Where we going next?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Two_Forward_One_Back, Jan 14, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Nehustan

    Nehustan On ROPs

    Times running out for George W. The best he can hope for is to steer the US and its allies down a course that is hard to retrace. That way his policies will have to be carried, even if he's long gone from the Whitehouse, by Mules or Elephants.
  2. I thought "Philip Sherwell" rang a bell


    More from Sherwell himself or 'news' he's associated with.





    On reading through some of these links, and others out there on the hinterweb, I'm really starting to think buying more Bacofoil is a good idea

    Devildog and Armchair, I'm with you. :frustrated:
  3. Nehustan

    Nehustan On ROPs

    Good call PTP, you should maybe be involved with current affairs/media monitoring in some way ;)

    (P.S. Where has the lovely Forum design gone??? Mr Potato head annexed by a dragonfly????)
  4. I can see it all happening all over again. The same people giving us the same stories of impending doom and verified reports from "Western Intelligence Agencies" like we don't know which hysterical finger-pointing entity that is.

    The same smoke and mirrors wheeled out again, with the same damn people behind it.

    I am not going to be surprised if Blair was to announce 'British Troops going North to Baghdad for a limited period only'.
  5. But you are implying this is all dubya's doing.

    Do you not think Iran are having a large say in the matter, what with sending bods and equipment over to Iraq to attack US and British troops.

    I think you are giving george W too much credit,both sides are eqaully at fault.
  6. PTP, there are people on here who know of Irans involvment first hand.
  7. Hang on.

    I infer impropriety in the Teorygraphs reporting and get slated. PTP infers the same thing and gets a favourable reply.

    Life is SO unfair

  8. Mark I am not saying Iran is not involved in Iraq, the weight of evidence suggests that they are.

    I am saying that this particular correspondent, has been involved in "the sky is falling" stories using 'western intelligence sources' before.

    I'm seeing the same pattern develop as last time.
  9. Out of Iraq, out of Germany and remain in Afghanistan?
  10. Fair enough PTP, you may be right.
  11. Nehustan

    Nehustan On ROPs

    Mark even tho' you weren't talking to me I'm gonna reply as I was inferring that Bush was up to his old tricks. I'm sure Iran has 'agents' in Iraq, its a no brainer. The US and UK have 'agents' in Iraq and they're not exactly neighbours.

    In regard to my statement about Bush I definitely stand by what I say, he intends to bind policy, no doubt in my mind. He has a set of policies that will take longer to achieve than his remaining term in office. America has played a gambit that cannot be lost. By my reading of Bush, he's afraid of being caught on the back foot, so on he plods relying on the considerable power of the USA. America has a long way to go until its army is physically or finacially overstretched, politically they maybe with the folks at home, but the US miltary is massive, something I think many people (not here) have not fully grasped.

    If I ask myself is Bush prepared for the whole region to go up in flames and to engage in a wider war even stretching into the European theatre? I find that I have no doubts on the issue. Bush is prepared to do anything that fits his perception of what needs to be done, to protect American hegemony and interests.
  12. Pongo,
    I am supposing that you all ready knew of the 'Office of Special Plans' that was run by D. Feith & Libby from Cheney's office and cherry picked evidence that supported the case for the Iraq war didn't you?

    They set up another last year called the 'Iranian Directorate' with the express same objective.
    If not:
    I've supplied no links - google either - you may very well come up with something interesting I haven't seen before.
  13. What neo con Michael Ledeen said:

    "He concludes, "I guess some top official will have to die at the hands of (obviously) Iranian-supported terrorists before the Pentagon is permitted to work on the subject." (attacking Iran he means)

    Well what do you know? Seems what we have is another neo con wishing for...erh, em...another 'pearl harbour' kind of thing to help things along.

    (Ledeen quote from Raw Story article)