Israel has carried out an exercise that appears to have been a rehearsal for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, US officials have told the New York Times.

 

More than 100 Israeli fighter jets took part in manoeuvres over the eastern Mediterranean and over Greece in the first week of June, US officials said.

 

Iran insists its programme is peaceful, but Israel sees Iran's development of the technology as a serious threat.

 

Tehran is defying a demand from the UN that it stop the enrichment of uranium.

 

The UN Security Council approved a third round of sanctions against Iran over the issue in March 2008.

 

The Israeli exercise, it seems, was designed to send a message to Tehran that Israel has the power and will to attack if it thought Iran was close to getting a nuclear weapon, the BBC's Jeremy Bowen reports.

 

None of what has been said and done so far means an attack on Iran is coming and talk of one faded out after US intelligence reported at the end of 2007 that Iran had given up its nuclear weapons programme, he notes. But now it is back and that is significant, our Middle East Editor says.

 

Mohammed ElBaradei, head of the UN's nuclear watchdog, said an attack would put Iran on a "crash course" to building nuclear weapons.

 

"A military strike, in my opinion, would be worse than anything possible - it would turn the region into a fireball," he told Al Arabiya television in an interview.

 

"It would make me unable to continue my work," he said.

 

'Signals'

 

Several US officials briefing the New York Times said the exercise was intended to demonstrate the seriousness of Israel's concern over Iran's nuclear activities, and its willingness to act unilaterally.

 

"They wanted us to know, they wanted the Europeans to know, and they wanted the Iranians to know," a Pentagon official is quoted as saying by the newspaper.

 

"There's a lot of signalling going on at different levels."

 

The exercise involved Israeli helicopters that could be used to rescue downed pilots, the newspaper reported.

 

The helicopters and refuelling tankers flew more than 1,400km (870 miles), roughly the distance between Israel and Iran's main uranium enrichment plant at Natanz.

 

The New York Times reported that Israeli officials declined to discuss the details of the exercise.

 

A spokesman for the Israeli military said the air force "regularly trains for various missions in order to confront and meet the challenges posed by the threats facing Israel".

 

The US state department would not comment on the Israeli exercise. A spokesperson said the US was focused on making diplomacy work with Iran but insisted that all options were still on the table, echoing remarks made recently by President George W Bush.

 

Diplomats in Washington described the exercise as muscle-flexing, a message that Israel would be ready to take unilateral action against Iran if needed.

 

But they add that if Israel ever decides to strike, there will be little advance warning - just like when it targeted a suspected nuclear reactor in Syria last September and Iraq's nuclear plant in Osirak in 1981.

 

Our Middle East editor adds that, at the UN, Russia and others believe attacking Iran would only make matters worse, and talking about it undercuts the diplomacy.

 

Warnings

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert warned on 4 June that drastic measures were needed to stop Iran obtaining nuclear weapons.

 

He said Iran must be shown there will be devastating consequences if it did develop such weapons.

 

Israeli deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz - a former defence minister - said earlier this month that military strikes to stop Iran developing nuclear weapons looked "unavoidable".

 

In 1981, Israeli jets bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor at Osirak, 30km (18 miles) outside Baghdad.

 

Israel said it believed the French-built plant was designed to make nuclear weapons that could be used against Israel.

 

 

Source: BBC News

Edited June 20, 200817 yr by brian91

You know, perhaps if Israel gave up its own completely illegally procured Nuclear weapons programme it would actually put the diplomatic ball FIRMLY into Iran's court to justify what it's doing.... As far as I can see, Iran or any other country in the ME has a legitimate RIGHT as a sovereign nation to defend itself against a neighbour which has proven itself an aggressive bunch of Imperialistic b'astards time and time again, especially when that neighbour has itself pursued an illegal nukes programme which the world would NEVER have known about had insiders not blown the whistle on what was going on......

 

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander if you ask me..... This "rehearsal" is nothing more than a thinly veiled act of aggression on the part of Israel.....

You know, perhaps if Israel gave up its own completely illegally procured Nuclear weapons programme it would actually put the diplomatic ball FIRMLY into Iran's court to justify what it's doing.... As far as I can see, Iran or any other country in the ME has a legitimate RIGHT as a sovereign nation to defend itself against a neighbour which has proven itself an aggressive bunch of Imperialistic b'astards time and time again, especially when that neighbour has itself pursued an illegal nukes programme which the world would NEVER have known about had insiders not blown the whistle on what was going on......

 

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander if you ask me..... This "rehearsal" is nothing more than a thinly veiled act of aggression on the part of Israel.....

 

completely agree...

 

but isnt it a nonsense anyway? if iran attacked with nukes, israel... wouldnt iran itself get caught in the fall out?.. surely israel is too bloody close to iran! hell we got contaminated when chernobyl went up in 86, and we are a thousand miles UPWIND..

 

and i wonder what the yanks would do if the situation was reversed?... that iran had nukes and were apparently having excercises suggesting a pre-emptive strike against an israeli nucular power development?...

You know, perhaps if Israel gave up its own completely illegally procured Nuclear weapons programme it would actually put the diplomatic ball FIRMLY into Iran's court to justify what it's doing.... As far as I can see, Iran or any other country in the ME has a legitimate RIGHT as a sovereign nation to defend itself against a neighbour which has proven itself an aggressive bunch of Imperialistic b'astards time and time again, especially when that neighbour has itself pursued an illegal nukes programme which the world would NEVER have known about had insiders not blown the whistle on what was going on......

 

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander if you ask me..... This "rehearsal" is nothing more than a thinly veiled act of aggression on the part of Israel.....

 

Naturally I am with Israel on this one

 

Iran is committed to the complete destruction of Israel, its President has also publicly said so so given the rhetoric that comes out of Teheran it is right that Israel has to consider its options and prepare for any Iranian wrongdoing

 

Olmert has never ever made public statements about wanting a sovereign nation wiped off the map whereas Iran have so it is right that Israel do what is necessary

 

Iran is not a fit and proper country to be having nuclear weapons given its commitment to the destruction of Israel

Naturally I am with Israel on this one

 

Iran is committed to the complete destruction of Israel, its President has also publicly said so so given the rhetoric that comes out of Teheran it is right that Israel has to consider its options and prepare for any Iranian wrongdoing

 

Olmert has never ever made public statements about wanting a sovereign nation wiped off the map whereas Iran have so it is right that Israel do what is necessary

 

Iran is not a fit and proper country to be having nuclear weapons given its commitment to the destruction of Israel

 

bloody hypocrit

 

what about israels total commitment to wiping out the palestinians? no public declaration?.. so what!

 

again, they are geographically too close to eachother to have a nuclear exchange, iran IF they develop nukes are doing so out of protection against an israeli attack.

Naturally I am with Israel on this one

 

Iran is committed to the complete destruction of Israel, its President has also publicly said so so given the rhetoric that comes out of Teheran it is right that Israel has to consider its options and prepare for any Iranian wrongdoing

 

Olmert has never ever made public statements about wanting a sovereign nation wiped off the map whereas Iran have so it is right that Israel do what is necessary

 

Iran is not a fit and proper country to be having nuclear weapons given its commitment to the destruction of Israel

 

I'm with Rob, you ARE a complete bloody hypocrite (much like the Yanks and our own Govt...), and so what if the Isrealis haven't made PUBLIC statements, their actions over the years speak for themselves. They are as much a "rogue state" as Taliban-controlled Afghanistan or Mugabe's Zimbabwe, we just turn a blind eye to it....

 

And you said it yourself - RHETORIC... It means absolutely nothing, just Ahmadinejad blowing off hot air to please the proles in Tehran, as opposed the the very REAL acts of aggression that the Israelis have commtted against entirely innocent Palestinian civilians since their completely rotten, Imperialist state was created..... Israel has brought the extremism out in people by their historical and continued actions.. You just dont get it do you - the Palestinians and the Iranians DID NOT START ANY OF THIS SH!T, it was your lot.... Start waking up to that fact, and maybe I'll start to take you seriously.....

bloody hypocrit

 

what about israels total commitment to wiping out the palestinians? no public declaration?.. so what!

 

again, they are geographically too close to eachother to have a nuclear exchange, iran IF they develop nukes are doing so out of protection against an israeli attack.

 

If the Israelis were committed to wiping out the Palestinians they would have done it by now, since 1984 there has been 1200 Palestinian deaths, excluding terrorists that is about probably 500 innocent civilians that have been killed in crossfire or whatever, too many yes but compared that with over 20,000 innocent Iraqis murdered in 2 nights in "shock and awe", we are not in a position to condemn Israel when we have done far worse than them in the last 20 years yet we are allowed nuclear weapons

 

If the Israelis wanted the Palestinians wiped out they could do it easily, soldiers could probably wipe out every living person in Palestine inside a month if Israel were committed to the destruction of Palestine but it isn't

iran IF they develop nukes are doing so out of protection against an israeli attack.

 

Of course they are. It seems perfectly rational to me, they want to avoid either the Isrealis or the Yanks "doing an Iraq" on them.... We invaded Iraq, which had no capability to defend itself (despite what the Govt says...), and are leaving the likes of North Korea alone because they certainly CAN defend themselves against an attack... So, er, if I was an Iranian I'd certainly be wanting our Govt to pursue a nukes programme, seems perfectly logical to me....

 

Us and the Yanks, we're the bullies of the world, picking on weaker nations incapable of defending themselves, and sh!tting a brick when it comes to the real assholes like North Korea who would hit us with everything they had if we set one foot across the border..... This is the sort of deterrent the Iranians want.....

And you said it yourself - RHETORIC... It means absolutely nothing, just Ahmadinejad blowing off hot air to please the proles in Tehran, as opposed the the very REAL acts of aggression that the Israelis have commtted against entirely innocent Palestinian civilians since their completely rotten, Imperialist state was created.....

 

They shouldn't say it in the first place

 

If someone phoned me up tonight and said that they were going to kill me you can rest assured whether they meant it or not that I would be taking necessary means to ensure it doesn't happen even if it was some drunk blowing hot air, Israel can't take that chance, if someone makes public statements about wiping out a country of course Olmert is going to be taking precautions, Ahmadinejad should keep his mouth shut instead of fanning the flames

If the Israelis wanted the Palestinians wiped out they could do it easily, soldiers could probably wipe out every living person in Palestine inside a month if Israel were committed to the destruction of Palestine but it isn't

 

Mate, you're just laughable..... Everything you say to defend your precious Isrealis is an insult to decency..... So, they aint sending in the troops or whatever, NAAAAAAAAH... They just bulldoze people's homes, dispossess them, turn them into refugees within their own country, make them homeless, treat them worse than second-class citizens, rob them of their very dignity and human rights.......

 

You are right about one thing though - Our Govt probably isn't in any kind of moral position to criticise Isreal because of Iraq... Well, neither are they in any moral position to criticise IRAN, or Mugabe, or the Chinese, or the North Koreans, et al......

 

They shouldn't say it in the first place

 

If someone phoned me up tonight and said that they were going to kill me you can rest assured whether they meant it or not that I would be taking necessary means to ensure it doesn't happen even if it was some drunk blowing hot air, Israel can't take that chance, if someone makes public statements about wiping out a country of course Olmert is going to be taking precautions, Ahmadinejad should keep his mouth shut instead of fanning the flames

 

And yet again you completely fail to criticise your precious Isreal for starting the fukkin' fire in the first place... -_-

 

Yeah, Ahmadinejad is a loudmouth.... But Isreal has given him PLENTY to be p!ssed off about..... If I was an Iranian, I'D probably want to see Isreal wiped off the map in the same way that if I was around in the times of William Wallace and Robert the Bruce I'd probably want to see every single English invader driven out of my country by whatever means necessary, or if I was Irish, I'd probably support De Valera and Collins against British colonialism..... Oppressors have no right to call foul when people fight back against them.....

 

Do you honestly believe that if De Valera had a nuke that he wouldn't have pointed it at London and told Lloyd George to "get the fukk out of my country or I'll destroy yours..."? Damn straight he would...

Frankly I dont think that Iran wanting to pursue a nukes programme is really any different to India or Pakistan doing so... India had to endure over 100 years of colonialist oppression and "divide and conquer" from Britain which tore the country apart..... They didn't want to be anyone's "coolies" anymore..... How can anyone fukkin' blame them....? No outsiders are gonna invade India or Pakistan ever again, are they....? Why...? 'COS THEY GOT NUKES!!!!! :rolleyes: Iran is seeing a nuclear weapons programme as a guarantee of NOT BEING INVADED by the "infidels"... It's worked for Pakistan, NK, etc. Bush probably detested the idea of negotiating with Musharraf, but what choice does he have, Musharraf has nukes, so he has to be taken seriously, the Yanks only understand one thing - Power.....

 

People talk about Ahmadinejad's aggressive rhetoric.... Well, what about Bush's aggressive rhetoric against Iran.. Lumping them together with Iraq and North Korea, then invading Iraq.... Kind of takes on the appearance of a Hit List if you ask me..... "We got Iraq, you Iranians are next......". Iran is just reacting to having aggressive overtures made against them in the first place...... So they respond by basically saying "Okay, maybe we cant hope to attack America itself, so we'll do the next best thing - threaten to attack their Middle Eastern satellite state if they dont leave us alone....".

and i wonder what the yanks would do if the situation was reversed?... that iran had nukes and were apparently having excercises suggesting a pre-emptive strike against an israeli nucular power development?...

We'd have the $h!t scared out of us, that's what we'd do.

 

They shouldn't say it in the first place

 

If someone phoned me up tonight and said that they were going to kill me you can rest assured whether they meant it or not that I would be taking necessary means to ensure it doesn't happen even if it was some drunk blowing hot air, Israel can't take that chance, if someone makes public statements about wiping out a country of course Olmert is going to be taking precautions, Ahmadinejad should keep his mouth shut instead of fanning the flames

I agree. It does no good to make threats, even idle ones. Someone's going to get angry, and here comes the war all over again.

 

the Yanks only understand one thing - Power.....

I disagree. Maybe some people of power want MORE power - but that can't be attributed to only Americans! [btw. I hate being called a Yank; where I come from, that's what we call airheaded northerners] There are plenty of Americans who would have nothing but peace. There isn't much that can be done if our President thinks war is the right way to go. I think it was understandable to begin the war, since we had been attacked - but we should have been gone long ago. We aren't getting anything done now, other than blood and more blood. Then again, I suppose my being anti-war is rather a bias, but Americans in general want out now. Obama is the only candidate who hasn't addressed the war to my knowledge. But from what I've seen on here, he would continue it. Basically, there isn't much we can do. Hillary Clinton promised to attack people if she was elected, and McCain is all for continuing the war. There isn't much hope now, is there?

 

And anyway, I don't think information like this should be released. Anything to do with war should be concealed from the public to prevent the "enemy" getting hold of it.

[btw. I hate being called a Yank; where I come from, that's what we call airheaded northerners] There are plenty of Americans who would have nothing but peace. There isn't much that can be done if our President thinks war is the right way to go. I

 

we...i... was refering to your government, not to the general population. we have had this discussion before and fully understand that you, the general population, are seperate from the presidents mob. so if theres a gilb dig at americans its MOST probably aimed at your government, not you. :)

 

I disagree. Maybe some people of power want MORE power - but that can't be attributed to only Americans! [btw. I hate being called a Yank; where I come from, that's what we call airheaded northerners] There are plenty of Americans who would have nothing but peace. There isn't much that can be done if our President thinks war is the right way to go. I think it was understandable to begin the war, since we had been attacked

 

You weren't attacked by Iraq though..... -_- In fact, it wasn't Afghans who attacked you either.... You were attacked by a bunch of Wahabi-ist Saudis, not the Sunni Muslims who were in control of Iraq or even the Taliban.... It would be a bit like us after being attacked by the IRA to send gunships, bombers and troops to New York or Chicago because this is where YOUR LOT raised funds for Gerry Adams and Martin MacGuinnes and allowed them to make speeches and hold rallies in support of IRA attacks on UK soil.....

 

9/11 happened as a result of YOUR GOVT's continued policy of supporting Israeli oppression against Palestinians since the late '40s, and the American military presence in Saudi Arabia since the first Gulf Oil war.... You SHOULD be storming the gates of the Whitehouse and demanding your leaders' heads on a sodding POLE..... It wouldn't be the first time you guys revolted against your leaders, you celebrate a Revolution every July 4th... Why not have the guts to do so again....?

 

Seems incredibly ironic that the only people with the guts to stand up to your Govt and its minions are the Right-Wing militias.... They at least get my respect for that.....

I don't think information like this should be released. Anything to do with war should be concealed from the public to prevent the "enemy" getting hold of it.

 

I completely disagree with this statment, this war is ILLEGAL (not an opinion, a fact..., ), both yours and my leaders are a bunch of bloody war criminals, therefore it should be blown wide open and the truth should out, I thought Americans valued "truth, liberty and justice" above all else.... Here's some quotes from some of your greatest countrymen

 

"We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home".

"The State which sacrifices freedom and liberty for security is deserving of neither"

"Let justice be done though the Heavens fall"

 

My cousin was a Lance Coporal in the army.. He fought in Kosovo, so he'd seen a bit of action.. But what he experienced in Iraq so incensed him that he resigned his commission, he and many ex-servicemen are seriously considering legal action against the Govt, they should.. He saw several of his comrades in arms blown to pieces by a roadside bomb, planted there by the insurgency that the foolish policies (such as disbanding the Iraqi army and thereby guaranteeing hundreds of thousands of extremely PISSED OFF Iraqi servicemen would be out baying for the blood of just about any Allied soldier they saw....) of YOUR GOVT ended up creating..... The Post-Invasion plan drawn up by Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz and Bremer was an utter joke, a complete CLUSTERFUKK... Even your own Generals have been saying this.... You should watch a documentary called "War Without End", and educate yourself about this piece of sh!t "war".....

 

....And this is before you get onto sh!t like Abu Ghraib and GITMO, which is frankly an outrage to anyone's sense of decency and humanity.....

 

 

Iran being a nuclear power worries me. Iran being a nuclear power worries me much more than India being one. Or North Korea. Or Israel. Or France. Or any other country in the world at the moment.

 

It's nothing to do with hypocrisy. It's not because I think only 'Western' powers should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. It's Iran. It's theocracy. I have a deep rooted fear of fanaticism. When religious fanaticism permeates government I really worry.

 

Like a good few of us on here, I grew up in the Nuclear Cold War years of the 70s and 80s. The arms race. 'Armageddon' just around the corner. But you know what? I never believed it would happen. My logic was that people (yes, even politicians and army generals) don't want to die. If the USSR had launched a missile strike against the US, the US would have pushed the button long before the first Soviet missiles landed. Both countries would be wiped off the map. Mutually assured destruction I think it was called. I always reckoned the the people in charge of the respective 'buttons' were sane and stable enough not to carry out a first strike. I reckoned they wanted to live just as I wanted to live. I reckoned they were scared of being incinerated in a puff of smoke.

 

Yes, nuclear weaponry does stop convential military invasions. I don't doubt that. If Iraq had been sitting with a bucketload of nuclear warheads pointed at the West we would never have invaded. Iran no doubt wants nuclear weapons for the same reason.

 

But. And a big but. I'm not 100% convinced the Mad Mullahs who run Iran are like the Cold War Ruskies of old. I'm not convinced they do worry about getting blown to smithereens. Some of them probably welcome martyrdom. When the people in charge go around recruiting and sanctioning suicide bombers one does start to worry. :blink: Exactly whose paw is going to be on the trigger of an Iranian nuclear arsenal?

 

I don't think I would sleep as soundly in my bed at night with a nuclear armed Iran in this world.

 

As for Israel, on past performance I don't expect Israel to take the chance. And that worries me equally. :(

Iran being a nuclear power worries me. Iran being a nuclear power worries me much more than India being one. Or North Korea. Or Israel. Or France. Or any other country in the world at the moment.

 

It's nothing to do with hypocrisy. It's not because I think only 'Western' powers should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. It's Iran. It's theocracy. I have a deep rooted fear of fanaticism. When religious fanaticism permeates government I really worry.

 

Like a good few of us on here, I grew up in the Nuclear Cold War years of the 70s and 80s. The arms race. 'Armageddon' just around the corner. But you know what? I never believed it would happen. My logic was that people (yes, even politicians and army generals) don't want to die. If the USSR had launched a missile strike against the US, the US would have pushed the button long before the first Soviet missiles landed. Both countries would be wiped off the map. Mutually assured destruction I think it was called. I always reckoned the the people in charge of the respective 'buttons' were sane and stable enough not to carry out a first strike. I reckoned they wanted to live just as I wanted to live. I reckoned they were scared of being incinerated in a puff of smoke.

 

Yes, nuclear weaponry does stop convential military invasions. I don't doubt that. If Iraq had been sitting with a bucketload of nuclear warheads pointed at the West we would never have invaded. Iran no doubt wants nuclear weapons for the same reason.

 

But. And a big but. I'm not 100% convinced the Mad Mullahs who run Iran are like the Cold War Ruskies of old. I'm not convinced they do worry about getting blown to smithereens. Some of them probably welcome martyrdom. When the people in charge go around recruiting and sanctioning suicide bombers one does start to worry. :blink: Exactly whose paw is going to be on the trigger of an Iranian nuclear arsenal?

 

I don't think I would sleep as soundly in my bed at night with a nuclear armed Iran in this world.

 

As for Israel, on past performance I don't expect Israel to take the chance. And that worries me equally. :(

 

I take your points, but I do think that the "mad mullahs" probably do worry about being blown to smitereens, which is why they may (and there's still no proof either way that this is what Iran are doing anyway) want to pursue a nukes programme, as a preventative measure.

 

What I find hard to take is this whole "one rule for the bloody Isrealis, another rule for everyone else" nonsense that's been going on for decades... It's the whole reason FOR the sorts of extremism that's been going on if you ask me... The US arming Israel to the teeth is what has provoked the desire in countries like Iran and Syria to pursue nukes programmes, the US has totally destabilized the balance of power in that region with its support and arming of Israel...

 

If the UN could force Isreal to give up its weapons, then that would end Iran's whole justification for (alledgedly) pursuing nukes... But of course, that aint gonna happen, the bloody Americans will just veto that, so what's Iran and Syria supposed to do....? Tolerate an aggressive neighbour and its sponsors (the US, Britain) destabilzing the entire Middle East region....? Tolerate the racist oppression of an entire ethnic group, fellow Muslims at that....? I mean, what would WE do if an Islamic country invaded the South of Spain, claiming that "god promised us this land.."? Sit back, or launch everything we have at them.....?

You SHOULD be storming the gates of the Whitehouse and demanding your leaders' heads on a sodding POLE..... It wouldn't be the first time you guys revolted against your leaders, you celebrate a Revolution every July 4th... Why not have the guts to do so again....?

Yeah, like demanding our President's head is going to get us anywhere but prison, and for a good damn while.

Also, considering this is NOT 1776 and we are NOT under the same government, bringing up the American Revolution does no good. Last I checked, our President is NOT George Washington, so obviously the government has changed quite a bit.

 

I completely disagree with this statment, this war is ILLEGAL (not an opinion, a fact..., ), both yours and my leaders are a bunch of bloody war criminals, therefore it should be blown wide open and the truth should out, I thought Americans valued "truth, liberty and justice" above all else.... Here's some quotes from some of your greatest countrymen

Oh yeah, as opposed to all those LEGAL wars :P

Yes, we do value truth, liberty, and justice - but not when it constitutes our heads being blown off.

 

As for your cousin, I am sorry that he had to go through all of that, BUT, afterall, wasn't it his decision to go into the war to begin with? That's what war is - blood and more blood. I'm anti-war, don't get me wrong, but if you're going into battle...I dunno, it just seems as if you would expect to see gore. I'm honestly not trying to seem cruel but that's what war is all about.

 

Iran being a nuclear power worries me. Iran being a nuclear power worries me much more than India being one. Or North Korea. Or Israel. Or France. Or any other country in the world at the moment.

 

It's nothing to do with hypocrisy. It's not because I think only 'Western' powers should be allowed to have nuclear weapons. It's Iran. It's theocracy. I have a deep rooted fear of fanaticism. When religious fanaticism permeates government I really worry.

 

But. And a big but. I'm not 100% convinced the Mad Mullahs who run Iran are like the Cold War Ruskies of old. I'm not convinced they do worry about getting blown to smithereens. Some of them probably welcome martyrdom. When the people in charge go around recruiting and sanctioning suicide bombers one does start to worry. Exactly whose paw is going to be on the trigger of an Iranian nuclear arsenal?

After the suicide bombers we've already dealt with...who knows? I agree entirely with the above statement btw

 

Also, just to throw it out there before everyone carries on thinking Americans are, in general, uneducated and stupid and anything else you'd like to label me, I'd like to inform everyone that I'm only 14, haven't even BEGUN high school yet, and therefore do not know every particular of every statement that's been made. I also ask you not to take advantage of that, as (as far as I know) all of you were 14 at one point or another and I doubt everyone was as educated as you are now.

Also, just to throw it out there before everyone carries on thinking Americans are, in general, uneducated and stupid and anything else you'd like to label me, I'd like to inform everyone that I'm only 14, haven't even BEGUN high school yet, and therefore do not know every particular of every statement that's been made. I also ask you not to take advantage of that, as (as far as I know) all of you were 14 at one point or another and I doubt everyone was as educated as you are now.

 

When I was 14, America and UK bombed Libya... I was smart enough to KNOW that was wrong, and for what, just cos a copper was killed outside the Libyan embassy??? And it led DIRECTLY to the bombing of a plane over Lockerbie in retaliation.... I was also smart enough to know that Thatcher ordering the bombing of the Belgrano as it was SAILING AWAY from the exclusion zone, TOWARDS ARGENTINA was basically the equivalent of shooting a man in the back, ie, complete fukkin' cowardice....

 

Dont use your youth as an excuse, some things you just know instinctively are wrong.... Hence my cousin quitting the army that he was proud to serve in for almos 15 years..... We were LIED to about Iraq.....