CHINA & U.S. – WAR IS INEVITABLE

Why do countries go to war?

  1. One or both countries are led by maniacs (Hitler, Stalin, Tojo) 
  2. Opposing political systems (Capitalism, Communism)
  3. Necessity for resources or land (Japan, Germany)
  4. Accident due to treaties & alliances (WWI)
  5. Seccession or internal political issues (Revolutionary War, Civil War)

China is tired of playing second fiddle to the U.S. They are already kicking our asses economically. They have us by the balls as they own $900 billion of our debt. We need to issue $1.5 trillion of new debt every year for the next 5 years. We need the Chinese to buy a good chunk of this debt. The Chinese know that. They also know that Bernanke is trying to screw them by devaluing the USD.

They are converting their USD into hard assets. They are buying up natural resouces like mines and oil wells. They are signing deals with Iran, Venezuela, and African nations to tie up oil resources. They are buying gold. They have most of the rare earths in the world and aren’t sharing. Now it seems they are using those USD to build missiles and other high tech military hardware.

The US Navy revolves around their 11 aircraft carriers. We are in the process of building 3 new aircraft carriers at a cost of $14 billion each. The Chinese have perfected a new missile that will put these outmoded WWII antiques at the bottom of the sea. The US is preparing for the last war. China is preparing for cyber war using satellites, computer hackers, and high tech missiles.

China and the US both need oil. The supplies of oil are depleting. Economic tensions are already high. As oil becomes more precious, the US and China will be competing for the same supply sources. Any economic collapse experienced by either country will significantly increase tensions between the countries. These issues are a powder-keg and both countries will be lighting matches. I expect armed conflict with China to commence between 2015 and 2020, as would be expected in the Fourth Turning Crisis. World War erupted 12 years after the onset of the last Fourth Turning. A similar scenario would result in major war around the year 2017. It is our destiny.

China preparing for armed conflict ‘in every direction’

China is preparing for conflict ‘in every direction’, the defence minister said on Wednesday in remarks that threaten to overshadow a visit to Beijing by his US counterpart next month.

China preparing for armed conflict 'in every direction'

By Peter Foster, Beijing 1:30PM GMT 29 Dec 2010

“In the coming five years, our military will push forward preparations for military conflict in every strategic direction,” said Liang Guanglie in an interview published by several state-backed newspapers in China. “We may be living in peaceful times, but we can never forget war, never send the horses south or put the bayonets and guns away,” Mr Liang added.

China repeatedly says it is planning a “peaceful rise” but the recent pace and scale of its military modernisation has alarmed many of its neighbours in the Asia-Pacific, including Japan which described China’s military build-up as a “global concern” this month.

Mr Liang’s remarks come at a time of increasingly difficult relations between the Chinese and US armed forces which a three-day visit by his counterpart Robert Gates is intended to address. A year ago China froze substantive military relations in protest at US arms sales to Taiwan and relations deteriorated further this summer when China objected to US plans to deploy one of its nuclear supercarriers, the USS George Washington, into the Yellow Sea off the Korean peninsula.

China also announced this month that it was preparing to launch its own aircraft carrier next year in a signal that China is determined to punch its weight as a rising superpower. The news came a year earlier than many US defence analysts had predicted.

China is also working on a “carrier-killing” ballistic missile that could sink US carriers from afar, fundamentally reordering the balance of power in a region that has been dominated by the US since the end of the Second World War.

A US Navy commander, Admiral Robert Willard, told Japan’s Asahi Shimbun newspaper this week that he believes the Chinese anti-ship missile, the Dong Feng 21, has already achieved “initial operational capability”, although it would require years of testing.

Analysts remain divided over whether China is initiating an Asian arms race. Even allowing for undeclared spending, China’s annual defence budget is still less than one-sixth of America’s $663bn a year, or less than half the US figure when expressed as a percentage of GDP.

However in a speech earlier this year Mr Gates warned that China’s new weapons, including its carrier-killing missile, “threaten America’s primary way to project power and help allies in the Pacific”, underscoring the difficulties that lie ahead as China and the US seek to contain growing strategic frictions.

As China modernises, Mr Liang pledged that its armed forces would also increasingly use homegrown Chinese technology, which analysts say still lags behind Western technology even as China races to catch up.

“The modernisation of the Chinese military cannot depend on others, and cannot be bought,” Mr Liang added, “In the next five years, our economy and society will develop faster, boosting comprehensive national power. We will take the opportunity and speed up modernisation of the military.”

Chinese missile shifts power in Pacific

By Kathrin Hille in Beijing

Published: December 28 2010 11:58 | Last updated: December 28 2010 11:58

A new Chinese anti-ship missile that will significantly alter the balance of military power in the Pacific is now operational, according to a senior US commander.

Admiral Robert Willard, the top US commander in the Pacific, said the Chinese ballistic missile, which was designed to threaten US aircraft carriers in the region, had reached “initial operational capability”.

His remarks signal that China is challenging the US ability to project military power in Asia much sooner than many had expected.

The US and other countries in the Pacific region are increasingly concerned at the speed with which China is developing its naval power. Japan, for example, recently decided to refocus its military on the potential threat from China.

“So now we know – China’s [anti-ship ballistic missile] is no longer aspirational,” Andrew Erickson, an expert on the Chinese military at the US Naval War College, said in response to Adm Willard’s comments to the Asahi newspaper.

Defence analysts have called the Dongfeng 21 D missile a “game changer” since it could force US aircraft carriers to stay away from waters where China does not want to see them. These include the Taiwan Strait where a potential conflict could develop over the self-ruled island which China claims.

The land-based missile is designed to target and track aircraft carrier groups with the help of satellites, unmanned aerial vehicles and over-the-horizon radar. Aircraft carriers and their accompanying ships are unable to defend themselves against such a threat.

Aware of the missile’s development, the Pentagon has already started considering ways to counter the new threat, including a new concept for more closely integrated navy and air force operations.

Robert Gates, US defence secretary, said in September, the development of such a missile would force the Pentagon to rethink the way carriers were deployed.

“If the Chinese or somebody else has a highly accurate anti-ship cruise or ballistic missile that can take out a carrier at hundreds of miles of ranges and therefore in Asia puts us back behind the second island chain, how then do you use carriers differently in the future?” Mr Gates asked.

The second chain of islands runs from the Bonins along the Marianas, Guam and Palau, forming a north-south line east of Japan and the Philippines. This line defines what China sees as its “near seas” – waters in which the US navy now frequently operates and are home to US naval bases and allies such as Japan and South Korea.

Adm Willard noted this year that China’s anti-ship ballistic missile was undergoing extensive testing and was close to deployment. Observers believe China started production of missile motors last year and that the Chinese military is preparing a nuclear missile base in the southern city of Shaoguan for their deployment.

Defence analysts have also linked several missile flight tests this year to the new weapon but no conclusive evidence has been available to date.

Adm Willard’s latest comments appear to remove any doubts. The term “initial operational capability” as used by the Pentagon indicates that some military units have started deployment of the weapon and are capable of using it.

Mr Erickson said: “Beijing has successfully developed, tested, and deployed the world’s first weapons system capable of targeting a moving carrier strike group from long-range, land-based mobile launchers.” .

Adm Willard said the new Chinese weapon was still not fully-operational and would probably undergo testing for “several more years”. The key remaining step is a comprehensive test of the entire system at sea, which is much more difficult than test flights over land.

China also needs to deploy more satellites to ensure seamless tracking of a moving target at sea. But defence experts warn that the weapon would immediately be a threat to US carriers because China could make up for a lack in accuracy by launching larger numbers of missiles.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
219 Comments
Kill Bill
Kill Bill
December 31, 2010 11:55 pm

Umm, no. Attila was a HUN, not a Mongol. You are thinking of Ghengis Khan. -RE

But Schmucky will claim he was right and he won.

SSS
SSS
January 1, 2011 1:19 am

The article, Admin, and RE (a former member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff whe unfailingly amazes all of us with his grasp of the military sciences) seem to be enthralled by China’s Dong Feng 21D “carrier buster” ballistic missile. The carrier buster bullshit was created by the Chinese Politburo and emailed to the Huffington Post and Keith Olbermann, IMHO.

Only one poster, Persnickety, mentioned an effective, very effective, countermeasure to the Dong Feng, and that is the Aegis Anti-Ballistic Missile. Carriers are protected by several cruisers which carry the Aegis. Oh, did I mention that the main foreign purchaser of the Aegis is, wait for it, Japan? Does Taiwan have the Aegis? Surprise!! It does. The Aegis is a bullet hitting a bullet. It works very well. So much for the Dong Feng.

Look. The U.S. Navy’s brown and blue water superiority over Chinese naval, air, and missile forces is a factor of about 10 or more. And we have two allies to support our carriers in the western Pacific. China will not attack us, not now or in the foreseeable future. It will get its ass kicked big time.

That leaves the U.S. attacking China. And here’s a point no one has raised thus far. Should the Commander-in-Chief and/or the Secretary of Defense order the JCS to draw up plans for an attack on China, there will be an immediate revolt among the many generals, admirals, colonels and other officers in the immediate inner circles of the top military echelons of the Pentagon. Not a revolt in the classic sense, but a “revolt” of leaking information, and it will take just a few officers privy to what’s going on. It will be leaked early and often. It will spin out of control. And the public outrage will stop it, no matter what the official pretext for war is. Once the president knows the anti-war sentiment is coming from his war machine and public outrage opposing a war with China continues to grow, the whole thing will fall apart.

War with China ain’t in the cards.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 1:45 am

Thats what I have been saying. There is no war with China as far as I can see. Smokey thinks Hillary, SOS,, will do something, but doesnt know what, that will start a conflict. BS.

Anyone think China is stupid and doesnt know that the debt it bought helped pay for the Iraq invasion and subsequent contracts for oil?

China is getting Iraq oil contracts already.

StuckInNJ
StuckInNJ
January 1, 2011 10:31 am

Thanks for the clarification RE. My bad.

Me: “Ancient history for $100, Alex”
Alex: “What nation/race was Attila THE HUN?”
Me: “Mongol?”
Alex: “Get the fuck off my show, dumbass!”

.
I found this reference — circa 550AD — to Attila regarding his appearance;

“Short of stature, with a broad chest and a large head; his eyes were small, his beard thin and sprinkled with grey.”

No offense RE, but I immediately thought of you!

StuckInNJ
StuckInNJ
January 1, 2011 10:36 am

Jim — in addition to a shitload of other differences — there were no nukes in 1929.

Do you honestly believe a war we start with China would remain only a Conventional affair? Do you honestly believe we would risk a nuclear war over oil? That would be like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 10:37 am

Kill Bill——–“Smokey thinks Hillary,SOS,, will do something, but doesn’t know what, that will start a conflict. BS.”——You stupid fucking retard, did you not read my posts on THIS THREAD where I outlined precisely why there won’t be a military conflict? Goddamn, you are one fucking dumbass. My earlier posts, prior to today, indicated that China will be the catalyst behind the USA’s economic downfall. I stand behind that statement 100%. I said NOTHING about an armed conflict. I also said that one of the primary reasons that China will precipitate our economic demise is PROBABLY that Hillary Clinton will commit a foreign policy blunder. I stand behind that statement also.—–There is no point in reading any of this stuff if you are too fucking stupid to understand it. I mean, I spoon feed it so that idiots like you can follow along, and it STILL goes over your head like Delta Airlines.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 10:42 am

Stuck—-That is one of many reasons a war with China is an utter impossibility. There is no way that the two mightiest powers on the planet would wage a limited scale war over resources. The losing side would resort to nukes.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 10:50 am

I think it is very clear to even the casual observer that the “war for oil” argument has been completely annihilated on this thread in every conceivable way, the delusional fallacy exposed for the fantasy it is. A fair reading of this thread leaves even the most hardcore, deluded “war for oil ” proponent with NO remaining hope to desperately cling to.

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 11:42 am

Smokey says:
I think it is very clear to even the casual observer that the “war for oil” argument has been completely annihilated on this thread in every conceivable way, the delusional fallacy exposed for the fantasy it is.

Ummm, except you fail to understand that we have already been in a war for oil for the past 9 years, and stand ready to defend and control much of the middle eastern oil fields right now. Why would we commit vast amounts of money, lives and resources for a 10 year supply? How about because that is 9 1/2 years beyond the average persons concept of the future.

How about peak oil = chaos, while war = chaos and control of the a dwindling resource?

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 12:26 pm

Punk—–Why do you provoke me? Why are you so fucking stupid? I’ve already explained eighteen ways to Sunday the idiocy of your position. What are we doing with all this oil that we are warring for, dumbass? Last time I checked, we were over $1 trillion in the hole, with not a goddamn drop of oil to show for it. We haven’t even taken Iraq’s oil to repay us from freeing fifty million of their citizens from a despotic dictator.—-You stupid fucking shit, do you really think that if the twin towers hadn’t been attacked that George Bush could have gone to Iraq? Are you that goddamn stupid? Do you honestly believe that, in the absence of a mass terrorist attack on American soil, that George Bush’s four year agenda included attacking Iraq? Do you think George W. Bush knew during his 2000 presidential debate that 9/11 would happen? He said emphatically during that debate that nation building was NOT on his agenda. —If oil was the objective, dumbass, why did George H.W. Bush conquer Iraq and walk away empty handed without the oil? Punk you’re a nice guy, but you are gullible and and easy mark for left wing radicals.

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 1:11 pm

“Punk—–Why do you provoke me? Why are you so fucking stupid? I’ve already explained eighteen ways to Sunday the idiocy of your position. What are we doing with all this oil that we are warring for, dumbass? Last time I checked, we were over $1 trillion in the hole, with not a goddamn drop of oil to show for it. We haven’t even taken Iraq’s oil to repay us from freeing fifty million of their citizens from a despotic dictator.”

You assume that for us to be in a war for oil we must suck it out of the ground and physically move it over here? Now THAT would be a goddamn waste of resources. Probably better to plant a military base or two on top of the oil and sit there. Argument number one, obliterated.

“—-You stupid fucking shit, do you really think that if the twin towers hadn’t been attacked that George Bush could have gone to Iraq? Are you that goddamn stupid? Do you honestly believe that, in the absence of a mass terrorist attack on American soil, that George Bush’s four year agenda included attacking Iraq? Do you think George W. Bush knew during his 2000 presidential debate that 9/11 would happen?”

Trick question. Truther I am not. Any number of things COULD have happened, that MIGHT have led to a conflict, Why exactly are we not fighting mexican drug lords, who are arguably causing a bit more trouble for us than the Islamic terrorists half way across the planet? Do I need to find a graph of Mexico’s oil production? Argument number two, dead and buried.

He said emphatically during that debate that nation building was NOT on his agenda.

Hahahaha!!! Are you fucking serious? I’m sorry, I had no idea that he said such a thing, emphatically no less. I don’t suppose you have considered the possibility that he LIED? That’s never happened before, has it? A politician lying? Or Misspeaking as they call it now. This argument is so fucking laughable it should even get a number but I will be generous. Argument number three, annihilated.

—If oil was the objective, dumbass, why did George H.W. Bush conquer Iraq and walk away empty handed without the oil?

When did we leave Iraq? News to me. Argument number four non existent.

Punk you’re a nice guy, but you are gullible and and easy mark for left wing radicals.

True on both accounts.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 1:23 pm

Punk—-H.W. Bush—-W!!!!! Bush SENIOR!!!! He won Gulf War I and then walked away from Iraq. If oil was the objective, why not take it then, even under some kind of ruse–like saying it was to repay us etc.etc.etc.—HE LEFT IT BEHIND. WHY???? If we’re there for oil? Your whole goddamn theory is left in shambles. Quit being so fucking naive. ——You Mexico argument is asinine also. Why ere we fighting in Vietnam in the sixties and seventies, dumbass? There is NO goddamn oil. and by YOUR criteria, we don’t go oversea to fight unless it is to steal other countries’ oil. IMBECILE!!!!!!

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 1:37 pm

Fuck me this is too easy.

First of all, I never said we only go overseas to steal oil. Stick to trying to debate what I do say.
Second, there were still massive oil discoveries during the 60s and 70s and peak oil was, at best, a crack pot theory. Even during the first gulf war, peak oil wasn’t blindingly obvious, and If I remember, we freed it for our Saudi allies. meaning that the collective “we” still had control.

Keep trying, Shit stain.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 1:48 pm

Yo fucking idiot. YOU IMPLIED WE ONLY GO OVERSEAS FOR OIL when you asked why we didn’t got to war with Mexico, but went instead to the middle east. I fucking give up. At least my normal opposition on this site at least knows how to debate, even when they are on the wrong side of the issues. You are too goddamn stupid to debate.

StuckInNJ
StuckInNJ
January 1, 2011 1:55 pm

Anybody else got their popcorn out?

Smokey you can not “fucking give up”. Are you French??

Stucky Rule #2: Any poster who walks away from a debate is automatically disqualified.

PS: (Punk — I’m glad to see that you did not fall for Smokey’s “Good Cop” routine. He emailed me privately and said you’re not a nice guy.)

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 2:05 pm

To the old as FUCK Addams Family wannabe sack of shit wearing more make up than Lady Gaga. I am not debating the entire fucking history of US military strategy, I am talking about THE CURRENT WAR, the one happening right NOW. Stop diverting the debate.

Your normal opposition as apparently sucking your wrinkly balls and stroking your half mast needle dick, So I guess I gotta make up for the lack of rational thought.

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 2:20 pm

Thank you, Admin. We are all alone, here. I would have thought that his feeble minded interpretation of the fourth turning might have lost him a few of the more intelligent people. I won’t mention any names…

Maybe that was just Smokey lashing out to hurt your feelings because he knows we are right.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 2:33 pm

Punk—–Read the goddamn thread, you deluded asshole. You and the Administrator are outnumbered ten to two. I have completely incinerated the war for oil argument. Regarding what you call the CURRENT war. If we are there now for oil, as you idiots contend, WHY DON’T WE TAKE IT? I mean, goddamn, what’s preventing us from taking the oil? Is it Akmed and his utility knives? I mean, GODDAMN, that’s why we’re there, according to you. We could take the goddamn oil TODAY, if that is why we are there, retards. We haven’t taken a fucking PENNY from the middle east oil in the CURRENT WAR. What, dumbass, are we waiting for the oil to run out? Fucking idiots.

SSS
SSS
January 1, 2011 2:45 pm

Smokey

You’re winning in one of the worst routs I’ve seen on TBP. It’s pathetic to watch. Admin and Punk have nothing left but to play tag team with you and post funny pictures. Next up: Admin will post an article on War with India over oil. He’ll need LOTS of funny pictures for that one.

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 2:54 pm

Fuckin A, Smokey. I told you once but I guess you must have gone to take a piss and it dribbled out while you were shuffling to the bathroom and you slipped and bumped the fucking rotten cantaloupe of a skull on the tub. Now your sopping wet with your own piss and have forgotten why your nuts hurt.

We don’t need to TAKE it. What a fucking ignorant mongoloid straw man argument. Bring it back here? Why? When you can control the SUPPLY LINES. Do you actually believe we will pull out next year? Even if we do, we have many bases throughout the middle east. We are sitting on top of the fucking oil basin. No one else. And we ARE trying to establish a democracy in Iraq. Specifically, one that is friendly with us. What the fuck do you think that means? Friendly with us. Think for once you syphilitic sack of shit.

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 2:58 pm

SSS
You have yet to address the sucking chest wound I left you with the other day. And I still got some of my balloons left. So watch your ass.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 3:06 pm

SSS——So true. This is the most humiliating defeat I have ever laid on any adversaries on TBP. It is embarrassing. I wish to commend the Administrator in continuing to post after being so thoroughly and relentlessly massacred on this post. A shout out to Punk also, in his admirable but futile attempt at salvaging the remains of the obliterated war-for-oil fantasy. Few people would have the fortitude to continue to post after being dominated and smacked down so easily and so completely. My guess is that Punk and Administer will be seeking professional psychological counseling to deal with the humiliation they have undergone in this savage beatdown. It is my hope that after years of intense therapy they may once again return to function somewhat normally in society.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 3:12 pm

China financed, in great part, the Iraq for oil [Operation Iraqi Liberation OIL ] occupation. They are now getting oil field contracts [5 that I know of]

Anyone thinks that Iraq was only about WMD is being dishonest with themselves.

Its so easy kicking Smokeys behind its like having a spelling bee with Archie Bunker as your opponent.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 3:14 pm

How can someone ‘win’ when all their messianic prophecies are years, if not decades, down the road?

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 3:15 pm

Smokey:
I like to sing Neil Diamond songs and shove things up my ass in the shower.
SSS:
No kidding, I like to rap along with Puff Daddy while I stick things up my ass in the shower.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 3:19 pm

Punk—You goddamn fool, we DON’T control the supply lines. Why the goddamn fuck do you think oil has risen 35% in price the past year? What the fuck do you mean we don’t need to TAKE it? IF WE’RE THERE FOR THE OIL, WE TAKE IT. How long have you been afflicted with Downs anyway, idiot? It does us no good sitting in the ground in Saudi Arabia or China.That’s why we import it by the barrel, fool. You fucking idiot, we have had military bases covering the globe for fifty years. You think we are setting up Iraq to be friendly with us because of their declining oil supply, retard? You stupid goddamn shit, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait are already friendly with us. What a lame uninformed ignorant dumbass.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 3:25 pm

we DON’T control the supply lines. -Smokey

And just when did all these oil contracts become available? When Saddam was overthrown by the US and they put a western friendly puppet in his place demented dick dwarf.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 3:30 pm

Why the goddamn fuck do you think oil has risen 35% in price the past year?

Mostly because of speculators just like when they pushed the price to 140 a barrel.

StuckInNJ
StuckInNJ
January 1, 2011 3:30 pm

Smokey — a lovely summary below from Krieger on Zero Hedge. I know you will agree with pretty much every sentence ……….. until the last one.

In other words you can SEE this; 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 +1 ———– What you can NOT see is this; 5

In other words, you see the dots but can not connect them.

In other words, your logical brain synapses aren’t firing properly.

In other words, you are getting your ass handed to you ….. and you can’t see that either. I will pray for you.

=====================================================================

Heading into 2010 I focused on three investment areas that I thought would benefit the most from the insane policies of desperate global Central Banks and governments adhering to the orders of the financial oligarchs that control them.

They were to be long precious metals, agricultural commodities and oil.

Not only was I a believer that most globally traded “hard assets” (as opposed to residential real estate) would do well as global fiat currencies are competitively devalued, but I thought that the three subgroups mentioned above would do particularly well since they are also strategic commodities.

Basically, in a world going through the type of dangerous geopolitical shift we are in at the moment governments and in fact all institutions become subject to upheaval and revolution. Since governments are made up of human beings (generally narcissistic power hungry ones) we can generally forecast how they will react to such tension.

In their attempt to maintain power and status governments usually do one of two things. They turn on their own people (or minorities within their own societies) or they turn the anger of the populace on a foreign enemy.

In an environment where the global financial system is based on digital monopoly money created with a keystroke by Banana Ben and company, money itself will become suspect and any large foreign government with even a basic understanding of money matters will buy all the gold they can so that if necessary they have real money to use the basis for a new currency if necessary down the road.

Just as gold is a necessary hedge for individual Americans that can see the destruction of currency values by their own government, it is too a hedge for China, Russia and others against their U.S. dollar reserve assets and indeed the global financial system to which they are a major participant.

Agricultural commodities are just as important since if a nation like China cannot provide food at a reasonable cost to its citizens there will be revolution overnight. In fact , this is true in any nation.

Oil fits in to the equation as a hedge if the whole thing breaks into global warfare which can occur once a nation loses the financial war happening now. If you don’t have access to enough oil you will lose any major conflict.

Why do you think we are in the Middle East and are looking for an excuse to attack Iran? To spread Democracy? Don’t make me laugh.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 3:35 pm

. Smokeys two lone firing neurons cant even find one another in that cavernous skull of his much less connect dots.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 3:37 pm

“Why do you think we are in the Middle East and are looking for an excuse to attack Iran.” It couldn’t be because they are the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world, are building nuclear weapons, and have said they will wipe Israel off the face of the earth.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 3:45 pm

Nuclear weapons. Oh thats such BS. Many countries have nukes and we dont attack them. Did GW Botch attack North Korea for getting a nuke?

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 3:47 pm

Saddam didnt have a nuke. The neo-cons lied about that. Lied about yellow cake, lied about anthrax, lied about aluminum tubes, The same loons are doing the same thing again. Who would listen to those noble idiots?

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 3:48 pm

Smuckey, you arent going to win the most vote downs of the year contest if you keep voting me down =)

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 3:48 pm

Your capacity for ignorance is beyond belief. That has go to be most ridiculously stupid collection of words you have ever managed to post. It does us no good in the ground. Tell me you are not so fucking brain damaged from your trip to the bathroom that you would consider this a rebuttal, What a joke. If you think the only way to take a resource is to move it to our country you need your fucking head examined. You move political lines on a map, and its ours. End of fucking story.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 3:53 pm

Kill Bill—–You are trying so desperately to be in the discussion. So I’ll allow you in for a minute. North Korea hasn’t funded terrorism all over the world, you stupid asshole. North Korea didn’t undermine the entire Iraq war while worthless pieces of subhuman shit like you cheered their efforts as they KILLED American soldiers, douchebag. North Korea has yet to threaten anyone with their nukes, you vapid cocksucker. Come back when you have something worthwhile to contribute to this merciless ass whipping I am imparting on your suck buddies.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 3:58 pm

You stupid fucking retard, did you not read my posts on THIS THREAD where I outlined precisely why there won’t be a military conflict? -Suckey

You repulsive reprobate you said the other day there WOULD be a conflict with China because Hillary would do something that fomented it. Your flip-flopping like a carp on a hot asphalt pier. Is your memory as long as your imaginary penis or just as non-existent?

Recall this?

My guess, and I said this a year and a half ago on SA, is that China will be the catalyst that launches the downfall of the USA. The downfall of the USA is inevitable anyway, but there is always a catalyst, a last straw. China will precipitate our crash. I know that much for certain. I also know that Hillary Clinton will be largely responsible for China taking us down. She will commit an enormous foreign policy blunder, and they will respond in a big way -Smokey

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 3:59 pm

[imgcomment image[/img]

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 4:01 pm

North Korea hasn’t funded terrorism all over the world, you stupid asshole -Smokey

You neo-con numbnut. Bush said he wouldnt allow north korea to get a nuke. How do you stop a country from getting a nuke? Listen to a bunch of lying neo-cons about Saddam having non-existent WMD then use that to go into Iraq? Huh? Isnt that why we went into Iraq, oh wait, it isnt!.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 4:01 pm

Punk—-“You move political lines on a map, and it is ours. End of fucking story.”—-Do my eyes deceive me? This may well be the most ignorant statement I’ve ever read in my entire life, let alone on a blog. You are saying WE ARE GOING TO ANNEX IRAQ? THE MIDDLE EAST ? Please tell me you are not so fucking stupid as to believe we are going to make Iran a part of the USA. Please tell me I am missing something. Nobody is fucking stupid enough to allege that. Even the most deluded hate-America extremists have yet to lay that out there. PLEASE tell me I misunderstand you. That is fucking beyond belief. If I bought something that foolish I’d check myself into a psych ward post haste.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 4:05 pm

Smokeys quantum nads are theoretically impossible to hit.

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 4:06 pm

Admin
That is a low blow, using their advanced age against them. I don’t think they were ever smart enough to grasp the concepts we are laying down.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 4:07 pm

Why just the other day Smokey went into a public restroom pulled out a pubic hair, mistaking it for his penis, then forthwithly pissed on himself.

Punk in Drublic
Punk in Drublic
January 1, 2011 4:11 pm

Yes, you misunderstand me, I should have said change names on a map. Perhaps maybe change Iraq into DisneyPunk, where you can take a ride on my baloney pony.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill
January 1, 2011 4:14 pm

Prolly also thinks we are winning the war on No Children Left Behind.

Smokey
Smokey
January 1, 2011 4:21 pm

Kill Bill—-Are you fucking incapable of understanding? This entire discussion began because of my disagreement with the Administrator of the possibility of war for oil. Did you not read my lengthy earlier posts here? How can you fuck something up that simple? That is goddamn mind boggling. My comments that you cut and pasted said NOTHING about a military engagement. Did not even imply that. Goddamn, a fucking 3 yr old wouldn’t have fucked that up. I’ve said for a couple of years that China will sell off treasuries, or discontinue buying them, or in some other manner induce an economic crisis in our country. You fucking idiot, China knows they’d lose big time in a military confrontation with us.Do you think they are stupid, like you?

SSS
SSS
January 1, 2011 4:27 pm

Admin said, “SSS thinks we won the WAR ON DRUGS and Smokey thinks we are winning the WAR ON TERROR. They do appear to be missing a reality gene.”

An off-subject red herring, one of your favorite tactics. I never asserted we are winning the war of drugs, and Smokey never asserted we are winning the war on terror. I merely stated the obvious, that Smokey has fried your and Punk’s ass on this War with China over oil nonsense. Both of you are looking into a clouded crystal ball, and Smokey has responded with sound historical facts. I’ll take facts over speculation every day.

BTW, you never responded to my post on facts about the Dong Feng 21 vs. the Aegis ABM and U.S. war planning. Dead silence. Sound of crickets. Pffft.