Warmonger Thread

reply to post by Zanti Misfit

I'd love to hear a realistic option other than America doing all the heavy lifting.

I personally feel as though it's not something we want to do, or look forward to doing, but something that has to be done.

Let people police themselves?

Brilliant!

How far would you take it?
Taiwan? None of my damned business, give it back to China.
S. Korea? Give back to N Korea.
Israel? You're on your own, pal.
Europe? Sorry, the russian bear scares me.
Islam? Let's give sharia a chance, eh?

Where do you DRAW THE LINE?

reply to post by beezzer

Perhaps. You have an alternative though?

I just offered that alternative and that was that We the People begin policing an out of control federal government and cleaning up our own back yard, at the very least, first. Perhaps your sanctimonious "realism" could not recognize that.

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by beezzer

 

Perhaps. You have an alternative though?

I just offered that alternative and that was that We the People begin policing an out of control federal government and cleaning up our own back yard, at the very least, first. Perhaps your sanctimonious "realism" could not recognize that.

The problem is that there are so many definitions of "clean" that regardless of the "cleaning" we do, it'll never be enough.

Realism isn't sanctimoniuos.

Realism just "is".

reply to post by beezzer

The problem is that there are so many definitions of "clean" that regardless of the "cleaning" we do, it'll never be enough.

Realism isn't sanctimoniuos.

Realism just "is".

Realism is not sanctimonious, but you, on the other hand are. Offering up disingenuous arguments that we can never know what "clean" means is hardly realistic.

What you are doing is sidestepping the implicit argument that Constitutionally speaking, the U.S. federal government exists to protect the rights of the individuals within those borders. Your sanctimony comes from implicitly defending a federal government that has eschewed protection of individual rights in favor of gross imperialism and military might.

You hope to side step this Constitutional restraint and mandate by suggesting that we can never really know what is Constitutional, what restraint means, or what mandate means. It is nothing more than disingenuous rhetoric all just to defend a military industrial complex that has shown reckless disregard for human rights.

reply to post by bekod


Can you really Conceive that if Iran did Develope a Workable Nuclear Weapon , then somehow Obtained a Delivery System for it (ICBM) , that they could somehow Lauch that Weapon at another present Nuclear capable Nation BEFORE that Nation was Aware of it ? That would be Absolute Suicide for the Entire Country . Are the present Leaders controling Iran Right Now IYO that Insane ? If so , what possibly makes you think that ? A Nuclear capable Pakistan is another Unstable Country in the Middle East . Many times in the Past they have had Serious Differences with India , but did they ever Resort to using those Weapons to Settle their Differences with them ? No , they too are not that Insane knowing the Consequences of using such a Weapon , what makes them any Different than Iran right now ?

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Zanti Misfit

 

I'd love to hear a realistic option other than America doing all the heavy lifting.

I personally feel as though it's not something we want to do, or look forward to doing, but something that has to be done.

Let people police themselves?

Brilliant!

How far would you take it?
Taiwan? None of my damned business, give it back to China.
S. Korea? Give back to N Korea.
Israel? You're on your own, pal.
Europe? Sorry, the russian bear scares me.
Islam? Let's give sharia a chance, eh?

Where do you DRAW THE LINE?

Let All those you just mentioned Settle their Differences themselves without the U.S. Interfearing is not Out of the Question . Once they See we are staying out of the Fight , they just might be Forced to be More Agreeable with eachother out of Necessity . If things get out of hand with some of them , then Maybe we step In , but to be there All the Time as a " Safety Net " is just not Viable for us Anymore . Sooner or Later America will Burn itself out continuing to be the Peace Enforcer of the World , we owe it to Ourselves to Preserve our Peace too .

reply to post by beezzer


" The problem is that there are so many definitions of "clean" that regardless of the "cleaning" we do, it'll never be enough.

Realism isn't sanctimoniuos.

Realism just "is". "


Geez , enough with Splitting Hares already ! .............

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit


Geez , enough with Splitting Hares already ! .............

Stop with the bunny jokes!

reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Part of protecting the the people and the Constitution would also have to include insuring that no outside forces, influences impact America in a negative way as well.

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit


Let All those you just mentioned Settle their Differences themselves without the U.S. Interfearing is not Out of the Question . Once they See we are staying out of the Fight , they just might be Forced to be More Agreeable with eachother out of Necessity . If things get out of hand with some of them , then Maybe we step In , but to be there All the Time as a " Safety Net " is just not Viable for us Anymore . Sooner or Later America will Burn itself out continuing to be the Peace Enforcer of the World , we owe it to Ourselves to Preserve our Peace too .

You may get your wish.

Sadly, America is losing it's teeth.

reply to post by beezzer


You know , I Understand the Points you have made in this Thread Very Clearly , it's just that we are looking at the Problem of Iran from Different Perspectives . Stew on that one Wabbit ..........

reply to post by Sly1one

lol the whole premise of this is thread is to trigger that fear mechanism into agreeing with pre-emptive actions/war based off of our countries apparent ability to predict the future...US/Israel predict the use of nuclear weapons by Iran...so really this should be in the predictions thread.

blah blah blah....same old tired garbage. Fear mechanism..blah blah..preemptive...blah blah.

They said this they said that, they are mean people they stone people over there still!! as if our police officers aren't doing equally if not more severe things to people who commit crimes over here...

That response wins the "weakest argument in the thread" award. So police in America commit more severe crimes than stoning women to death for adultery and killing Christians for not converting to Islam??

I don't agree with pre-emptive war, pre-emtive arrest because I don't believe people can predict the future well enough to justify such an asinine concept as such...

Yawn....

This thread is crap and the only one with balls ins't me replying but the OP for posting...

I second that!! That OP has balls for speaking the truth. Iran is a tyrannical regime that cannot be allowed to have nukes. 

Let's be frank and honest; something most people cannot handle and avoid like the plague. Every single enemy of the United States has been earned, not through ideology, not through way of life, not through belief. Our Enemies have been earned through action, through subversion and subterfuge, through greed and malice throughout the world.

You declare Iran a threat, why is Iran a threat but through our own machinations? Greed and lust for profit saw us overthrow the shah in 1953, a bloody coup to suit the interest of oil men that saw a nation destabilize and turn on it's head so that we could profit. Iran if developing nukes has every right to attain whatever level of technology they can and such technology is in the interest of preserving national sovereignty.

We orchestrated the Iraq Iran war that saw millions of dead, we have tampered with their society at it's very core, we have treated them as chattel and backed them into a corner surrounded on all sides. If such actions were taken against the United States by an outside agency you can be certain the populous would chant death at the very mention of it's tarnished name.

It is the maniacal hubris with which we operate that will be the downfall of this nation, it is the usury of peoples and nations, the murder and meddling for the one true god of Americas anointed the Dollar. Every enemy we have has been earned from the senseless exploitation and barbarism of the banana republics, the murder and waste of fighting a war in Asia at the behest of french empire and proxy conflicts, the mujaheddin in Afghanistan whom we armed, trained and used to fight the Russians ultimately to abandon after the conflict when we claimed we would help bring stability to the region.

Every enemy we have is through blow-back, our actions on the international scene for the last 200 years have been violent, full of malice, and excuses to spread empire at the tip of a spear or with a knife in the back. We adopted the worst auspices of the regimes we have defeated such as through operation paperclip and the acquisition of key men and material from Unit 731 after WWII.

We willfully murdered millions in south America to study disease, we manufacture our enemies to suit our agenda, and yet these truth fly by nearly every man in this nation foremost out of willful ignorance but primarily because the mechanism for propaganda and lies is so very rooted in our culture.

As a student of history and a human being foremost I can easily see why we are so reviled when we have earned it, if you were human too you would learn that none of this is necessary, none of this makes you safer or superior, none of this improves your life but see's so many others impoverished. If we as a nation learned to be human, to act with humanity and humility when the worlds ill's are but a simple matter of will and conscience to correct you would see how very wrong all of this is.

If you want to perceive threats you must first understand that we are the greatest threat this planet has ever known.

Yes, you are a warmonger. You can't polish a turd, and you can't perfume away the smell of crap. But please, do go ahead and attempt to pretty your views and your beliefs so the rest of us can easily identify you. Normally this would be considered a T&C violation, but taken into account you made the thread about yourself (typical warmonger narcissism), then I'm in the clear. Truly, the ego of a nationalist warmonger is astounding, absolutely fascinating.

There is a handful of posters on this site that go around to EVERY Iran thread to warmonger and create chaos in the thread. I love it, it's given me the chance to completely deny ignorance, and hold everything you people say with a grain of salt for the years to come.

Hip-hip Hooray! To the Warmonger rally!

Really, you people are disgraceful human beings, and an absolute shame to the country you represent. ('cept for Beezer up there, he warmongers from the safety of Europe now!)

Originally posted by SyphonX

Hip-hip Hooray! To the Warmonger rally!

Really, you people are disgraceful human beings, and an absolute shame to the country you represent. ('cept for Beezer up there, he warmongers from the safety of Europe now!)

edit on 17-1-2012 by SyphonX because: (no reason given)

Opinions are wonderful things.

reply to post by beezzer


Being a warmonger and "having an opinion" are two separate things. Warmongers don't have "opinions" and I don't classify it as "free-speech". The same reason you can't yell FIRE in a theater, you can't just keep screaming FIRST STRIKE FIRST STRIKE and expect people to be civil with your kind.

Really, it's insulting and idiotic. It's equally idiotic to claim anyone who argues against needless war is an "Iran supporter" or "loves Ahmadinejad", etc. Or as Slayer put it, "Iran elevated to Sainthood".

Tell me again, who has armies surrounding Iran, and has 2 carrier groups in the Strait?

Irresponsible. If you were all journalists, you'd be fired from Fox for being too jingoist.

reply to post by SyphonX
A rose by any other name. . . . .

What we're talking about is protecting America and american interests.

As stated previously, we could take a step back, but the second we did, someone else would fill the vaccum.

And that's when I posited my question.

What "police" would you prefer?

None is not a realistic choice.
China?
Islam?

What other culture/nation/ideology is as expasnsive?

People use the term warmonger, but is that really the case?

Peace-keeper might be another term.

Originally posted by SyphonX



Tell me again, who has armies surrounding Iran, and has 2 carrier groups in the Strait?

Tell me what country's,in a world of Nuclear threats,decides to escalate their nuclear ambitions,knowing that the world can be destroyed 20 times over,with annihilation already in place?

September 19, 2005,The statement says that North Korea “stated that it has the right to peaceful uses of nuclear energy” and that the other parties “expressed their respect and agreed to discuss, at an appropriate time, the subject of the provision” of a light-water nuclear power reactor to Pyongyang. This issue had been controversial during the negotiations and the final agreement was the result of a compromise between Washington and Pyongyang. North Korea insisted that the statement recognize its right to a peaceful nuclear energy program and commit the other participants to provide it with light-water reactors while the United States argued that North Korea should not receive any nuclear reactors.

Chronology of U.S.-North Korean Nuclear and Missile Diplomacy


Bravo North Korea,to sticking to your word,and making the world a safer place.



BTW,What other country is claiming peaceful NUCLEAR ambitions........?

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
The relationship between the US and Iran is very much like that of a man who raises a puppy and abuses it horribly until one day it grows old enough and realizes it can bite the man and run away.

We need to reopen relations and trade with Iran. We need to treat them with the same respect we treat any other nation. We might even want to think about paying them reparations to begin the process,..

The best way to prevent future aggression by other countries is to stop creating enemies through insane foreign policy and make them interdependent through trade.

You make some excellent points. The more time I have spent in recent days learning about and really putting hard time into researching the Iranians and the history of all this, the more I've come to evolve my thinking. This isn't a side show fight like Panama or Libya. We can't spank them and go home or 'teach them a lesson' and expect to co-exist afterward like nothing happened. They won't let us just bomb them senseless and declare victory over a submissive population. Oh geeze... no. If I've learned anything...it's that Persians aren't Arabs and that has meaning in A LOT of ways we're better off not exploring in war.

There was a time where I would have loved to debate your points on opening talk and relations vs just beating them into submission... .. but that was 10 years worth of war ago. For the love of all we LOVE, enough.

Yeah....We can defeat Iran. Only the clinically insane would think otherwise if the U.S. threw everything into it..but for what gain? (sigh) What has been accomplished in Iraq? So indeed... Lets give the talk and relations a try if we can find a leader capable of doing it in good faith and without giving away OUR nation in the process.

We sure have made a mess of things trying it the hard way.

reply to post by chr0naut


you should feel more worried about Russia's nuclear stockpile, and the many mobile ICBM launch vehicles that are still unaccounted for since the end cold-war, where someone could stumble up one and pry the warhead off and smuggle it somewhere.

maybe you all can call me a warmonger, but does everyone miss the obvious? after dropping the bombs on japan, they are now a key ally and trading partner.