 09:13									#138
	Remove this text

So you'd prefer a fundamentalist Islamic state get nukes + ballistic missiles?

	21-05-2004 10:25									#139
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Maybe you can understand it this way. Bees sting. They sting more often when you mess with there hive. Leave them alone and the chance of you getting stung goes down dramatically.

	21-05-2004 11:02									#140
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Ah. You understand.

They try and sting us because we have forces in the Mideast - specifically, Saudi Arabia. Plus Israel.

I'm sure the world would be a better place if we just left the Mideast to its own devices...

	21-05-2004 19:08									#141
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich If they can't get past the border, they can't do anything. We may have difficulties fighting insurgents, but do you really think US troops would do anything but completely PWN any conventional forces?

Okay, maybe not invade on June 30th, but after there is a larger withdrawal of US troops. Iran PWNS Iraq's armed forces in any case. Besides, even if they didn't get across the border there would still be a shitstorm of unimaginable proportions. Also any limited military action would be preceded by months of funded shia insurgency in the south (especially after June 30th, when the IPC will be as weak as a kitten) which would be destabilising. It might even cause Iraq to strike back again Iran and give them a CB (causus bellum) like in the 70's and 80's

quote: then we send weapons and aid to the revolutionaries in Iran. That can be played both ways, over 60% of the populations hates the mullahs.

Thats a recipe for stability! What happens when those revolutionaries move into Sth Iraq, or Kurdistan? Even just Iran imploding in civil strife is not to the benefit of the region.
Besides when faced with the US or Israel the mullah regime would probably get new life and widespread support.

Happy now?

	21-05-2004 19:09									#142
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I think that the world trade center would still be standing. There would be no USS COLE incident. No American loss of life in Iraq or Afghanistan. That's for certain.

	21-05-2004 19:34									#143
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich So you'd prefer a fundamentalist Islamic state get nukes + ballistic missiles?

I see no difference between a fundamentalist Jewish state having nukes and an Islamic one.

Better to have a balance of terror.

	21-05-2004 19:34									#144
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich You missed my point - we AREN'T installing a new regime! You just send people in, they blow up the stuff you want gone, then they leave. You don't care about "liberating" Iran or anything, just removing certain targets that you may not be capable of destroying from the air.

No you stubborn person!

Sending military personel into the soverign territory of another state uninvited is always an invasion-it does not matter if the mission is a raid or conquest, it is an invasion. period

	21-05-2004 22:37									#145
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Sending military personel into the soverign territory of another state uninvited is always an invasion-it does not matter if the mission is a raid or conquest, it is an invasion. period

So in 1970 palestinian commandos invaded Germany?
In 1989? israeli commandos invaded tunis?
In 195? Israeli commandos invaded argentine?

quote: Better to have a balance of terror.

Hmm...
how about that would allow the arab countries to support terrorism without any fear of toppling or retaliation?

	22-05-2004 00:25									#146
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by GePap No you stubborn person! Sending military personel into the soverign territory of another state uninvited is always an invasion-it does not matter if the mission is a raid or conquest, it is an invasion. period

That wasn't an argument that it wasn't an invasion, it was an argument that it did not have the downsides of most invasions, because we aren't occupying anything.

	22-05-2004 00:26									#147
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Pax Africanus I think that the world trade center would still be standing. There would be no USS COLE incident. No American loss of life in Iraq or Afghanistan. That's for certain.

If we just hadn't ever supported Israel, or participated in the first Gulf War...

	22-05-2004 00:27									#148
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Evil Knevil Okay, maybe not invade on June 30th, but after there is a larger withdrawal of US troops. Iran PWNS Iraq's armed forces in any case. Besides, even if they didn't get across the border there would still be a shitstorm of unimaginable proportions. Also any limited military action would be preceded by months of funded shia insurgency in the south (especially after June 30th, when the IPC will be as weak as a kitten) which would be destabilising. It might even cause Iraq to strike back again Iran and give them a CB (causus bellum) like in the 70's and 80's

Which is why we continue to have some forces stationed in Iraq for a while

	22-05-2004 00:29									#149
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Kucinich That wasn't an argument that it wasn't an invasion, it was an argument that it did not have the downsides of most invasions, because we aren't occupying anything.

to quote Kuchinich from earlier:

quote: Not if we bomb their reactors. Also, deploying troops on the ground != invasion. We could still attack over land, just not actually topple their government (and then have to set up a new one).

Now, what do you mean by {!=} ?

	22-05-2004 00:32									#150
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Cruddy I see no difference between a fundamentalist Jewish state having nukes and an Islamic one. Better to have a balance of terror.

can you tell me where theres a fundamentalist Jewish state? A lot of fundamentalist Israelis would be interested in moving there