Astrologers' Community  

Go Back   Astrologers' Community > General Astrology > Other Astrology > Mundane Astrology

Mundane Astrology Discuss the astrology of towns, cities, states, provinces, countries, empires, and the world in general.


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 08-30-2013, 08:06 PM
Kuntuzangmo's Avatar
Kuntuzangmo Kuntuzangmo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Here, now
Posts: 878
Syria, will USA attack?

What do you think? Are we doomed for more war or will peace prevail?

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 08-30-2013, 11:14 PM
rahu rahu is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 5025 valley crest dr #135 concord ca 94521
Posts: 10,865
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

i think we are doomed to more war but not over syria. to many reperts are coming out casting doubt(as usual) on the whole affair.

the rebels admitt to the chemiscal attack
http://www.prisonplanet.com/rebels-a...ns-attack.html

the saudi's gave the rebels the chemicals
http://www.mintpressnews.com/witness...eapons/168135/

ron paul calls this affair another false flag
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-paul...alse-flag.html

rahu
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 08-31-2013, 04:52 AM
steel steel is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: seattle,washington
Posts: 11
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

with Pluto coming to Syrias' Sun and then Jupiter coming to the midheaven and then Uranus opposing the Aascendant of Syria...yes..within two days we will throw the Tomohawk...Israel depends on this event...Iron Dome is activated in the whole country....We are truly Pluto as we move towards our Pluto Return @ 29' Capricorn......the Cardinal Cross has brought activation for the Human Species...we have chosen to manifest conflict with this amazing collection of powers...some day the greater action may be of a higher standard...not now.....
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 08-31-2013, 10:24 AM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 50,855
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuntuzangmo View Post
What do you think? Are we doomed for more war or will peace prevail?
Gen. Wesley Clark
Says Pentagon Had Plan in 2001
to Attack Seven Countries in Five Years
http://warisacrime.org/node/19200


QUOTE:

'...He says, "We've made the decision we're going to war with Iraq."

This was on or about 20th of September.

"We're going to war with Iraq? Why?"

He said: "I don't know. I guess they don't know what else to do."

So I said: "Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?"

He said: "No, no. There's nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq. I guess it's like we don't know what to do about terrorists, but we've got a good military and we can take down governments.I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail."....'



'..So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan.

I said: "Are we still going to war with Iraq?"

And he said, "Oh, it's worse than that." He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. "I just got this down from upstairs" -- meaning the Secretary of Defense's office "today. This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.".......'



'...I said: "Is it classified?"

He said: "Yes, sir."

I said: "Well, don't show it to me." And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said: "You remember that?"

He said: "Sir, I didn't show you that memo! I didn't show it to you!"

AMY GOODMAN: I'm sorry. What did you say his name was?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I'm not going to give you his name.......'
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JUPITERASC For This Useful Post:
BobZemco (08-31-2013), chris10 (09-01-2013)
  #5  
Unread 08-31-2013, 05:53 PM
*emma* *emma* is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 752
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Saudi Arabia is an Islamist country/monarchy/theocracy where the Quran is the constitution, if the rebels are wantng to change a secular Syria to a religious system with Sharia law makes sense where the weapons support came from


Obama is addressing the nation in about 20 minutes

6.15 pm uk time 1.15 pm washngton time

I gather Kerry said it doesnt matter who fired the weapons, in one breath, in the other said it was Assad regime....is he sane?

Putin has said Kerrys speech was utter nonsense, ilogcal and requesting PROOF it was the regime,ie why would Assad knowing the USA is gunning for hm give them an ace and use chem weapons givng the USA the excuse they need to attack....makes no sense


I thnk all leaders know the vast majority of their populations, USA included, are not in support of military action without solid grounds
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 08-31-2013, 07:25 PM
Kuntuzangmo's Avatar
Kuntuzangmo Kuntuzangmo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Here, now
Posts: 878
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

It seems to me peaceful logic lays the responsibility to the international community....not in the pride/hubris of the American president.
UN, Arab League, Nato etc....these are the groups who should be leading response with USA giving support behind them.

Jupiterasc....that's pretty scary....and of course never broached in the mainstream media.

I'm looking at charts...more later.

Last edited by Kuntuzangmo; 08-31-2013 at 07:30 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 08-31-2013, 08:41 PM
Marinka's Avatar
Marinka Marinka is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Westwood, MA
Posts: 1,736
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuntuzangmo View Post
It seems to me peaceful logic lays the responsibility to the international community....not in the pride/hubris of the American president.
UN, Arab League, Nato etc....these are the groups who should be leading response with USA giving support behind them.

Jupiterasc....that's pretty scary....and of course never broached in the mainstream media.

I'm looking at charts...more later.

Actually, I will disagree and say that is the strength of the president standing up and planning on calling out Syria for what they have done -- it is not his pride that is instigating this action.

Cowards will bow and move out of the way of bully. Sometimes it takes another bully (or policeman) to stand up to a bully. Bullies do not understand peace, they only understand that they can use the delaying tactics like peace talks to further their own aim.

The countries in that surrounding area are afraid of what is happening but, are not going to the UN, Nato, or to the Saudi world -- they are going to someone that can do something about it -- the US.

This is not to say that Syria as a country should not be allowed to rule as they see fit but, they have broken the rules where it concerns the use of chemical weapons.


Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 08-31-2013, 09:12 PM
Kuntuzangmo's Avatar
Kuntuzangmo Kuntuzangmo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Here, now
Posts: 878
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Marika, under normal circumstances I would agree with you...but this comes on the heels and amidst unprecedented American attacks over the last 12 years in the middle east.
We cannot afford to play global cop. Other countries and/or an international coalition should take charge.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kuntuzangmo For This Useful Post:
summer92 (09-16-2013), wintersprite1 (09-01-2013)
  #9  
Unread 08-31-2013, 09:20 PM
*emma* *emma* is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 752
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Well I wasnt expecting that! Obama says he has the authority to strike Syria without going to the UN or obtaining Congress approval...but he has chosen to ask Congress for approval. They are not due back after the holidays until September 9 ( although its not impossible they may be recalled before, just as Cameron did in the UK)

This will also make his time at the G20 next week in Russia an easier ride

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmgQs...e_gdata_player


PS Congress has not approved any military action in any war or intervention since WW2.....(according to a commentator on RT News earlier today)

This is a very unusual situation in general compared with e.g. Iraq war...but the USA and other countries are war weary..the legacy of the past decade and a little has certainly made its mark, especially fake evidence for war

Both the USA and UK and to lesser extent France KNOW the public have no stomach for another war....that is at least two of them so far are putting it to a vote....I dont blame them, they are inbetween a rock and a hard place

I found his speech on the whole good,making the best of several awkward situations..he has proven at least HE is not a warmonger...theMccains and Bushes of this world are old news...their gun ho toddler attitudes have never ever made anything better...just miles worse not just for their enemies and the civilians but for their own peoples

I also realised that by him saying usa supports the opposition, oh how can they when theywant an islamist country with sharia law and contain al qaeda elements, this is tantamount to saying he wants regime change...on what authority does any country have the right go instigate regime change in any sovereign country?

I know it is not just me who considers the whole business murky disturbing hypocritical and a little insane



PPS Can anyone tell me if it is by international law illegal to manufacture or supply or store chem weapons why the international community cannot try anyone and confiscate all stocks of anyone who does any of that....better than bombing a country with undoubtedly resulting civilian casualties...what if the collateral damage is more than the people killed in these chem weapon attacks?Compounding all misery and death? that is why NON military action is always the better way....it begets another cycle of death fear misery poverty hatred.....humankind in the 21st century seems to not have advanced that much at all from eons ago...thatis called stupidity...oh and lets not forget the role of religion in all this.....responsible for so much destruction by proxy

MY prediction is there will be no military attack...the situation is complicated, unpredictable, and changing by the day.....the powers that be dont have the proof Assad ordered the massacred 1400 civilians a third of them children, using chem weapons....IF THEY HAD there wouldbe no need for debates and votes and speeches...lets not forget the many reports it was the opposition...

Last edited by *emma*; 08-31-2013 at 09:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 08-31-2013, 09:37 PM
Marinka's Avatar
Marinka Marinka is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Westwood, MA
Posts: 1,736
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuntuzangmo View Post
Marika, under normal circumstances I would agree with you...but this comes on the heels and amidst unprecedented American attacks over the last 12 years in the middle east.
We cannot afford to play global cop. Other countries and/or an international coalition should take charge.
I agree with you that other "international coalitions" should take charge but, at this time -- none exists that have the power or the strength of character to move forward.

America should not have to be "global cop" but, who is going to do it -- China? Russia? Canada? England ? Japan? Australia? The only two with some amount of power are China and Russia and they have their own agenda such that very few other countries would trust them as a leader in a situation like this. England or France might be able to do it but, they would need the US force behind them. The only country that can pull other countries in line with them is the US because most other countries trust that the US does not want to be there in the first place and is acting for the best outcome of the international community.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Unread 08-31-2013, 09:56 PM
Marinka's Avatar
Marinka Marinka is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Westwood, MA
Posts: 1,736
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by *emma* View Post


PPS Can anyone tell me if it is by international law illegal to manufacture or supply or store chem weapons why the international community cannot try anyone and confiscate all stocks of anyone who does any of that....better than bombing a country with undoubtedly resulting civilian casualties...what if the collateral damage is more than the people killed in these chem weapon attacks?Compounding all misery and death? that is why NON military action is always the better way....it begets another cycle of death fear misery poverty hatred.....humankind in the 21st century seems to not have advanced that much at all from eons ago...thatis called stupidity...oh and lets not forget the role of religion in all this.....responsible for so much destruction by proxy

This is a great question. There was something similar with the war trials that were used for the individual people involved in the Germany death camps but, it took so long for these to work through the system. Usually these come into play after the fact - once a ruler is disposed.

Most countries respect the sovereignty of Syria (or any other country) and as such, ask permission to go into the country such as for the UN inspectors checking for the chemicals. Syria can refuse. There is currently no process in place to take a country's ruler to court or to confiscate material from that country, at least that I am aware of.

Reply With Quote
  #12  
Unread 08-31-2013, 10:35 PM
*emma* *emma* is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 752
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marinka View Post
This is a great question. There was something similar with the war trials that were used for the individual people involved in the Germany death camps but, it took so long for these to work through the system. Usually these come into play after the fact - once a ruler is disposed.

Most countries respect the sovereignty of Syria (or any other country) and as such, ask permission to go into the country such as for the UN inspectors checking for the chemicals. Syria can refuse. There is currently no process in place to take a country's ruler to court or to confiscate material from that country, at least that I am aware of.

Im not aware of it either, I just go by what I read, and what I read is its ILLEGAL to hold manufacture or use chemical weapons....the USA and other countries holds stockpiles...so the USAand other countries are engaging in illegal behaviour ...including the ones that manufacture them.....end of the day if someone dies in a war by being blown up or gassed, whats the difference? Areconventional weapons OK? how about the USA napalming vietnamese or using an atom bomb onjapan? Sad feckers werent they? I know its history but its still the pot cLling the kettle black!!!!!!!

You ALSO have to ask yourself one question.....just one....why does the usa think it should police the middle east? There are so many atrocities over the years in many lands.....where was the usa when thousands of people were getting macheted to death in rwanda eg...so the moral argument falls down

Last edited by *emma*; 08-31-2013 at 10:42 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Unread 08-31-2013, 10:53 PM
rahu rahu is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 5025 valley crest dr #135 concord ca 94521
Posts: 10,865
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/america-...scredited.html

rahu
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Unread 09-01-2013, 12:12 AM
rahu rahu is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 5025 valley crest dr #135 concord ca 94521
Posts: 10,865
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

HUH
isn't it a bit extremist for a presdient to be threathening war on a country that isn't attacking us?
rahu
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Unread 09-01-2013, 12:43 AM
Marinka's Avatar
Marinka Marinka is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Westwood, MA
Posts: 1,736
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rahu View Post
HUH
isn't it a bit extremist for a presdient to be threathening war on a country that isn't attacking us?
rahu

Syria is acting in such a way to threaten it's neighbors which incidentally, have asked for help from the US.

If Syria continued to harm it's own people without resorting to chemical weapons, then there would have been little reason for any action from other countries - when it is a case of civil war, other countries have little recourse to help the people in that state/country - hence, this explains many of the atrocities that have taken place in many African countries while the world stood by.

If Syria is using chemical weapons, then this could be used against it's neighbors who, justifiably are now alarmed about this situation.

Reply With Quote
  #16  
Unread 09-01-2013, 01:18 AM
BobZemco's Avatar
BobZemco BobZemco is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: On a web-site far, far away...
Posts: 2,137
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuntuzangmo View Post
What do you think? Are we doomed for more war or will peace prevail?
At least 25 more years of war, ending in Russia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JUPITERASC View Post
Gen. Wesley Clark Says Pentagon Had Plan in 2001 to Attack Seven Countries in Five Years.
15.

15 years. I knew that long before Clark did. The US is way behind their time-table, and every day is critical.

There's a "critical mass" point in there somewhere. I don't know when it is, but suffice to say that when Russia and China get enough resources flowing out of Central Asia to the rest of the world....it's history, lights out, good night for the US.

That's that would this is all about. The US$. It has nothing to do with "evil dictators."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuntuzangmo View Post
It seems to me peaceful logic lays the responsibility to the international community....not in the pride/hubris of the American president.
UN, Arab League, Nato etc....these are the groups who should be leading response with USA giving support behind them.
Those groups have no authority.

Had you bothered to read the UN Charter, then you would know that the UN never had authority to intervene in any conflict, until the conflict ends.

The NATO Charter only permits action when a NATO member is under attack, and I don't recall Syria being NATO member.

Even so, utilizing NATO contrary to its stated purpose in the Charter is a dangerous precedent that will have negative ramifications for every man, woman and child on this Earth.

Even if Syria would be a NATO member, the Charter is for external conflicts, not internal conflicts. Again, using NATO contrary to its stated purpose in the Chart is a dangerous precedent that will serious negative very bad consequences for every man, woman and child on this Earth.

So why do it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marinka View Post
This is not to say that Syria as a country should not be allowed to rule as they see fit but, they have broken the rules where it concerns the use of chemical weapons.
That would be impossible since Syria does not have chemical weapons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuntuzangmo View Post
Marika, under normal circumstances I would agree with you...but this comes on the heels and amidst unprecedented American attacks over the last 12 years in the middle east.
We cannot afford to play global cop.
Uh, you are not playing global cop...you are playing global bully and global slave master using the mantra of global cop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by *emma* View Post
Im not aware of it either, I just go by what I read, and what I read is its ILLEGAL to hold manufacture or use chemical weapons....the USA and other countries holds stockpiles...so the USAand other countries are engaging in illegal behaviour ...including the ones that manufacture them.....
The US secretly deployed chemical weapons to Germany during the JFK Administration....the Germans had no knowledge until 1990 that those weapons....which had become useless and leaking dangerous chemicals....had been in their country for more than 25 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by *emma* View Post
You ALSO have to ask yourself one question.....just one....why does the usa think it should police the middle east? There are so many atrocities over the years in many lands.....where was the usa when thousands of people were getting macheted to death in rwanda eg...so the moral argument falls down
Money. It's about money and wealth, specifically about the US$. It's about Americans maintaining a life-style and standard of living that is superior to any other country.

What's in Rwanda? Nothing. No oil, no metal ores, and no non-metallic minerals....so why should the US care?

Same with North Korea....they can have, um, you know...Weapons of Mass Destruction (right) since they have no resources the US needs to control.

[deleted response to attacking comment - Moderator]

This has been going on since 1969 or 1970...not sure exactly when the US capitulated on the Pacific Rim Plan, but another plan was adopted in 1972, and they've been running the play-book ever since.

I was on the team responsible for developing doctrine for Central Asia/Black Sea. Clinton put that into play, but then botched it, otherwise there would be fewer years of warfare and fewer people would die.

Now the whole thing has to be done over again.

I had nothing to do with Middle East/North Africa, but I don't recall Syria, Tunisia or Libya being part of the equation. If I had to venture a reasonable guess, I would say the US expected Israel to have control of Syria, and that the US would be able to control the dictators it installed in Libya and Tunisia.

And, why, yes, it was the US who illegally over-threw the Libyan government and installed Mohammed Gaddafi as dictator, and then continued to support Gaddafi, until Gaddafi tried to be his own man and do what's best for the peoples of Libya, at which time the US branded him as a "terrorist."

Speaking of Gaddafi, I think someone made some silly remark as "not being the style of the US."

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/08...er-flight-870/

Upon seeing the missile impact the airliner nearby, the Libyan MiG-23 pilot, Ezedin Koal, pulled away, searching for nearby enemy aircraft. In every direction his nose would have pointed, the radar would have suddenly shown more enemy fighter jets.
A flight of three Italian F-104S Starfighter aircraft closed in from one side while one or two A-7 Corsairs from the US Navy came from another direction.

Two French Mirage fighters pressed in from the north, their radars lighting up his early warning radar receiving systems as they tracked him and prepared to fire.

The US, France and Italy plotted to murder Gaddafi in cold blood by shooting down his transport aircraft. Instead, an Italian civilian airliner was shot down, murdering all the people in cold blood and then a Libyan witness, on patrol in his MiG-23, was shot down by the US, France and Italy.

All these things....NATO attack on Libya, NATO attack on Yugoslavia, Syria, Tunisia, Iraq, Afghanistan, plus Central Asia, Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Georgia, Ossetia, Chechnya etc etc are all part of a plan that also included the expansion of NATO....

....and then after Syria, the future attack on Iran, the future wars in Central Asia and then Russia.

The goal is for the US to control all of the world's oil and non-oil resources. The vast majority of those resources sit in Central Asia, and that part of Russia that constitutes "Central Asia/Central Russia" east all the way to the Pacific.

Understand the US does not need to own those resources, rather the US needs to control those resources, to guarantee that the resources are sold on the global market in US$.

I'll have to show you a map, which I can't make tonight since I'm getting ready to go party.
__________________
Addressing his pupil, Satyacharya said, "The science of Astrology is a great secret. It should be guarded with care. This sacred science of Astrology should never be taught to bad people. Nor should it be revealed to too many people and very frequently. It should be taught only to a few chosen disciples who really deserve and have the necessary qualifications."

Last edited by wilsontc; 09-01-2013 at 03:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BobZemco For This Useful Post:
chris10 (09-01-2013), DreamingTheSeas (09-01-2013)
  #17  
Unread 09-01-2013, 03:39 AM
tsmall's Avatar
tsmall tsmall is offline
Senior Member, Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 3,114
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobZemco View Post
That would be impossible since Syria does not have chemical weapons.
If you carefully read the reports, especially those from the UN inspectors who left earlier than scheduled this morning, none of them are saying definatively who "did it." If Syria lacks chemical weapons (although I seem to remember early this year or late last there were reports of the threat from the Syrian government to use them) then who released them?
__________________
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." ~Mark Twain
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to tsmall For This Useful Post:
chris10 (09-01-2013)
  #18  
Unread 09-01-2013, 06:05 AM
chris10's Avatar
chris10 chris10 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Paradise
Posts: 1,323
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuntuzangmo View Post
What do you think? Are we doomed for more war or will peace prevail?
I think we are doomed for more war.
As long as there are power driven humans, wars will never stop.
World Peace seems like an utopian dream for me.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Unread 09-01-2013, 06:19 AM
chris10's Avatar
chris10 chris10 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Paradise
Posts: 1,323
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by *emma* View Post
...why does the usa think it should police the middle east?
Answer 1) uuummm.... because they are after their resources e.g. oil ?

Answer 2) because of altruism on their part?

I'm ... divided between these two





Quote:
Originally Posted by *emma* View Post
There are so many atrocities over the years in many lands.....where was the usa when thousands of people were getting macheted to death in rwanda eg...
Quote:
Originally Posted by *emma* View Post
so the moral argument falls down
hmmm ... yes, it does.
I guess people are developing quite thick skin
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Unread 09-01-2013, 06:45 AM
tsmall's Avatar
tsmall tsmall is offline
Senior Member, Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 3,114
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris10 View Post
Answer 1) uuummm.... because they are after their resources e.g. oil ?
Yes, well first it would be necessary to define who "they" are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chris10 View Post
Answer 2) because of altruism on their part?
Close. Not because of altruism on "their" part, but because "they" apply to the altruism of the masses in order to satisfy their own agenda.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobZemco View Post
Uh, you are not playing global cop...you are playing global bully and global slave master using the mantra of global cop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobZemco View Post
I don't mean "you" personally, I mean Brits and Americans, and to a lesser extent, a handful of the Western European countries....well, the northern Western European countries....well, okay, the central Western European countries (all two of them....France and Germany).

This is all your doing.

For the last 150 years or so, you violated Natural Laws, in particular Economic Law, by tilting the playing field so far to your advantage that no others could ever compete against you.
Let's be serious. It's been going on longer than 150 years. Look at what Eroupean invaders inflicted on the brown man they found on the North American continent.

Actually, 150 years ago brings the US to 1863. A prize to anyone who can remember what happened that year in the US.

The real problem isn't the notion that most western people want world domination, and the problem isn't just that most people in the US are too busy wondering what Miley Cyrus did at the VMA's. The problem is that most western people (although feeling a bit of comfort for the lifestyle they have come to expect of their society) don't really give a good gosh dang thing beyond wanting to provide for themselves and their families, and not have to worry about anything beyond the moment.

Which is why as a society we are so easily manipulated. It does not help that we are also so easily frightened by the unknown.

It's funny, and probably not relevant, but this entire discussion reminds me of a book I read in high school...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Inh...illiam_Golding)


Quote:
Originally Posted by chris10 View Post
hmmm ... yes, it does.
I guess people are developing quite thick skin
No, they always had one...when it came to caring for themselves and their families. Mostly, people don't want to worry about the global economy, or a world market...or even other people they don't know. Not because they don't have the capacity for it, but because they are too busy living in their own moments. Bring it to their house, and they will care. Cast it half the world away, and it does not affect them.
__________________
"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on or by imbeciles who really mean it." ~Mark Twain

Last edited by tsmall; 09-01-2013 at 06:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Unread 09-01-2013, 07:33 AM
DreamingTheSeas's Avatar
DreamingTheSeas DreamingTheSeas is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: I want to see the Northern Lights
Posts: 514
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marinka View Post
Actually, I will disagree and say that is the strength of the president standing up and planning on calling out Syria for what they have done -- it is not his pride that is instigating this action.

Cowards will bow and move out of the way of bully. Sometimes it takes another bully (or policeman) to stand up to a bully. Bullies do not understand peace, they only understand that they can use the delaying tactics like peace talks to further their own aim.

The countries in that surrounding area are afraid of what is happening but, are not going to the UN, Nato, or to the Saudi world -- they are going to someone that can do something about it -- the US.

This is not to say that Syria as a country should not be allowed to rule as they see fit but, they have broken the rules where it concerns the use of chemical weapons.


[deleted attacking comment - Moderator]
If you see blood by NATO/USA you have to look for the money, cause honey that is not a love story, its a money story and always was.
__________________

Last edited by wilsontc; 09-03-2013 at 05:09 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Unread 09-01-2013, 07:59 AM
poyi's Avatar
poyi poyi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,015
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

I have great interest on learning the power of Solar Eclipse in mundane and personal horoscope. So I spent some time and found the following information.

The 3rd November 2013 Solar Eclipse will be a Hybrid Solar Eclipse, known as Annular/Total, just over about 5% of the solar eclipses are counted as Hybrid.

According to NASA records, the last two Hybrid Solar Eclipse were on 20th March, 0071 and 17th April 1912.
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhistory/SEhistory.html

http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhisto...0071Mar20H.pdf
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhisto...1912Apr17H.pdf

April 1917, it was the month of World War I.

"Western Front comprises the Franco-German-Belgian front and any military action in Great Britain, Switzerland, Scandinavia and Holland. Eastern Front comprises the German-Russian, Austro-Russian and Austro-Romanian fronts. Southern Front comprises the Austro-Italian and Balkan (including Bulgaro-Romanian) fronts, and Dardanelles. Asiatic and Egyptian Theatres comprises Egypt, Tripoli, the Sudan, Asia Minor (including Transcaucasia), Arabia, Mesopotamia, Syria, Persia, Afghanistan, Turkestan, China, India, etc. Naval and Overseas Operations comprises operations on the seas (except where carried out in combination with troops on land) and in Colonial and Overseas theatres, America, etc. Political, etc. moderator truncated Forum Rules
http://www.firstworldwar.com/onthisday/1917_04_17.htm

"United States entry into World War I came in April 1917, after two and a half years of efforts by President Woodrow Wilson to keep the United States neutral. Americans had no idea that war was imminent in the summer of 1914, and tens of thousands of tourists were caught by surprise. The U.S. government, under Wilson's firm control, called for neutrality "in thought and deed".[1] Apart from an Anglophile element supporting the British, public opinion went along with neutrality at first. The sentiment was strong for neutrality among the Irish Americans, German Americans, and Swedish Americans, as well as many farmers (especially in the South[2]), church leaders and women..... moderator truncated Forum Rules
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...to_World_War_I


From This Day in History for 17th April 1917:
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-h...battle-of-gaza

"As the major Allied offensive masterminded by Robert Nivelle was failing miserably on the Western Front, British forces in Palestine make their second attempt to capture the city of Gaza from the Ottoman army on this day in 1917.
In the wake of the failed British assault on Gaza of March 26, 1917, Sir Archibald Murray, commander of British forces in the region, misrepresented the battle as a clear Allied victory, claiming Turkish losses to be triple what they actually were; in truth, at 2,400 they were significantly lower than the British total of 4,000..... moderator truncatedForum Rules


There is belief the power of Solar Eclipse can be felt 3 months prior the eclipse and as long as 3 years post eclipse. Overall effect of the Eclipse in term of smaller scale in a personal horoscope with contacted as conjunction to personal planet it will be highly significant and life changing. In large scale as in mundane scale, it might be suggestive of world changing event.
__________________
I believe there is something of the divine mystery in everything that exists. We can see it sparkle in a sunflower or a poppy. We sense more of the unfathomable mystery in a butterfly that flutters from a twig--or in a goldfish swimming in a bowl. But we are closest to God in our own soul. Only there can we become one with the greatest mystery of life. In truth, at very rare moments we can experience that we ourselves are that divine mystery. --Jostein Gaarder, Sophie's World

Last edited by wintersprite1; 09-02-2013 at 10:04 PM. Reason: Forum Rules have specific guidelines on material from other authors.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Unread 09-01-2013, 08:18 AM
poyi's Avatar
poyi poyi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,015
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Since RMS Titanic sank two days before this 17th April 1912 Hybrid Eclipse, many linked the two together and called it as The Titanic Eclipse.
http://www.astronomeer.com/eclipses/index.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_e...April_17,_1912

See in the NASA table, under "Event, Description, Reference", The Titanic Eclipse.
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhistory/SEhistory.html

Astrologically and Symbolically speaking, to me they were highly related. Titanic was the symbol of Power and Glory of the British people at the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RMS_Titanic
__________________
I believe there is something of the divine mystery in everything that exists. We can see it sparkle in a sunflower or a poppy. We sense more of the unfathomable mystery in a butterfly that flutters from a twig--or in a goldfish swimming in a bowl. But we are closest to God in our own soul. Only there can we become one with the greatest mystery of life. In truth, at very rare moments we can experience that we ourselves are that divine mystery. --Jostein Gaarder, Sophie's World

Last edited by poyi; 09-01-2013 at 08:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Unread 09-01-2013, 08:41 AM
poyi's Avatar
poyi poyi is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,015
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

"The final event of 2013 is the most interesting eclipse of the year. It is one of the rare hybrid or annular/total eclipses in which some sections of the path are annular while other parts are total. The duality comes about when the vertex of the Moon's umbral shadow pierces Earth's surface at some locations, but falls short of the planet along other sections of the path."
moderator truncated Forum Rules


So these are what I found, see if any member have interest to explore prediction on War based on this upcoming very unique Hybrid Solar Eclipse of our generation.........
__________________
I believe there is something of the divine mystery in everything that exists. We can see it sparkle in a sunflower or a poppy. We sense more of the unfathomable mystery in a butterfly that flutters from a twig--or in a goldfish swimming in a bowl. But we are closest to God in our own soul. Only there can we become one with the greatest mystery of life. In truth, at very rare moments we can experience that we ourselves are that divine mystery. --Jostein Gaarder, Sophie's World

Last edited by wintersprite1; 09-02-2013 at 10:10 PM. Reason: forum rules on copyrite
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Unread 09-01-2013, 02:25 PM
Marinka's Avatar
Marinka Marinka is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Westwood, MA
Posts: 1,736
Re: Syria, will USA attack?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobZemco View Post



That would be impossible since Syria does not have chemical weapons.


This just in from CNN - Sarin signature was found.

Attached Images
File Type: jpg SarinSig.jpg (40.6 KB, 3 views)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
attack, syria

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 10:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005-2018, AstrologyWeekly.com. Boards' structure and all posts are property of AstrologyWeekly.com and their respective creators. No part of the messages sent on these boards may be copied without their owners' explicit consent.