Surely Biff isn't starting a war with Iran
- Thread starter Syskatine
- Start date
Having a “relationship” with people that hate you and want you to die is laughable. They will act friendly as long as you’re sucking their dick (or giving them plane loads of cash).
How can we make a determination yet on North Korea if the matter is still being discussed? If the jury is still out, we don’t have a verdict, right?
Yep. Their false flag stuff sounds like the same script the ultra-right wing folks break out for Obama. The modern leftists sound just like those crazy asses.
No it isn't. This is a faulty and even dangerous mindset to have when it comes to engaging in foreign relations.
I am glad that we had leaders who didn't embrace such a mindset when it came to China and the Soviet Union. The earth would have been a nuclear wasteland by now if they had.
So you don't consider having negotiations with North Korea (i.e. having a relationship with North Korea) as appeasement?
Is that avatar of yours a pic of Neville Chamberlain, by chance?
No. And I’m not aware that North Korea wants us to die, so you’re attempt at an equivalence here is not getting anywhere.
But North Korea is, as you posted, a "nutjob dictatorial government." Their government has also called for our destruction and actually fought a war against us. They have been called an evil regime too and were lumped in with the Axis of Evil.
And yet you have no problem negotiating with them? Not appeasement huh?
Look up the definition of appeasement and get back to me.
How long ago did NK call for our destruction? I’m not familiar with that, unless you’re talking about the Korean War, maybe. If that’s the case, then you’re talking about a different dictatorial nutjob. In any event, I don’t expect miracles from any negotiations with them. Because they’re nutjobs.
It is tough trying to defend a contradiction, isn't it?
I'll let you off the hook though. I actually agree with you on North Korea. Having dialogue with North Korea isn't appeasement nor is it the wrong approach. Same goes for Iran too. It is not in our interest to go to war with either country or not engage in dialogue with both countries.
The goal behind the dialogue is very important though as is the impact it has in the other country. And that is where I believe the current administrations is getting it wrong with North Korea.
Welcome to 10 - 2 years ago for the other half of the country.
Let me off the hook? Har dee har har.
Let’s go back to Iran since you’re in time machine mode. We supported the Shah. One day, revolution occurs. Extremists invade our embassy in Tehran. They invade our sovereign territory according to international law. They hold our people hostage for over a year. Our reaction? It took decades, but we give them billions and, in return, we got a “promise” that they wouldn’t nuke up for a few years. And didn’t they violate that agreement before we bailed on it? Sounds a lot like “peace in our time”, Neville.
Actually, there has been a lot of reaction in those decades you just skipped over. You left out almost forty years of our interaction with Iran since this incident.
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2019-04/news/iaea-says-iran-abiding-nuclear-deal
No, "there is no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea" sounds more like the Chamberlain quote.
Plus a tremendous amount of interest. I realize the principal was theirs. And what did we get in return for the takeover of our embassy and the trauma the hostages endured?
Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Because we want to make them like us? Not possible.
So when I use the word “appeasement” here, it’s entirely justified. We made major concessions and got nothing in return.
Well, there you have it. Caitlyn Johnstone. Game over.
The war started at 3 pm. Full invasion of Iran. Did the Playstation Network not interrupt your gaming with the breaking news?
I should have noted that we haven’t had formal diplomatic relations in 40 years?
Which is a reaction of course.
And there has been more "reaction" as well. Start with the Reagan administration arming Iraq (and possibly even Iran) during the Iraq-Iran and move forward. There is much that you just skipped over for some reason.
Possibly? Quite compelling.
Dude, you’re absent for months. Then you show up out of nowhere and start irritating.
Are you herpes?
As if your security clearance permits you to know more than he.Bolton says...
Nice try but a fail nevertheless.
Absolutely. Ask those military members that served in the Middle East that were victims of Iran's support of terrorist group that are planting IEDs all over. Ask all of those effect by Iran's support of Hezbollah, Hammas, Al Qaeda, Taliban, Mahdi militia, Japanese Red Army, the Armenian Secret Army, the Kurdistan Workers' Party, the Da'wah Party in Iraq, the Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain, just to name a few. Do you consider these groups threats to US national security?
You liberals go nuts over a few hundred white supremist members in the US but don't seem to have anywhere near the same concerns with hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Muslim terrorist that want nothing more than the destruction of the US and our way of life.
As to what our policy should be, the destruction and removal of the current regime in Iran.
"contradicting statements by U.S. intelligence officials that Tehran was in compliance with the now-jettisoned accord."
"There are others where I think they've clearly been in violation."
Bolton, a neocon who has wanted war with Iran for decades and who helped lead us into the Iraq War on false premises.
I don't see how anyone besides Bolton's fellow neocons could or should trust anything this man claims!
How many American lives are you willing to sacrifice to ensure this happens?
Your own? The lives of your children?
If I were president, my foreign policy would be a lot like batman. Mysteriously people who are plotting against America would just disappear with no attribution and no credit taken or given.
Well considering that the Iranian regime has already taken several family members lives I would say we are already sacrificing and would be willing to sacrifice more. Being a liberal I already know sacrifice is foreign to you so I know your answer. You must understand I have family trapped in Iran and can not get them out. We have managed to legally get 2 nephews and nieces out to Canada. All have PHDs in there fields and are currently working to obtain Visas to take jobs they have been offered here in the US.
Answer me this, how many lives are you willing to lose until you feel it would be justified to do what is necessary to get rid of the regime?
I do not advocate war, I much prefer sanctions that devastate the regime, which is part of the reasoning I despised Obama and his appeasement approach in regards to Iran.
Are they American citizens or Iranian citizens?
I do not support sacrificing any American lives in an unnecessary war with Iran. Iran is not a direct threat to our national security and there is no reason to go to war.
I believe the best approach to Iran is smart diplomacy that encourages the moderate forces in Iran and will hopefully lead to the end of what you apparently are referencing. I don't believe banging the drums or war or seeking to isolate Iran will accomplish anything but the deaths of more people.
Obama (and the international community btw) was not engaged in appeasement. That is a neocon talking point, a talking point from people who want war with Iran for their own selfish interests. The same people who claimed we were appeasing Iraq.
Obama, and the international community, was seeking the best possible path forward with Iran. I know for those who hate Obama, they will never accept this. But it is the truth and the right path forward with Iran is smart diplomacy.
