The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Declassified documents show Henry Kissinger giving Isreal the all=clear to violate a ceasefire between Isreal & Russia.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB98/press.htm
Wow, it's almost like the USA encouraging action to keep the region destabilised.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB98/press.htm
Wow, it's almost like the USA encouraging action to keep the region destabilised.
Page:
Belldandy wrote:
> Yeah, it's a pain in the a r s e when someone doesn't agree with
> people isn't it ?
But it isn't only you who disagrees.
> Yeah, it's a pain in the a r s e when someone doesn't agree with
> people isn't it ?
But it isn't only you who disagrees.
Ecplain the "irony" comment please, because simply quoting back makes you a fool.
What's an intellectual coward?
Is that someone who's really clever, but scared of everything?
Is that someone who's really clever, but scared of everything?
In summary;
''His Tory-Boy Doublethink Generator must have been working overtime to reconcile that one in his head...''
''Two-prong method of attack:
1) Let post slide off front page then come back and talk about stuff
2) Only enter threads where Tom Clancy has provided ample research for arguing''
''Heh. It's funny you know; in his own head, the reason he gets such a hard time is that we're all wrong and he's the only one sucking from the pure teat of truth. I can't WAIT to see him trying that approach with his lecturers/employers in the future...''
''Describing Bell's approach as 'back to basics' was therefore amusing to me for obvious reasons. :)''
''And Belldandy, have you noticed that it only decends into name calling when you're here?''***
''Clueless Joe that will only post now after 5pm and at weekends so people don't point and laugh at you.''
''*points and laughs*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA''
''*points and laughs at Clancyfan*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA''
''Unlike you, you mean?
Besides, we just wrote that as a test''
''You rancid little hypocrite. How dare you think that you can slither up the moral high ground after you've made it painfully clear that you are a moral and intellectual coward who hasn't the courage of his convictions.''
''Loathesome little coward; can't even provide a consistent argument cos you don't think, you just parrot whatever Clancy/White House briefing you've read that day.''
''You are a clown. An 11ft towering clown with a massive red, white and blue nose doing handstands for the crowd without realising we're bored of it and waiting for the lions.
Run along Bozo''
''My favourite Bell moment, even more than the "I was wait for it...wrong" thread was when you pointed out that I SMOKE!!!!!!
"don't you have a pack of cancersticks to stick in your mouth?"
Waaaah waaaah waaaah''
***Irony value of 1000 points.
''His Tory-Boy Doublethink Generator must have been working overtime to reconcile that one in his head...''
''Two-prong method of attack:
1) Let post slide off front page then come back and talk about stuff
2) Only enter threads where Tom Clancy has provided ample research for arguing''
''Heh. It's funny you know; in his own head, the reason he gets such a hard time is that we're all wrong and he's the only one sucking from the pure teat of truth. I can't WAIT to see him trying that approach with his lecturers/employers in the future...''
''Describing Bell's approach as 'back to basics' was therefore amusing to me for obvious reasons. :)''
''And Belldandy, have you noticed that it only decends into name calling when you're here?''***
''Clueless Joe that will only post now after 5pm and at weekends so people don't point and laugh at you.''
''*points and laughs*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA''
''*points and laughs at Clancyfan*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA''
''Unlike you, you mean?
Besides, we just wrote that as a test''
''You rancid little hypocrite. How dare you think that you can slither up the moral high ground after you've made it painfully clear that you are a moral and intellectual coward who hasn't the courage of his convictions.''
''Loathesome little coward; can't even provide a consistent argument cos you don't think, you just parrot whatever Clancy/White House briefing you've read that day.''
''You are a clown. An 11ft towering clown with a massive red, white and blue nose doing handstands for the crowd without realising we're bored of it and waiting for the lions.
Run along Bozo''
''My favourite Bell moment, even more than the "I was wait for it...wrong" thread was when you pointed out that I SMOKE!!!!!!
"don't you have a pack of cancersticks to stick in your mouth?"
Waaaah waaaah waaaah''
***Irony value of 1000 points.
Actually Bell, you're not even trying to be annoying on purpose, I've just realised.
You're actually too stupid to remember what you said two posts previous and twist yourself into knots of fury when it's pointed out, calmly and methodically, that you have zero clue about the noise you create.
"Anyone that marched with that group is, essentially, part of the communist party"
2 posts later:
"I'm not saying everyone that marched is a communist"
Call me what you like, google and Clancy-novel read for reference to support your cliched politrick soundbites - but at least I'm consistent in my views and will take the same path again and again during an argument.
Read your response to my post.
Then read this:
Belldandy wrote:
> Yes indeed it does have a Foreign Policy: Disagree with us and we'll
> invade\sanction\politically cripple you\send the CIA to topple you.
> Agree with us and we'll buy your stuff and sell shiny new stuff to
> you, and occasionaly ignore you anyway.
-----
My favourite Bell moment, even more than the "I was wait for it...wrong" thread was when you pointed out that I SMOKE!!!!!!
"don't you have a pack of cancersticks to stick in your mouth?"
Waaaah waaaah waaaah
You're actually too stupid to remember what you said two posts previous and twist yourself into knots of fury when it's pointed out, calmly and methodically, that you have zero clue about the noise you create.
"Anyone that marched with that group is, essentially, part of the communist party"
2 posts later:
"I'm not saying everyone that marched is a communist"
Call me what you like, google and Clancy-novel read for reference to support your cliched politrick soundbites - but at least I'm consistent in my views and will take the same path again and again during an argument.
Read your response to my post.
Then read this:
Belldandy wrote:
> Yes indeed it does have a Foreign Policy: Disagree with us and we'll
> invade\sanction\politically cripple you\send the CIA to topple you.
> Agree with us and we'll buy your stuff and sell shiny new stuff to
> you, and occasionaly ignore you anyway.
-----
My favourite Bell moment, even more than the "I was wait for it...wrong" thread was when you pointed out that I SMOKE!!!!!!
"don't you have a pack of cancersticks to stick in your mouth?"
Waaaah waaaah waaaah
Hmmm..I have read your responses Clancy fan, and can only offer this in response in response to American Foreign Policy:
Belldandy wrote:
> Yes indeed it does have a Foreign Policy: Disagree with us and we'll
> invade\sanction\politically cripple you\send the CIA to topple you.
> Agree with us and we'll buy your stuff and sell shiny new stuff to
> you, and occasionaly ignore you anyway.
---
And it's nice to see you blithely sidestep the other posts I made where I laugh at your for bleating about people refusing to admit they are ever wrong.
Which is Irony Central, n'est ce pas Captain Retraction?
You are a clown. An 11ft towering clown with a massive red, white and blue nose doing handstands for the crowd without realising we're bored of it and waiting for the lions.
Run along Bozo
Belldandy wrote:
> Yes indeed it does have a Foreign Policy: Disagree with us and we'll
> invade\sanction\politically cripple you\send the CIA to topple you.
> Agree with us and we'll buy your stuff and sell shiny new stuff to
> you, and occasionaly ignore you anyway.
---
And it's nice to see you blithely sidestep the other posts I made where I laugh at your for bleating about people refusing to admit they are ever wrong.
Which is Irony Central, n'est ce pas Captain Retraction?
You are a clown. An 11ft towering clown with a massive red, white and blue nose doing handstands for the crowd without realising we're bored of it and waiting for the lions.
Run along Bozo
Belldandy wrote:
> Or, alternatively, it's just as interesting to ask why, if what the
> USA does is so wrong, it can continue to do so without fear of
> recriminations from most of the world ?(for the most part).
Uhh...because no one other nation has the power to challenge it?
>
> Sure, it's a superpower, but does that mean much nowadays ?
Heh. I'm sure the Egyptians said the same about the Roman Empire...
> I don't
> think it does, Iraq has proved that a superpower cannot really win a
> war by itself anymore, and any illusion Russia had about it's might
> lies in the ruins of Chechenya and other former states. In reality, I
> think now that the very way the war was fought in Iraq has actually
> caused the current situation, as it has done in Afghanistan.
You don't think it does? Funny cos you always said prior to this post it did. You wouldn't be amending your barely-held opinions in order to try and not to have your ill thought through Orwellian thought process annihiliated again, would you?
>
> For what it's worth I think Bush can basically forget re-election,
> it's turning into Vietnam mark 2 day by day and thats going to cost
> him politically, even with those who supported his actions. He hasn't
> followed through, he hasn't announced how the situation is going to
> be resolved, it's like the USA and UK have just left their troops in
> the lurch.
Yup, he can indeed.
By the way, y'know when you said Bush was a fighter pilot? What you were doing there was confusing the Dubya Doll with reality; Dubya's 'war' record is abysmal. He couldn't even be bothered to turn up to his cushy National Guard duty. Not that this is on topic, but it will annoy you and turn your babyface red with humourless rage. Which is, as I believe I have already said, funny.
Loathesome little coward; can't even provide a consistent argument cos you don't think, you just parrot whatever Clancy/White House briefing you've read that day.
> Or, alternatively, it's just as interesting to ask why, if what the
> USA does is so wrong, it can continue to do so without fear of
> recriminations from most of the world ?(for the most part).
Uhh...because no one other nation has the power to challenge it?
>
> Sure, it's a superpower, but does that mean much nowadays ?
Heh. I'm sure the Egyptians said the same about the Roman Empire...
> I don't
> think it does, Iraq has proved that a superpower cannot really win a
> war by itself anymore, and any illusion Russia had about it's might
> lies in the ruins of Chechenya and other former states. In reality, I
> think now that the very way the war was fought in Iraq has actually
> caused the current situation, as it has done in Afghanistan.
You don't think it does? Funny cos you always said prior to this post it did. You wouldn't be amending your barely-held opinions in order to try and not to have your ill thought through Orwellian thought process annihiliated again, would you?
>
> For what it's worth I think Bush can basically forget re-election,
> it's turning into Vietnam mark 2 day by day and thats going to cost
> him politically, even with those who supported his actions. He hasn't
> followed through, he hasn't announced how the situation is going to
> be resolved, it's like the USA and UK have just left their troops in
> the lurch.
Yup, he can indeed.
By the way, y'know when you said Bush was a fighter pilot? What you were doing there was confusing the Dubya Doll with reality; Dubya's 'war' record is abysmal. He couldn't even be bothered to turn up to his cushy National Guard duty. Not that this is on topic, but it will annoy you and turn your babyface red with humourless rage. Which is, as I believe I have already said, funny.
Loathesome little coward; can't even provide a consistent argument cos you don't think, you just parrot whatever Clancy/White House briefing you've read that day.
Belldandy wrote:
>
> Tenuos ? Understatement of the century ! All Israel's enemies were
> massing troops ready to attack, six years previously Israel had been
> attacked.
...and that justifies keeping the fires of hate burning there does it?
>
> Yawn, this again ? the USA funded/supplied native Afghans, not Arab
> Afghans. As it was, at the time, the Taliban were not outlawed
> anyway. Bin Laden and other Arab Afghans were funded solely by the
> Saudi's, indeed the Saudi's were very concerned that they should only
> fund Arab Afghans, i.e not the same ones the USA was funding.
That must be why the US have admitted that Osama bin Laden (that whacky Saudi guy) received CIA training. Whilst fighting in Afghanistan. Not like you to simply lie in order to propogate your doublethink Bell.
>
>
> Because the USA is the only nation to have done that right ? It's
> okay that Russia did likewise with Iran, that France and Germany did
> likewise with Saddam in exchange for oil guarantees, that China did
> likewise in exchange for hefty military contracts (strangely the
> Asian military industrial complex is something most people like you
> never seem to mention...)
And does any of that change the fact that the US did it too?
Hey Bell, by the way; you seem to have ran away from your assertion that I said Iraq never invaded anyone. Could that be because it was pointed out to you that you were...well, lying?
>
>
> Iraq was not illegal, and not unsupported,
Explain how an invasion in direct contradiction of International Law is not illegal, and how the support of 1 nation clears the way for it not to be unsupported? I already know how they've justified it, I'm just intrigued to see if you've read any further than your Chimp-idol's assertions.
it toppled Hussein,
> revealed the extent of his dealings, and the wepaons inspectors have
> admitted they have ample evidence he was pursuing WMD and a nuclear
> program.
As opposed to Israel, who this week revealed they have nuclear subs thanks to the good old USA; helping keep things stable there, eh?
People slammed planes into buildings because they're cowards
> and can't fight straight, and in doing so they signed the death
> warrant of themselves, and all those involved with them.
Funny you know; you use the emotional approach of 9/11 (incidentally, even Dubya has admitted there is no evidence linked Iraq to 9/11), yet when Goatboy, who lost a relative in that attack, disagrees with you, you whine and rage about 'people who think their opinion matters more cos they lost someone'.
You rancid little hypocrite. How dare you think that you can slither up the moral high ground after you've made it painfully clear that you are a moral and intellectual coward who hasn't the courage of his convictions.
>
> Tenuos ? Understatement of the century ! All Israel's enemies were
> massing troops ready to attack, six years previously Israel had been
> attacked.
...and that justifies keeping the fires of hate burning there does it?
>
> Yawn, this again ? the USA funded/supplied native Afghans, not Arab
> Afghans. As it was, at the time, the Taliban were not outlawed
> anyway. Bin Laden and other Arab Afghans were funded solely by the
> Saudi's, indeed the Saudi's were very concerned that they should only
> fund Arab Afghans, i.e not the same ones the USA was funding.
That must be why the US have admitted that Osama bin Laden (that whacky Saudi guy) received CIA training. Whilst fighting in Afghanistan. Not like you to simply lie in order to propogate your doublethink Bell.
>
>
> Because the USA is the only nation to have done that right ? It's
> okay that Russia did likewise with Iran, that France and Germany did
> likewise with Saddam in exchange for oil guarantees, that China did
> likewise in exchange for hefty military contracts (strangely the
> Asian military industrial complex is something most people like you
> never seem to mention...)
And does any of that change the fact that the US did it too?
Hey Bell, by the way; you seem to have ran away from your assertion that I said Iraq never invaded anyone. Could that be because it was pointed out to you that you were...well, lying?
>
>
> Iraq was not illegal, and not unsupported,
Explain how an invasion in direct contradiction of International Law is not illegal, and how the support of 1 nation clears the way for it not to be unsupported? I already know how they've justified it, I'm just intrigued to see if you've read any further than your Chimp-idol's assertions.
it toppled Hussein,
> revealed the extent of his dealings, and the wepaons inspectors have
> admitted they have ample evidence he was pursuing WMD and a nuclear
> program.
As opposed to Israel, who this week revealed they have nuclear subs thanks to the good old USA; helping keep things stable there, eh?
People slammed planes into buildings because they're cowards
> and can't fight straight, and in doing so they signed the death
> warrant of themselves, and all those involved with them.
Funny you know; you use the emotional approach of 9/11 (incidentally, even Dubya has admitted there is no evidence linked Iraq to 9/11), yet when Goatboy, who lost a relative in that attack, disagrees with you, you whine and rage about 'people who think their opinion matters more cos they lost someone'.
You rancid little hypocrite. How dare you think that you can slither up the moral high ground after you've made it painfully clear that you are a moral and intellectual coward who hasn't the courage of his convictions.
Belldandy wrote:
> Iraq was not illegal, and not unsupported
Very amusing. Your sense of irony is developing at a prodigous rate.
> the wepaons inspectors have
> admitted they have ample evidence he was pursuing WMD and a nuclear
> program.
"45 minutes!!!! They will BLOW UP our troops in Cyprus with their chemical guns!!!111"
> People slammed planes into buildings because they're cowards
> and can't fight straight, and in doing so they signed the death
> warrant of themselves, and all those involved with them.
This has nothing to do with the rest of your paragraph. Either your English is terrible, or you're hoping that you can mix Iraq and 9/11 together for some Bush/Rumsfeld style emotional blackmail. It won't work because Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Unless you have evidence that nobody else does?
> Iraq was not illegal, and not unsupported
Very amusing. Your sense of irony is developing at a prodigous rate.
> the wepaons inspectors have
> admitted they have ample evidence he was pursuing WMD and a nuclear
> program.
"45 minutes!!!! They will BLOW UP our troops in Cyprus with their chemical guns!!!111"
> People slammed planes into buildings because they're cowards
> and can't fight straight, and in doing so they signed the death
> warrant of themselves, and all those involved with them.
This has nothing to do with the rest of your paragraph. Either your English is terrible, or you're hoping that you can mix Iraq and 9/11 together for some Bush/Rumsfeld style emotional blackmail. It won't work because Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Unless you have evidence that nobody else does?
Or, alternatively, it's just as interesting to ask why, if what the USA does is so wrong, it can continue to do so without fear of recriminations from most of the world ?(for the most part).
Sure, it's a superpower, but does that mean much nowadays ? I don't think it does, Iraq has proved that a superpower cannot really win a war by itself anymore, and any illusion Russia had about it's might lies in the ruins of Chechenya and other former states. In reality, I think now that the very way the war was fought in Iraq has actually caused the current situation, as it has done in Afghanistan.
In both conflicts the strategy seemed to be to use speed and firepower in key areas to effect advances and capture of territory. But speed did not leave time for thouroughness, allowing many elements to safely melt away to fight again.
For what it's worth I think Bush can basically forget re-election, it's turning into Vietnam mark 2 day by day and thats going to cost him politically, even with those who supported his actions. He hasn't followed through, he hasn't announced how the situation is going to be resolved, it's like the USA and UK have just left their troops in the lurch.
Sure, it's a superpower, but does that mean much nowadays ? I don't think it does, Iraq has proved that a superpower cannot really win a war by itself anymore, and any illusion Russia had about it's might lies in the ruins of Chechenya and other former states. In reality, I think now that the very way the war was fought in Iraq has actually caused the current situation, as it has done in Afghanistan.
In both conflicts the strategy seemed to be to use speed and firepower in key areas to effect advances and capture of territory. But speed did not leave time for thouroughness, allowing many elements to safely melt away to fight again.
For what it's worth I think Bush can basically forget re-election, it's turning into Vietnam mark 2 day by day and thats going to cost him politically, even with those who supported his actions. He hasn't followed through, he hasn't announced how the situation is going to be resolved, it's like the USA and UK have just left their troops in the lurch.
Page: