Go Back   Club Conspiracy Forums > General Conspiracy Discussion > Opinions
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-15-2005, 01:08 AM
truebeliever truebeliever is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,768
Default "Stan Goff". Ex-Special Forces Writes On Possibility Of Bush Using Tactical Nukes


Ruppert has fast made himself obselete and irrelivent with his infantile attachment to the "Peak Oil" scam.

Stan Goff however still has a modicum of respect particularly with regards military matters.

The only options left for Bush and Co are do nothing and continue to "nip" away with half assed terrorist attacks which get more badly done each time and risk more exposure - a limited bombing campaign after some sort of staged event on Iran - use tactical nukes on Iran and others...openly. To get away with this they will need a staged EVENT of some magnitude...perhaps the sinking of a Carrier in the Mid East with 5000 dead sailors.

The U.S has NO capacity to invade anyone. PERIOD. End of discussion. To continue to flounce about with an invasion of Iran and even Syria is a complete distraction.

We have heard from the "experts" for three years! that a draft was "just around the corner".

Tactical nukes are their ONLY option of attack and I believe there most likely.

In this I agree with Stan Goff.

This is just an exerpt. You will have to be a special "Ruppertarian" to get the full story.
---------------------------------------------------
Central to my analysis of the "Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support," and the concomitant leaks from the Pentagon that the war in Iraq has undermined the two-war doctrine, is my belief that - while the Bush administration would like nothing more than to impose martial law - their ability to do so, and even to see through their current debacle in Southwest Asia, may already be disappearing around the corner of no return. The real danger, from my viewpoint, is that with failure to achieve their desired objectives in Iraq, the reckless incompetence of this lame duck administration may lead them to consider the unthinkable - tactical nuclear strikes against "adversaries" in a period when conventional military power is rendering itself obsolete. -SG]

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/070805_global_battlefield_summary.shtml
---------------------------------------------------
I'm sure he's changed his opinion on the London bombings by now.

__________________
[size=medium]\"The Office\" is the greatest comedy...ever. [/size]
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-15-2005, 03:08 AM
igwt igwt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,391
Default Re: "Stan Goff". Ex-Special Forces Writes On Possibility Of Bush Using Tactical Nukes

Russia Proves 'Peak Oil' is a Misleading Zionist Scam

http://www.vialls.com/wecontrolamerica/peakoil.html
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-15-2005, 11:31 AM
Dreak Dreak is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 159
Default Re: "Stan Goff". Ex-Special Forces Writes On Possibility Of Bush Using Tactical Nukes

I have to dissagree with ya TB.

There is no way that Nukes are gonna start flying because a carrier is sunk m8.

No way in hell will the US nuke anyone after an "attack" .. unless its from Soviet nuke subs..

US will gather the support of all Nations after such a massive attack ( if a military target is sunk no matter how many lives lost its not the same if someone Nuked N.Y. instead of some planes ) now..if N.Y. was Nuked..then we would be living in a Totally different world right now.

When Bush said " with us or against us " I think after New York had been nuked, that would mean totally "you help us or fuk you and your horseman".."Sorry for that fallout world..but US wont take that..so help us..or were gonna be like Isreal..mess with us..were gonna nuke you."

Its hard being the Big Boy on the block..but hey..Look at Isreal.

Ill post that on another Thread...
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-15-2005, 07:45 PM
truebeliever truebeliever is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,768
Default Re: "Stan Goff". Ex-Special Forces Writes On Possibility Of Bush Using Tactical Nukes

Tactical Nukes were undoubtably used during the Afghanistan operation circa 2001.

All the hogwash about the "Daisy Cutter" Fuel/Air Bomb crapola repeated adinfunatim with GROSSLY exagerated discriptions of its effects (ie:HUGE explosive power) was a cover for deep penetration tactical nukes.

The Daisy Cutter works best when used against WELL dug in troops in that it will "burn" the oxygen in a wide area suffocating infantry. It has secondary blast effects on living things due to the vaccuum it creates.

It does not, as in conventional explosives, have a intense blast wave and yet that is exactly what they were infering in the massive media effort to tell us that the Taliban were going to all die from the AWESOME "Daisy Cutter"...

I read on the net briefly, of local tribesmen exhibiting all the signs of radiation sickness including bleeding gums, rectal bleeding vomiting etc...

It was an excellent article which people should look into...do a search. I might try and retrieve it as well.

I believe you are mistaken that Bush and Co would NOT use tactical nukes, at least the "bunker buster" types on Iran.

They have proven themselves ruthless enough.

There are ample discussion papers and NSC documents detailing how the U.S MUST NOT look too "reasonable" and "stable" to an adversary as this would promote challenges to U.S hegemony in the world. An unbalanced and unpredictable nature was vital so as to keep the barbarians in line.

Hence what we see today.

I have written previously that it would be unlikely that "they" would commit another terrorist act on the scale of 9-11 on U.S soil after the HUGE grassroots backlash via the net, exposing the whole shebang. I believe it is now possible. However, with all the "talk" circulating from "official" sources regarding "suitcase" bombs, I believe it is a deliberate distraction.

An "offshore" covert op would give the benefits of decreased exposure by the conspiricy nuts who exposed the last scam, a clean crime scene ie: sunk Carrier, and a more easily identifiable culprit ie: Iran.

As the Garrison character in JFK states..."you all gotta think like the CIA, white is black and black is white".

Get in their minds. Read history. They are human and are as predictable as a fox near a hen house.
__________________
[size=medium]\"The Office\" is the greatest comedy...ever. [/size]
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-15-2005, 07:51 PM
truebeliever truebeliever is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,768
Default Re: "Stan Goff". Ex-Special Forces Writes On Possibility Of Bush Using Tactical Nukes

Also, we saw not to long ago the sinking of a Carrier off the U.S coast with the express purpose of "investigating survivability".

From what?

What would be the best measure of survivability of an Aircraft Carrier in todays world?

Obtain or build from scratch a replica of the venerated "Sunburn" missiles Iran has purchased by the hundreds from China?

Would'nt that or a similar test be best?

Instead we had the "test", as explosives placed at various "vital points" in the huge belly of the beast.

Hmmmm...
__________________
[size=medium]\"The Office\" is the greatest comedy...ever. [/size]
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-16-2005, 07:57 AM
Dreak Dreak is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 159
Default Re: "Stan Goff". Ex-Special Forces Writes On Possibility Of Bush Using Tactical Nukes

Sorry m8 I misunderstood you..

Quote:
I believe you are mistaken that Bush and Co would NOT use tactical nukes, at least the "bunker buster" types on Iran.
I thought you were talking about Real Nukes..you know..missles-a-flying, mushroom clouds filling the landscape.

bunker busters..yea I can see that. Minimal Eradiated areas.

Lets say for argument that a Nuke went off in L.A. and we "found" it to be "Iran" that did it..

I still dont see us Nuking the hell out of any nation, for whatever reason, unless its an all out WW III. Just my opinion ..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-18-2005, 02:07 AM
igwt igwt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,391
Default Re: "Stan Goff". Ex-Special Forces Writes On Possibility Of Bush Using Tactical Nukes

Quote:
truebeliever wrote:
...
The U.S has NO capacity to invade anyone. PERIOD. End of discussion. To continue to flounce about with an invasion of Iran and even Syria is a complete distraction.


Tactical nukes are their ONLY option of attack and I believe there most likely...
Read this on a forum:

Subject: US Plans Nuclear Attack on Iran
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 19:32:32 -0400

http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=38408
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-18-2005, 02:46 AM
igwt igwt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,391
Default Thread On ID Card

Subject: re: ID Card Positives post id: 82
I agree but I think you have not gone far enough. Not only should people be paying $100 every time they *don't* use the card, there should also be an option to, as they say, go the whole hog and have a chip inserted into your brain which contains every transaction you do (to prevent tax evasion), your medical records, hobbies, sexual preference, criminal record, driving record etc and anything else which is of interest. That way when you walk into a store they already know what you want, or if you have even a minor criminal record they can turf you out into the street. Of course for all those people who don't want progress there should be a charge for not having a chip in your brain (and therefore just using the card), $50 sounds fair to me.

Additionally, should the chip stop working for any reason people should have a barcode burn into their forearm or forehead to identify them.

When technology advances we will be able to have new and improved chips which can detect thought patterns and if you even think of doing something the govt doesn't like, then the chip can shut down your brain via remote control and you can be arrested on the spot. This will stop terrorism I'm sure.

http://www2b.abc.net.au/news/forum/newsonline9/
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-18-2005, 05:39 AM
truebeliever truebeliever is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,768
Default Re: Thread On ID Card

Ha ha ha...thats the way to do it! EXCELLENT!

Needs to reassess their sentence structure though to make it easier to read. Makow style.

----------------------------------------------------
I will be surprised if Bush is President this time next year. He will be dead or resigned due to health reasons. I have heard rumours that this may even happen before the end of the year.

He is an agent of the East Coast Blue Blood Esteblishment as described by Caroll Quigly in his book "Tragedy & Hope".

J.P Morgan was one, as were the Rockerfella's. They ALL worked for the European/U.K Banking houses...Rothschild-Warberg etc...

Soon, after the U.S Elite; representing the false choice Conservative/Fascistic arm of the New World Order, have brought us to the point of Nuclear war, we will see the Internationalist/socialist arm of the NWO, represented by the U.N and Europe take the reigns and lead us down a path of Reason and Multilateralism and away from the madness brought on by a Christian/Fundamentalist Unilateral U.S administration.

This will entail a nuclear exchange of some sort. With FULL, LIVE broadcast of the expanding mushroom cloud for FULL effect.

The final march to One World Government will begin.

They are so predictable they bore me.

Surely they can come up with another formula. I'm sick of Hegal.
__________________
[size=medium]\"The Office\" is the greatest comedy...ever. [/size]
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-18-2005, 10:29 AM
Dreak Dreak is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 159
Default Re: Isreal

What about Isreals part in this ?

Did you know that Isreal was an hour away from nuking Iraq in the first war ?

After Saddam moved his missles into Jordan.. then Isreal told the US they were gonna protect themselves with nukes. The US then called up Russia in attempt for Them to call Saddam and basically withdraw the missles.

From what I understand It was a very close call to nukes flying.

I think anyone that would really go after Isreal would start a war in great magnitude.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Forces of the Unconscious Mind - Exploring the Work of Stan Gooch SeC Opinions 0 01-21-2008 04:03 PM
Look at how many Nukes America has!!! SeC Opinions 3 12-14-2006 09:48 AM
Look at how many Nukes America has!!! SeC Opinions 1 02-11-2006 08:25 PM
Dave Mc Gowan Writes - "How Come Cuba Can Have NO Deaths From Hurricanes"? truebeliever What is really going on? 3 10-27-2005 02:55 AM
Office of Special Counsel igwt General Conspiracy Discussion 2 10-23-2005 10:39 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:57 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.