Did the USA arm ISIL?

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
LOL. Hilarious.

It looks like ISIS is on the same page with you, SG:

In a grainy, 27-minute VHS video sent to the US Consulate in Baghdad, an unidentified ISIS member demands that Barack Obama be removed from power. “Obama, the cowardly apostate who refuses his Muslim lineage, must no longer lead the godless American infidels and must leave the White House immediately,” the terrorist proclaims.

http://nationalreport.net/isis-say-theyd-leave-iraq-obama-leaves-white-house/

Originally posted by no1marauder
It looks like ISIS is on the same page with you, SG:

In a grainy, 27-minute VHS video sent to the US Consulate in Baghdad, an unidentified ISIS member demands that Barack Obama be removed from power. “Obama, the cowardly apostate who refuses his Muslim lineage, must no longer lead the godless American infidels and must leave the White Hous ...[text shortened]... st proclaims.

http://nationalreport.net/isis-say-theyd-leave-iraq-obama-leaves-white-house/

Having fun?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Saudi Arabian rich guys we can do business with; they send their kids to Harvard and Oxford not to madrassas. Why do you think radical Jihadists like AQ want to overthrow them?

The "brainwashed" crap is boring. Present some arguments instead of your usual bile.

They are all Sunnis that want Sharia law. That is what you said was so bad about them. Come up with a better reason to say they are bad. Many Muslims support Sharia law. People may disagree with it, but it is common with Muslims and that does not make them a threat to the USA.

"AQ want to overthrow them"

Sunnis that support Sharia law want to overthrow other Sunnis that support Sharia law? You said that is why they are radical, because they are Sunnis that support Sharia law. Now you are contradicting yourself.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
They are all Sunnis that want Sharia law. That is what you said was so bad about them. Come up with a better reason to say they are bad. Many Muslims support Sharia law. People may disagree with it, but it is common with Muslims and that does not make them a threat to the USA.

"AQ want to overthrow them"

Sunnis that support Sharia law want to over ...[text shortened]... re radical, because they are Sunnis that support Sharia law. Now you are contradicting yourself.

Internal power struggle in the Arab world between the businessmen and the warriors.

Rand Paul is saying pretty much what I said. If he is so wrong why no debating him by those that disagree?

YouTube

Originally posted by Metal Brain
They are all Sunnis that want Sharia law. That is what you said was so bad about them. Come up with a better reason to say they are bad. Many Muslims support Sharia law. People may disagree with it, but it is common with Muslims and that does not make them a threat to the USA.

"AQ want to overthrow them"

Sunnis that support Sharia law want to over ...[text shortened]... re radical, because they are Sunnis that support Sharia law. Now you are contradicting yourself.

Some aren't as radical as the City Council of Dearborn, Michigan.

I don't think Muslims imposing Sharia Law on themselves makes them a threat to the USA or "bad"; just misguided. AQ and other radical jihadists don't think people like the Saudi Arabian royal family are sufficiently devoted to Islamic principles to rule. Are you really unaware of this? If so, you should try to get your information from a better source than the National Report.

Iraq is a majority Sh'iite State, so they are not very interested in Sunni theocratic rule either.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Some aren't as radical as the City Council of Dearborn, Michigan.

I don't think Muslims imposing Sharia Law on themselves makes them a threat to the USA or "bad"; just misguided. AQ and other radical jihadists don't think people like the Saudi Arabian royal family are sufficiently devoted to Islamic principles to rule. Are you really un ...[text shortened]... aq is a majority Sh'iite State, so they are not very interested in Sunni theocratic rule either.

The insurrection in Iraq is a Sunni insurrection, not just a ISIS insurrection. Sunnis found a common goal to fight for, but if they overthrow the existing government the ISIS could very well be fighting the other Sunnis they are presently cooperating with and it is likely that the ISIS would lose.

The National Report article has nothing to do with Saudi Arabia. You just want to distract others from your comments about Sharia Law which has nothing to do with Jihad. Jihad exists because the USA government has imperialist goals in their region that any people there would hate.

Saudi Arabia treats Shiites like the Iraqi government treats Sunnis. The Saudi Arabian royal family are turds. A lot of people dislike them, not just AQ and other radicals.

http://www.hrw.org/news/2009/09/02/saudi-arabia-treat-shia-equally

Rand Paul is right and a lot of people cannot accept it because they just want to believe the USA is right for their meddling in Syria. Trying to get rid of Assad the way they did was an extremely stupid mistake if it was not intentional to create a civil war in Iraq, but it probably was intentional just like the Iranian leader said. Those in denial of this possibility are forgetting Operation Ajax and the fact that it was a conspiracy to overthrow their democratically elected leader and replace him with a brutal dictator.

I suspect if it were 1953 and I claimed there was a conspiracy to do that you would call me a crazy conspiracy theorist and scoff at that reality. You are too much of a conformist to accept that sort of thing and that is one of your flaws even though you will probably never accept that. No matter how factual a conspiracy is you never accept it when it is a mere theory. All factual conspiracies start out as theories, but you never accept any of them until they are exposed and widely accepted as fact. Organized crime syndicates love people like you because they could get away with a lot while your head is buried in the sand.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
The insurrection in Iraq is a Sunni insurrection, not just a ISIS insurrection. Sunnis found a common goal to fight for, but if they overthrow the existing government the ISIS could very well be fighting the other Sunnis they are presently cooperating with and it is likely that the ISIS would lose.

The National Report article has nothing to do with Sa ...[text shortened]... ve people like you because they could get away with a lot while your head is buried in the sand.

(Shrug) There's a lot of abusive ranting and raving there and screeching about positions I don't hold. As most people on this board are aware, I'm against any US meddling in the Middle East. Always have been. Whatever the People there wind up doing, that's up to them.

Originally posted by no1marauder
(Shrug) There's a lot of abusive ranting and raving there and screeching about positions I don't hold. As most people on this board are aware, I'm against any US meddling in the Middle East. Always have been. Whatever the People there wind up doing, that's up to them.

I think you underestimate the amount of US meddling in that region right now. Oil is not only a valuable commodity, it is key to world domination. The USA won the wars against Japan and Germany by restricting their access to fuel. If you can do that on a wider scale world domination can be achieved. This is partly why the empire sees Russia as a threat, because they have a lot of oil within their border and they have nuclear weapons.

The empire does not want any oil rich country to have nuclear weapons unless they control that country or the country sells oil in US dollars to insure the dollar keeps it's status as the world reserve currency. Saudi Arabia sells oil in US dollars and keeps the empire happy so they are left alone. That was not always the case though. Kissinger once threatened to invade Saudi Arabia to stop the oil embargo and when he said how pissed off Faisal was he literally laughed. Kissinger thought it was hilarious.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
I think you underestimate the amount of US meddling in that region right now. Oil is not only a valuable commodity, it is key to world domination. The USA won the wars against Japan and Germany by restricting their access to fuel. If you can do that on a wider scale world domination can be achieved. This is partly why the empire sees Russia as a threat, ...[text shortened]... when he said how pissed off Faisal was he literally laughed. Kissinger thought it was hilarious.

Your conspiracy rationale is out of date. The US imports more oil from Canada than the entire Middle East combined and total imports of oil have declined by 20% in the last 5 years. Imports of oil from Saudi Arabia have plummeted 23.2% in 10 years. http://www.energytrendsinsider.com/2014/06/23/where-the-us-got-its-oil-from-in-2013/

I don't underestimate the amount of US meddling in the Middle East at all. But it is simplistic and incorrect to tie that meddling only to some perceived need for world domination based on oil. The US is meddling in a bunch of countries with little oil production.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Your conspiracy rationale is out of date. The US imports more oil from Canada than the entire Middle East combined and total imports of oil have declined by 20% in the last 5 years. Imports of oil from Saudi Arabia have plummeted 23.2% in 10 years. http://www.energytrendsinsider.com/2014/06/23/where-the-us-got-its-oil-from-in-2013/

I don' ...[text shortened]... domination based on oil. The US is meddling in a bunch of countries with little oil production.

(Sigh) You clearly did not pay much attention when you read my last post. It is not about importing oil, it is about controlling it. DENYING it to others. I was well aware how little oil the USA imports from the middle east. Your assertion that I was unaware of that is a little insulting. I think you well know I am more informed than most people as most on this forum are.

As for the other countries with little oil production, it is also about installing central banks in those countries. That is where the real money is. If you want to know more about it check out the documentary "All Wars Are Banking Wars" so YOUR rational is not out of date.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/all-wars-are-bankers-wars/

Originally posted by DeepThought
First stop putting words into my mouth. I said none of the above. I just said that you cannot read any of what you've said into the references you gave.

I don't think you do know the facts, I think you just believe the first conspiracy theory that pops into your head. I question most things from "the status quo". This doesn't mean I believe every piece of paranoid crap that comes along instead.

Conspiracy eh?

Why is it when anyone questions the powers that be it means they must have a tin foil hat?

Answer me this, why did the troops pull out of Iraq and not Korea?

Now you are thinking Whodey. People think that is just because a different political party got into office and foreign policy changes. That is naive of those partisan creatures to think.
Jimmy Carter supported the Sandinistas and Reagan funded the opposition later. This is another example of how complicated things seem to be, but when you look at it from a point of view that excludes partisan bias you start to see the real picture.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/timeline/carter/3/

"September 2, 1979

Carter welcomes Nicaraguan Daniel Ortega and other Sandinista leaders, who have just toppled dictator Anastasio Somoza, to the White House. He provides them with $118 million in aid."

This is how ISIL acquired weapons:
YouTube

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
This is how ISIL acquired weapons:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lChJz2DSpsE

You are funny.