Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

US to sell 36 F-15 to international financiers of Terror.....Yes it's true

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    It is the opposite .

    Besides, as long as governments are not supporting terrorists who attack US, there is no problem to do business with them .
    You're implying that there are good radical Islamist... Or at best ones that are of no threat to the US. I can't accept that as their core ideology, their goals, their motives are not only a direct threat to us but to the rest of the world. There is NO such thing as an acceptable radical.

    Aside from that, bear in mind Qatar funds Hamas. So will you side with Hamas and Qatar or Israel? After all Hamas isn't attacking the US, so are they ok?
    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    - Benjamin Franklin

    The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

    Comment


    • #77
      The nationality of the "alleged" hijackers looks definitive to me.

      Wiki:

      American Airlines Flight 11
      Mohamed Atta 33 Egypt
      Abdulaziz al-Omari 22 Saudi Arabia
      Wail al-Shehri 28 Saudi Arabia
      Waleed al-Shehri 22 Saudi Arabia
      Satam al-Suqami 25 Saudi Arabia

      United Airlines Flight 175
      Marwan al-Shehhi 23 United Arab Emirates
      Fayez Banihammad 24 United Arab Emirates
      Mohand al-Shehri 22 Saudi Arabia
      Hamza al-Ghamdi 20 Saudi Arabia
      Ahmed al-Ghamdi 22 Saudi Arabia

      American Airlines Flight 77
      Hani Hanjour 29 Saudi Arabia
      Khalid al-Mihdhar 26 Saudi Arabia
      Majed Moqed 24 Saudi Arabia
      Nawaf al-Hazmi 25 Saudi Arabia
      Salem al-Hazmi 20 Saudi Arabia

      United Airlines Flight 93
      Ziad Jarrah 26 Lebanon
      Ahmed al-Haznawi 20 Saudi Arabia
      Ahmed al-Nami 24 Saudi Arabia
      Saeed al-Ghamdi 21 Saudi Arabia

      Further to that, but possibly being the source of the above:

      https://www.cia.gov/news-information...timony_new.pdf
      "For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return"

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Rutger View Post
        The nationality of the "alleged" hijackers looks definitive to me.

        Wiki:

        American Airlines Flight 11
        Mohamed Atta 33 Egypt
        Abdulaziz al-Omari 22 Saudi Arabia
        Wail al-Shehri 28 Saudi Arabia
        Waleed al-Shehri 22 Saudi Arabia
        Satam al-Suqami 25 Saudi Arabia

        United Airlines Flight 175
        Marwan al-Shehhi 23 United Arab Emirates
        Fayez Banihammad 24 United Arab Emirates
        Mohand al-Shehri 22 Saudi Arabia
        Hamza al-Ghamdi 20 Saudi Arabia
        Ahmed al-Ghamdi 22 Saudi Arabia

        American Airlines Flight 77
        Hani Hanjour 29 Saudi Arabia
        Khalid al-Mihdhar 26 Saudi Arabia
        Majed Moqed 24 Saudi Arabia
        Nawaf al-Hazmi 25 Saudi Arabia
        Salem al-Hazmi 20 Saudi Arabia

        United Airlines Flight 93
        Ziad Jarrah 26 Lebanon
        Ahmed al-Haznawi 20 Saudi Arabia
        Ahmed al-Nami 24 Saudi Arabia
        Saeed al-Ghamdi 21 Saudi Arabia

        Further to that, but possibly being the source of the above:

        https://www.cia.gov/news-information...timony_new.pdf
        You forgot to use the word "alleged"...someone may tell you there's no proof.
        You'll live, only the best get killed.

        -General Charles de Gaulle

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by Rutger View Post
          The nationality of the "alleged" hijackers looks definitive to me.

          Wiki:

          American Airlines Flight 11
          Mohamed Atta 33 Egypt
          Abdulaziz al-Omari 22 Saudi Arabia
          Wail al-Shehri 28 Saudi Arabia
          Waleed al-Shehri 22 Saudi Arabia
          Satam al-Suqami 25 Saudi Arabia

          United Airlines Flight 175
          Marwan al-Shehhi 23 United Arab Emirates
          Fayez Banihammad 24 United Arab Emirates
          Mohand al-Shehri 22 Saudi Arabia
          Hamza al-Ghamdi 20 Saudi Arabia
          Ahmed al-Ghamdi 22 Saudi Arabia

          American Airlines Flight 77
          Hani Hanjour 29 Saudi Arabia
          Khalid al-Mihdhar 26 Saudi Arabia
          Majed Moqed 24 Saudi Arabia
          Nawaf al-Hazmi 25 Saudi Arabia
          Salem al-Hazmi 20 Saudi Arabia

          United Airlines Flight 93
          Ziad Jarrah 26 Lebanon
          Ahmed al-Haznawi 20 Saudi Arabia
          Ahmed al-Nami 24 Saudi Arabia
          Saeed al-Ghamdi 21 Saudi Arabia

          Further to that, but possibly being the source of the above:

          https://www.cia.gov/news-information...timony_new.pdf
          Nationality is not in dispute.
          Were they official agents of the KSA government?
          Operatives of a rogue faction within KSA government?*
          Expression and result of KSA export of Wahhabi extremism "out of country" to reduce the presense and impact with KSA?
          Other?

          * Reflecting some of the complexities in dealing with the Islamic World, the USA/West has to operate thru Pakistan to support operations in Afghanistan. However Pakistan is a nation divided with Secular and Fundimentalists factions in it's general population and it's government. IIRC, the Taliban were set-up and sponsored by Fundi factions within ISI. And Pakistan is often seen as on the brink of internal civil war which could put USA/West forces in Afghanistan at risk.
          TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

          Comment


          • #80
            "Of the 19 hijackers that allegedly carried out the attack,15 were Saudi nationals and available evidence suggests some of them were linked to high-ranking Saudi officials ."


            People will notice

            allegedly,which means :used to convey that something is claimed to be the case or have taken place,although there is NO proof .

            suggests : means :cause one to THINK that something exists or is the case
            Using the word "allegedly" in the above line and elaborating on it, the poster appears to have doubts of them to be the hijackers, hence also their nationality to be of no importance.

            As for any involvement of SA officials with 9/11, who is to tell? Surely no one here will have solid knowledge on that, but follow their own logic.
            "For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return"

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
              You're implying that there are good radical Islamist... Or at best ones that are of no threat to the US. I can't accept that as their core ideology, their goals, their motives are not only a direct threat to us but to the rest of the world. There is NO such thing as an acceptable radical.

              Aside from that, bear in mind Qatar funds Hamas. So will you side with Hamas and Qatar or Israel? After all Hamas isn't attacking the US, so are they ok?
              The fact that Qatar funds Hamas is no obstacle for the US to sell jets to Qatar, after all Hamas wil not use these jets to attack Israel .

              There is a difference between selling jets to Qatar,who can not use them, and to sell weapons to Hamas who will use them .

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Rutger View Post
                Using the word "allegedly" in the above line and elaborating on it, the poster appears to have doubts of them to be the hijackers, hence also their nationality to be of no importance.

                As for any involvement of SA officials with 9/11, who is to tell? Surely no one here will have solid knowledge on that, but follow their own logic.
                That's why I am saying that there are no proofs that the government of KSA was involved in 9/11 .

                The whole claim that KSA was involved in 9/11 is a liberal tactic to force US to abandon KSA to the benefit of Iran .

                About Hamas : there has been a rupture between Hamas that supported the insurrection against Assad and Iran that supported Assad .

                Hamas was forced to look elsewhere for help and found it in Qatar .

                Why did Qatar help Hamas ? No one knows, one can only guess .

                Comment


                • #83
                  Here's one take on the complexities of Qatar, FWIW:
                  The world's richest nation has rarely looked weaker

                  http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/marke...kBz?li=BBnbfcL
                  TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                    You're implying that there are good radical Islamist... Or at best ones that are of no threat to the US. I can't accept that as their core ideology, their goals, their motives are not only a direct threat to us but to the rest of the world. There is NO such thing as an acceptable radical.

                    Aside from that, bear in mind Qatar funds Hamas. So will you side with Hamas and Qatar or Israel? After all Hamas isn't attacking the US, so are they ok?

                    Business is business : if US could give food to the dictator of NK, why could they not sell aircraft to Qatar ?

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by ljadw View Post
                      The fact that Qatar funds Hamas is no obstacle for the US to sell jets to Qatar, after all Hamas wil not use these jets to attack Israel .

                      There is a difference between selling jets to Qatar,who can not use them, and to sell weapons to Hamas who will use them .
                      Your argument doesn't hold any weight, because when it was a democrat doing the same thing the right-wing was against it. So how can your position be met with any sort of respect when it changes based on who's in charge. Your issue isn't the act, it's who's committing the act.

                      As Trump said, countries that directly support terror should be punished, isolated from the rest of the civilized world. We should not be strengthening their military, instead we should be seeking ways to weaken them which would in turn weaken the terrorists they support.
                      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                      - Benjamin Franklin

                      The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by asterix View Post
                        You forgot to use the word "alleged"...someone may tell you there's no proof.
                        You mean besides their pilot training and verified presence aboard the aircraft?
                        Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                          Your argument doesn't hold any weight, because when it was a democrat doing the same thing the right-wing was against it. So how can your position be met with any sort of respect when it changes based on who's in charge. Your issue isn't the act, it's who's committing the act.

                          As Trump said, countries that directly support terror should be punished, isolated from the rest of the civilized world. We should not be strengthening their military, instead we should be seeking ways to weaken them which would in turn weaken the terrorists they support.

                          Selling jets to Qatar is not strengthening their military.And, to weak Qatar is not to weak Hamas .


                          If US did not sell jets to Qatar, Qatar would buy jets elsewhere : I am sure that France would not object to sell jets to Qatar .

                          One can AND punish Qatar AND sell them jets .

                          BTW : I should not use "civilised world " .

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Manpower of the air force of Qatar : 1500

                            Meanwhile Qatar is fighting at the side of KSA in Yemen against Iran .

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                              Your argument doesn't hold any weight, because when it was a democrat doing the same thing the right-wing was against it. So how can your position be met with any sort of respect when it changes based on who's in charge. Your issue isn't the act, it's who's committing the act.

                              As Trump said, countries that directly support terror should be punished, isolated from the rest of the civilized world. We should not be strengthening their military, instead we should be seeking ways to weaken them which would in turn weaken the terrorists they support.
                              1) The Democrats did the same : Samantha Power attacks Trump for the weapon deal with KSA, but forgets that her boss also was selling weapns to KSA


                              2 ) The weapon deal is good for USA, good for the GOP , good for the reelection of Trump .

                              One can also argue that the weapon deal is good for Israel,as the billions Qatar is spending on the aircraft can not be used to strengthen Hamas .

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X