http://www.boston.com/news/world/mid..._un_sanctions/
this is very interesting, any thoughts?
Printable View
http://www.boston.com/news/world/mid..._un_sanctions/
this is very interesting, any thoughts?
I always said they would defend syria & Iran(china&russia), and it will cause an all out war.
They backed Iraq also!Quote:
Originally Posted by eg420ne
Howdy Psycho4Bud,
This is the alignment foretold of in Revelations,leading up to Armegeddon.
Don't ya reckon ?
Have a good one !
And a Howdy to you Torog,Quote:
Originally Posted by Torog
It sure sounds familiar! Even with Nostradamous, he states that Russia will switch sides.....guess they get screwed by the Chinese some how.
Have a good one!!! :rasta:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
russia switched sides in ww2 already
"In the year of the new century (2001) and nine months (September)/
From the sky will come a great King of Terror (the hijacked planes)/
The sky will burn at 45 degrees (NY is on the 45th parallel)/
Fire approaches the great new city/
In the City of God there will be great thunder/
Two brothers (the towers) torn apart by Chaos/
While the fortress (the pentagon) endures/
The great leader will succumb/
The third big war will begin when the city is burning
The Eagle (the US) and the Bear (Russia) Arise as 1 to combat a common Foe,
but it will take 20 years to overcome."
~Nostradamus (1654)
What is the common foe? We got Al-Queda and they have the Chechens....same shit different name. Who knows???
Uhm sorry but Nostradomus didn't write that, it was just an internet hoax. Nice try, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
Not really a hoax, I heard something similar long before 9/11. The problem with Nostradomus is that everything he wrote was so cryptic that it could be interpreted to mean whatever someone wanted. What Psycho posted was just a popular interpretation of one of his writings.
Its not surprising that Russia would back Syria given their history. Just like we would back Isreal if Russia wanted to impose sanctions on them for what they have done in the name of "defense". Doubtful it will lead to any all out war though.
And Torog,the only thing I reckon is that you are smoking way to much weed. Stop reading the Bible while your stoned man. You might just start thinking all those stories are true.
interpretation? A student wrote it. as a hoax. He said so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fengzi
Maybe some student twisted it a bit to fit 9/11 as a hoax, but it was based on a pretty well known prophecy of Nostradomus. There was an HBO special on Nostradomus back in the '80's that talked about this prophecy. If I remember correctly the wording was very similar, I clearly remember the bit about the great city and the eagelk and the bear. The basics were an attack by some Middle East Country on New York City leading to WW3. With Russia and the U.S finally joining forces to conquer the enemy. The attack back then was interpreted to be nukes, however, and they even had a scene were some Arab in a blue turban pushes the button. The good news though was that after the long war was over the world would enjoy peace for hundreds of years, or something like that.
I've been looking for the transcript. If I recall, it was hosted by Orsan Wells.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fengzi
Perhaps, but didn't Orsan Wells once host a show claiming Mars was invading the Earth? It was a joke. In any case,the US isn't going to invade Iran, for several reasons. First, the US Army is busy right now, and will be for a long time. Iran is 3 times the size of Iraq, both in area and population, and in far better shape militarily. It also overlooks the straights of hormuz (sp?), and could thus play hell with gulf oil shipments. War with Iran would also mean problems with both hezbollah and many shiites in Iraq. China and Russia are considerations, but not likely the main ones. In any case, Iran's talk is most likely just that, aimed mostly for internal political purposes. Nothing like a foriegn enemy to build support at home. Of course, nothing would serve that better than a US or Israeli airstrike, which is of course a possibillity, albeit one with most of the same downsides as an invasion, minus of course the direct US casualties. Which is the one thing the congress will not vote to authorize, given the situation in Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud