Pages

Jump to bottom

144 comments

1 Dark_Falcon  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 8:50:10am

Baloney! Iran is trying for a nuke and Iranian nuclear weapons pose an existential threat to Israel.

2 Destro  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 8:57:10am

re: #1 Dark_Falcon

Baloney! Iran is trying for a nuke and Iranian nuclear weapons pose an existential threat to Israel.

[Link: www.ynetnews.com...]

'Iran does not pose an existential threat '

Contrary to statements made when he was in office, former IDF chief Dan Halutz now negates 'doomsday scenarios' vis-à-vis Iran

3 alinuxguru  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 10:41:51am

re: #2 Destro

In all fairness, Halutz said that in a time when the world was naively hopeful that flourishing democracies would occur after the Arab Spring. This was a dream not realized.

4 Destro  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 11:13:08am

re: #3 alinuxguru

In all fairness, Halutz said that in a time when the world was naively hopeful that flourishing democracies would occur after the Arab Spring. This was a dream not realized.

I have been openly critical of the Arab Spring intervention - in that I hate American armed interventions for regime changes even against Qaddafi because of the Islamist element.

With that said, the Arab Spring does not usher in a nuclear bomb any faster just because it happened.

The above news item is directed against Netanyahu's version of reality and not directed against Israel.

5 Daniel Ballard  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 12:47:48pm

I await Irans response to the IAEA query about evidence they found that Iran is doing the work to be able to to enrich to weapons grade and evidence of warhead design work.

I think Netanyahu fears are well founded, even if he is all too ready for a military solution.

A lot of the Israel talk is a red herring. Saudi Arabia has been looking for a strike on Iran for years, unless those wikileaked documents are fakes.

Destro if you want to complain about war mongering vis a vis Iran, better also include the House of Saud as well as numerous other Arab nations nearby. Netanyahu is just a single politician. Ponder Saudi Arabias influence by comparison.

6 Destro  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 1:30:11pm

re: #5 Daniel Ballard

I await Irans response to the IAEA query about evidence they found that Iran is doing the work to be able to to enrich to weapons grade and evidence of warhead design work.

I think Netanyahu fears are well founded, even if he is all too ready for a military solution.

A lot of the Israel talk is a red herring. Saudi Arabia has been looking for a strike on Iran for years, unless those wikileaked documents are fakes.

Destro if you want to complain about war mongering vis a vis Iran, better also include the House of Saud as well as numerous other Arab nations nearby. Netanyahu is just a single politician. Ponder Saudi Arabias influence by comparison.

Where were you when I openly said I support Syria's Assad regime against the Saudi backed Free Syrian Army.

Given a chance to live in a Ba'athist somewhat secularist socialist state vs an Islamist Sunni state backed by Saudi Arabia give me the Ba'athist any time.

7 Prideful, Arrogant Marriage Equality Advocate  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 1:34:46pm

If the extremist powers that be in Iran have any opportunity at all at arming themselves with Nukes and making Israeli's lives miserable they will.

Just my opinion.

8 Destro  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 1:36:33pm

re: #7 Prideful, Arrogant Marriage Equality Advocate

But the Iranians DON'T have the opportunity.

9 ckkatz  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 2:50:27pm

Hmm... The article seemed to be about Israel reaction to possible Iranian building of nuclear weapons in the future. I didn't see or hear any mention in the article that claims that Iran currently has nuclear weapons, or that denies such claims. Did I miss that?

The article itself identifies some (but interestingly, not all) of the arguments against Israeli unilateral action while not stating the case for it. And takes a few digs at Netanyahu in the process. All in all, it appears to be a restatement of what I understand is the Australian government's position.

That the Israelis are also actively engaged in a debate is unsurprising.

10 Daniel Ballard  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 3:01:10pm

re: #6 Destro

Hmm I did miss that post of yours, but this is a big blog and fortunately I do get busy with my small biz sometimes.
I support neither Assad nor the rebels. I have no idea who the rebels might really be, apart from news sources I don't have much confidence in. If I had to guess I'd say the rebels are a hodgepodge of militants.

11 Cap'n Magic  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 3:43:42pm

re: #1 Dark_Falcon

Given that Israel has at least two dozen nukes and has not signed the NPT, the notion that Iran is trying to get a nuclear weapon to wipe Israel off the map is, quite frankly, laughable. Given the US involvement in Operation Ajax, if Iran does indeed get the bomb, I welcome it as a big middle finger to the American Empire-especially given the fact that there are more Israelis outside of Israel than in Israel borders, and our own meddling in countries on the behest of the military-industrial complex since the 20th century has killed more people than 9/11. The House Of Saud is on tenterhooks as it is and their own kingdom may not survive given the age of their ruling structure.

12 Cap'n Magic  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 3:48:53pm

re: #6 Destro

Great choices there-death by a Stasi-like force or death by religious police.

There is no good ending here, short of sending both sides to the negotiating table with an outside force saying negotiate or we'll turn your country into glass.

13 Dark_Falcon  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 6:10:09pm

re: #11 Cap'n Magic

There is no 'American Empire', and the only people I hear using that term seriously are moonbats.

On a serious note, how many nukes Israel has is not relevant. Having nukes only raise the cost of someone firing nukes at you, they don't reduce the damage your nation would suffer from them. Iran might well decide if it gets the bomb that its ideology demands Israel's destruction, regardless of the consequences. That's unlikely, but not impossible when dealing with a fanatical regime.

14 Destro  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 6:13:01pm

re: #12 Cap'n Magic

Great choices there-death by a Stasi-like force or death by religious police.

There is no good ending here, short of sending both sides to the negotiating table with an outside force saying negotiate or we'll turn your country into glass.

Given a dilemma between choosing life under the Ba'athists who would leave me alone if I stayed out of politics and an Islamist regime? No choice at all.

15 Destro  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 6:18:50pm

re: #13 Dark_Falcon

There is no 'American Empire', and the only people I hear using that term seriously are moonbats.

On a serious note, how many nukes Israel has is not relevant. Having nukes only raise the cost of someone firing nukes at you, they don't reduce the damage your nation would suffer from them. Iran might well decide if it gets the bomb that its ideology demands Israel's destruction, regardless of the consequences. That's unlikely, but not impossible when dealing with a fanatical regime.

How many wars has Iran started? I count zero in the 20th and 21st centuries. That sounds like a people who are not irrational.

Why are you claiming bloody America, we who start wars at the drop of a hat has the high road here?

And America is an empire - just an empire run by inbred WASP retards recruited from Ivy League schools.

Read: Imperial Life in the Emerald City

16 ckkatz  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 9:04:40pm

re: #14 Destro

"the Ba'athists who would leave me alone if I stayed out of politics"

Really?

The thousands of women and children gassed in Halabja were anti-Ba'athist operatives? What about the other 40 or so Kurdistani villages that were also gassed around that time? And the Anfal Campaign only targeted political activists?

The half million Madan who were driven out or shot or poisoned and their villages all burned to ground; they were all involved in anti-Ba'athist politics? The two million refugees fleeing from the indiscriminate shelling and assaults by the Iraqi Army in 1991 that killed tens of thousands of civilians, and the refugee columns which were strafed and shelled by the Iraqi Army, they also were all involved in anti-government activities? The Iraqi Army's systematic round-up of all young adult males in many cities in the south, followed by their summary execution was only targeted at known political activists?

Frankly, I feel that the American occupation of Iraq badly flawed. Nor am I convinced that the invasion of Iraq was necessarily in the United States national interest. However, that does _not_ obscure the fact that Saddam Hussein and his Ba'athist regime slaughtered hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens.

17 Destro  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 9:46:01pm

re: #16 ckkatz

Frankly, I feel that the American occupation of Iraq badly flawed. Nor am I convinced that the invasion of Iraq was necessarily in the United States national interest. However, that does _not_ obscure the fact that Saddam Hussein and his Ba'athist regime slaughtered hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens.

Middle finger to Uncle Sam and his faux moral outrage when it suits him (and that bastard Uncle Sam maybe helped Iraq's Ba'athist use chemical weapons to bring Iran to her knees). Let's go down the memory hole, shall we?

Halabja : America didn't seem to mind poison gas

By Joost R. Hiltermann

Published: January 17, 2003

[Link: www.nytimes.com...]

AMMAN, Jordan— In calling for regime change in Iraq, George W. Bush has accused Saddam Hussein of being a man who gassed his own people. Bush is right, of course. The public record shows that Saddam's regime repeatedly spread poisonous gases on Kurdish villages in 1987 and 1988 in an attempt to put down a persistent rebellion.

The biggest such attack was against Halabja in March 1988. According to local organizations providing relief to the survivors, some 6,800 Kurds were killed, the vast majority of them civilians.

It is a good thing that Bush has highlighted these atrocities by a regime that is more brutal than most. Yet it is cynical to use them as a justification for American plans to terminate the regime. By any measure, the American record on Halabja is shameful.

Analysis of thousands of captured Iraqi secret police documents and declassified U.S. government documents, as well as interviews with scores of Kurdish survivors, senior Iraqi defectors and retired U.S. intelligence officers, show (1) that Iraq carried out the attack on Halabja, and (2) that the United States, fully aware it was Iraq, accused Iran, Iraq's enemy in a fierce war, of being partly responsible for the attack. The State Department instructed its diplomats to say that Iran was partly to blame.

This was at a time when Iraq was launching what proved to be the final battles of the war against Iran. Its wholesale use of poison gas against Iranian troops and Iranian Kurdish towns, and its threat to place chemical warheads on the missiles it was lobbing at Tehran, brought Iran to its knees.

Iraq had also just embarked on a counterinsurgency campaign, called the Anfal, against its rebellious Kurds. In this effort, too, the regime's resort to chemical weapons gave it a decisive edge, enabling the systematic killing of an estimated 100,000 men, women, and children.

The deliberate American prevarication on Halabja was the logical, although probably undesired, outcome of a pronounced six-year tilt toward Iraq, seen as a bulwark against the perceived threat posed by Iran's zealous brand of politicized Islam. The United States began the tilt after Iraq, the aggressor in the war, was expelled from Iranian territory by a resurgent Iran, which then decided to pursue its own, fruitless version of regime change in Baghdad.

So spare me. And yes, I rather live in Saddam's Ba'athist Iraq where I could buy a good bottle of Scotch than fucking American ally Saudi-Wahabist-Arabia where such a purchase may get me be-headed.

And I am still waiting for someone to tell me how many wars Iran started in the 20th century? 21st? to prove Iran is an irrational nation ready to carry out a mass suicide attack at moment's notice.

18 ckkatz  Fri, Oct 19, 2012 9:58:22pm

Should I understand your posting to mean that you feel it was okay for the Ba'athist regime to poison gas thousands of civilians?

19 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 3:47:45am

re: #17 Destro


So spare me. And yes, I rather live in Saddam's Ba'athist Iraq where I could buy a good bottle of Scotch than fucking American ally Saudi-Wahabist-Arabia where such a purchase may get me be-headed.

What if you were a Kurd?

20 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 5:19:05am

re: #18 ckkatz

re: #19 Obdicut

Don't let facts get in the way.....

21 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 6:31:32am

re: #18 ckkatz

Should I understand your posting to mean that you feel it was okay for the Ba'athist regime to poison gas thousands of civilians?

Why not? It was Ok for the USA? And in any case, Saddam's regime long stopped being a Ba'athist regime and was a personal dictatorship.

Syria is a Ba'athist regime and I would have no problem living there over Saudi Arabia.

22 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 6:35:27am

re: #19 Obdicut

Turkey killed 30,000 Kurds. If I was a Kurd it would be a toss up who would be trying to kill me? American ally Turkey? Iran? Syria? Iraq?

23 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 6:59:48am

re: #22 Destro

Turkey killed 30,000 Kurds. If I was a Kurd it would be a toss up who would be trying to kill me? American ally Turkey? Iran? Syria? Iraq?

So you wouldn't want to be a kurd in Iraq, right? What about being a pro-Democracy activist. Would you want to be one of those in Iraq?

24 Cap'n Magic  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:03:04am

re: #13 Dark_Falcon

All one has to look at the number of military bases the US has scattered across the world and the US dollar as the de-facto world currency to shred the claim that the American Empire doesn't exist.

25 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:23:31am

The thing is, Destro, this is just another stupid off-the-point argument on your part. That the US partners with places like Saudi Arabia, which is an oppressive theocratic shithole that allows religious police to beat women to death, is true, and is a very bad thing. It's well worth pointing out, agitating about, and using to point out that the 'humanitarian' reasons for invading Iraq are fucking bullshit.

But instead of making that clear, reasonable argument, you have to go down the road of saying you'd rather be in Hussein's Iraq because you could at least by scotch there. It's a farcical, spoiled first world perspective that serves to diminish the suffering of those under Saddam's regime.

26 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:15:19am

re: #25 Obdicut

The thing is, Destro, this is just another stupid off-the-point argument on your part. That the US partners with places like Saudi Arabia, which is an oppressive theocratic shithole that allows religious police to beat women to death, is true, and is a very bad thing. It's well worth pointing out, agitating about, and using to point out that the 'humanitarian' reasons for invading Iraq are fucking bullshit.

But instead of making that clear, reasonable argument, you have to go down the road of saying you'd rather be in Hussein's Iraq because you could at least by scotch there. It's a farcical, spoiled first world perspective that serves to diminish the suffering of those under Saddam's regime.

Quoted For Truth.

Destro's act is to make inflammatory remarks like this and then enjoy the resulting fight.

27 Buck  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 1:40:59pm

re: #2 Destro

'Iran does not pose an existential threat '

Contrary to statements made when he was in office, former IDF chief Dan Halutz now negates 'doomsday scenarios' vis-à-vis Iran

An existential threat, he explained "is defined as the other side's ability to obliterate us off the face of the earth. That doesn’t apply nor do I think it will."

That is some bar Destro expects Israel to rise to. In Destros world, it seems that only threats that will obliterate are to be defended against. No one should have any worries until the threat is the other side's ability to obliterate us off the face of the earth.

Is that for everyone Destro? Or just Jews?

28 ckkatz  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 2:06:27pm

re: #23 Obdicut

"So you wouldn't want to be a Kurd in Iraq, right? What about being a pro-Democracy activist. Would you want to be one of those in Iraq?"

Hmmm... Has destro actually ever come out in support of Democracy?

I haven't expended a great deal of effort reading his "comments". However, I only recall him supporting certain forms of dictatorship and their violent suppression of dissidents, including atrocities, mass-murder, and ethnic cleansing, if not also genocide.

29 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 2:32:24pm

re: #23 Obdicut

I would not mind being a Kun Syria. And since we are talking Syria the Baathist there are porbably a better option than the Free Syrian rebels.

30 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 2:38:27pm

re: #28 ckkatz

"So you wouldn't want to be a Kurd in Iraq, right? What about being a pro-Democracy activist. Would you want to be one of those in Iraq?"

Hmmm... Has destro actually ever come out in support of Democracy?

I haven't expended a great deal of effort reading his "comments". However, I only recall him supporting certain forms of dictatorship and their violent suppression of dissidents, including atrocities, mass-murder, and ethnic cleansing, if not also genocide.

The Founding Fathers did not support democracy, why should I? Athens went through two generations of benevolent dictatorship to be able to sport a Democracy. In balkanized nations like Syria to claim a Democracy is possible where groups won't vote along tribal lines is American lunacy.

31 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 2:45:15pm

re: #25 Obdicut

I am openly supporting Syria's regime against any rebellion armed by Saudia Arabia.

That the stupid USA still uses the old Afghan playbook of arming Islamists to overthrow leftist regimes just shows that not one idiot in the State dep learned from 911:

32 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 3:27:05pm

So, sides should be picked based not on whether a government is democratic, not on whether it kills civilians wantonly, but apparently on whether you can get a decent bottle of scotch on the open market. Or possibly whether the government in question is one the United States does not like. Being disliked by the U.S. is worth even more points than scotch.

33 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 3:36:39pm

re: #32 SanFranciscoZionist

The USA likes Saudi Arabia.

Hates Syria.

What doe sthis tell us? Nothing other than the USA's foreign policy is full of bullshit.

34 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 3:42:15pm

re: #23 Obdicut

Let me try that again since lGF is shit in a cell phone and my post was mangaled above @ #29.

The Kurds are not innocents in these wars, they have been pioneers in suicide bombings for example and I have seen Kurds march in military parades for both Saddam and Iran (various factions) and and then there is Turkey's Kurdish Hezbollah (real Islamist Kurd sickos fighting secular communist PKK Kurds for Turkey). The USA blamed the Iranians in part for the gassing of the Kurds and saw no problem supporting a Ba'athis regime vs Islamist crazies.

I see no problem in supporting secular leaning Ba'athists against Islamists either. I am not praising Ba'athists - I am making a choice as to which hell hole I could live in and that would be the Ba'athist hell hole vs the Islamist hell hole.

Now if you are going to say, we are working on not producing a hell hole but a good form of decent democracy - OK - good luck - but the history of the region speaks against it. So any attempt at the USA to arm rebels or over throw regimes I am against.

Don't support any regime and don't over throw any regime.

And I wish Assad all the best in ridding his nation of Free Syrian Islamists.

35 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 3:50:42pm

re: #33 Destro

The USA likes Saudi Arabia.

Hates Syria.

What doe sthis tell us? Nothing other than the USA's foreign policy is full of bullshit.

It's your foreign policy I was commenting on.

36 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 6:53:36pm

re: #35 SanFranciscoZionist

One of the first victims of Iraq's Islamist spread was Christian liquor store owners. I am sorry I did not realize you needed that spelled out for you. Women in Iraq started to cover up for fear of their lives. Gays were hunted and killed.

Saddam did not do any such things when his regime was in power and not under sanctions (and not even during sanctions).

But nuance seems not to be your strong suit.

From 2011 (not that long ago - fuck you American invasion for freedom):
Iraq liquor store owners fear for their lives amid attacks

Essa believes the attacks are not really about liquor stores so much as it is about a struggle to balance a fledgling democracy with a conservative religious tradition.

"It's about the new democracy that Americans promised us," he said.

Under Islamic tradition, Muslims do not drink alcohol. But in many parts of Baghdad, it is not uncommon to see people drinking alcohol at outdoor cafes and restaurants.

Within months of the 2003 U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein, liquor stores in Baghdad and elsewhere were bombed and shot up.

[Link: articles.cnn.com...]

You want me to post stories of what happened to Iraqi gays after the American invasion?

37 palomino  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:03:03pm

re: #27 Buck

An existential threat, he explained "is defined as the other side's ability to obliterate us off the face of the earth. That doesn’t apply nor do I think it will."

That is some bar Destro expects Israel to rise to. In Destros world, it seems that only threats that will obliterate are to be defended against. No one should have any worries until the threat is the other side's ability to obliterate us off the face of the earth.

Is that for everyone Destro? Or just Jews?

A very weak response. The article is about one group of Israelis whose views differ markedly from another group of Israelis. And somehow you've turned that into Destro vs. the Jews.

When I hear Destro say something anti-Semitic, then I'll tell him to go to hell. But criticizing the current leadership in Israel is hardly tantamount to the racism you implicitly attribute to the allegedly dastardly Destro.

38 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:06:24pm

re: #34 Destro

If you seriously support Assad over the FSA, then I consider you to be no better morally than Rodan of the Stalker Blog. You are by your own words willing to support murderous tyrants if they move things in directions you think are the right ones. If you'd been alive in the 1930's, I feel sure in saying that you would have supported Stalin!

By your words and links, Destro, you have revealed yourself to be an enemy of democracy and freedom. Being also unwilling to listen to the views of others, you are unworthy of future engagement or discussion from me.

39 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:12:19pm

re: #37 palomino

1. Would you please upding SFZ's #35? Buck downdinged it by mistake.

2. The thing is, Palomino, is that Destro been on this vein for months. In any matter of any tension between Israel and any other nation or entity, Destro inevitably sides against Israel. He has done often enough for long enough to merit a charge of being Objectively anti-Semitic. I know you're asking for a proof, but the way he goes he's never going to say something clearly anti-Jewish. He's just going to continually side against Israel, no matter how just her claims in a matter may be.

40 Varek Raith  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:29:19pm

re: #34 Destro

Assad can go fuck himself.

41 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:30:40pm

re: #36 Destro

But nuance seems not to be your strong suit.

Thank God we have you around to handle the nuance.

42 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:32:10pm

re: #37 palomino

A very weak response. The article is about one group of Israelis whose views differ markedly from another group of Israelis. And somehow you've turned that into Destro vs. the Jews.

When I hear Destro say something anti-Semitic, then I'll tell him to go to hell. But criticizing the current leadership in Israel is hardly tantamount to the racism you implicitly attribute to the allegedly dastardly Destro.

Let's just say that there are patterns all over the place with Mr. D., and some of them have to do with Israel.

43 ProGunLiberal  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:33:53pm

re: #33 Destro

No, it means the US Foreign Policy is schizophrenic. As it has been since the end of the Cold War.

44 ozbloke  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:45:11pm

re: #39 Dark_Falcon

He's just going to continually side against Israel, no matter how just her claims in a matter may be.

Maybe he's a team player, you know, doesn't matter what individuals do, as long as your team wins.

45 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:46:22pm

re: #44 ozbloke

Maybe he's a team player, you know, doesn't matter what individuals do, as long as your team wins.

Then he's part of Team Tyrant, which to me is the same thing as rooting for Team Asshole.

46 ProGunLiberal  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:46:24pm

re: #44 ozbloke

Fortunately, I don't buy into that malarky.

47 ProGunLiberal  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:46:41pm

re: #45 Dark_Falcon

No, he is Team Galloway.

48 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:47:00pm

re: #34 Destro

The Kurds are not innocents in these wars, they have been pioneers in suicide bombings for example and I have seen Kurds march in military parades for both Saddam and Iran (various factions) and and then there is Turkey's Kurdish Hezbollah (real Islamist Kurd sickos fighting secular communist PKK Kurds for Turkey).

Group blame, whooo! Fucking moronic.

Destro, you're on record supporting the cover-up of war crimes for the Soviet Union and being pro-Assad. Are you actually a parody account, mocking people who are so blinded by anti-American sentiment they see everything through that flawed lens?

49 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:48:32pm

re: #27 Buck

Destro has never said anything even remotely anti-Jewish. He is extremely anti-American. I think if Israel wasn't America's ally he wouldn't actually give a shit about them.

50 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:49:41pm

re: #48 Obdicut

Group blame, whooo! Fucking moronic.

Amazing how 'collective punishment' becomes something less of a cuss word when you're trying to find justification for a tyrant's behavior.

51 ozbloke  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:50:28pm

re: #45 Dark_Falcon

Then he's part of Team Tyrant, which to me is the same thing as rooting for Team Asshole.

So in USA politics its ok to ignore what the individuals within a party say and do and you are happy to support the team for your goal of winning.

But you take issue with someone supporting team baathist's over team unknown?

52 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:53:06pm

re: #50 SanFranciscoZionist

Maybe it's something in the way I was raised, but I've never been into group blame. It's never made any sense to me.

Anyhoo, according to Destro:

Image: kurdish_children_polishing_shoes_in_hewler_np00433875.jpg

Not innocents.

53 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:54:00pm

re: #49 Obdicut

Destro has never said anything even remotely anti-Jewish. He is extremely anti-American. I think if Israel wasn't America's ally he wouldn't actually give a shit about them.

Well, he hates American allies, and he hates religion, and he hates Netanyahu, but I suppose it's possible that he is very positive about Jews who agree with his political views and are thoroughly secular.

Or not. I'm a tad skeptical about the Des.

54 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:57:41pm

re: #47 ProGunLiberal

No, he is Team Galloway.

Team Galloway players are all part of Team Asshole, especially Mr. Galloway.

55 William Barnett-Lewis  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:57:42pm

re: #49 Obdicut

Destro has never said anything even remotely anti-Jewish. He is extremely anti-American. I think if Israel wasn't America's ally he wouldn't actually give a shit about them.

QFT. This is as perfect a description of Destro as is possible within the bounds of what he has show of himself.

56 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:58:43pm

re: #53 SanFranciscoZionist

Who knows. But real anti-semites tend to show their hand a lot more. He's enough of a douchebag there isn't really any reason to pile up other charges.

People like Destro make it much easier for arguments from the 'left' to get dismissed. I dunno. Maybe he thinks he's moving the non-existent Overton window, maybe he's a real True Believer in anti-Americanism. Not really worth figuring out. He might get smarter as he gets older; he sounds pretty young.

57 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 7:59:34pm

re: #51 ozbloke

So in USA politics its ok to ignore what the individuals within a party say and do and you are happy to support the team for your goal of winning.

But you take issue with someone supporting team baathist's over team unknown?

Neither US party is anywhere close to as bad as the Baath Party.

58 ozbloke  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:07:02pm

re: #57 Dark_Falcon

Neither US party is anywhere close to as bad as the Baath Party.

So is it about degrees of bad?
Where will you place your red line?

Somewhere after equal rights for LBGT?
Somewhere after a women's right to choose?
Somewhere after equal pay for women?
Somewhere after more tax cuts to the rich?

Bad is in the eye of the beholder.

You seem to both be ignoring what those in power within the particular parties say and do, and support 'your team' for the teams sake.

Details matter.

59 Gus  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:11:49pm

Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollahs have made their intentions clear. They want to develop a nuclear weapon. We frequently hear from leadership of Iran on official channels, the occasional cabinet member threatening the destruction of Israel.

We should take their word it.

We probably shouldn't have helped overthrow the Iranian government in 1953.

60 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:18:26pm

re: #59 Gus

Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah have made their intentions clear. They want to develop a nuclear weapon. We frequently hear from leadership of Iran on official channels, the occasional cabinet member threatening the destruction of Israel.

We should take their word it.

We probably shouldn't have helped overthrow the Iranian government in 1953.

It was the fifties. Everyone was doing it.

///Destro, when you come back to the thread, this is what we call sarcasm. I am not defending Ike, Churchill or the Pahlavis.

61 Gus  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:18:50pm

Why is Iran even whining all the time about Israel any way? They have 636,372 sq mi of land while Israel has only 8,522 sq mi. Iran has a huge maritime front. They have far more natural resources. Why doesn't Iran start taking in Gaza refugees?

62 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:19:56pm

re: #59 Gus

Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah have made their intentions clear. They want to develop a nuclear weapon. We frequently hear from leadership of Iran on official channels, the occasional cabinet member threatening the destruction of Israel.

We should take their word it.

We probably shouldn't have helped overthrow the Iranian government in 1953.

Perhaps, but that still only goes so far. Pres. Ahmadinejad and Grand Ayatollah Khameni are the ones to blame for the current crisis, not Kermit Roosevelt Jr.

63 ProGunLiberal  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:23:36pm

re: #54 Dark_Falcon

Did you hear the most recent story about Galloway?

64 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:24:06pm

re: #63 ProGunLiberal

Did you hear the most recent story about Galloway?

No, enlighten me.

65 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:24:27pm

re: #62 Dark_Falcon

Perhaps, but that still only goes so far. Pres. Ahmadinejad and Grand Ayatollah Khameni are the ones to blame for the current crisis, not Kermit Roosevelt Jr.

Who really suffered enough, just being named Kermit Roosevelt.

66 ProGunLiberal  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:25:36pm

re: #64 Dark_Falcon

Oh, this is a fun one:

Respect MP George Galloway writes to British home secretary Theresa May and makes a complaint to the police about his secretary Aisha Ali-Khan, claiming that she was working as an "agent" for a Metropolitan police counterterrorism officer who was running a "dirty tricks" campaign against him.

From the Guardian.

67 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:27:24pm

re: #65 SanFranciscoZionist

His father-- same name, obviously-- was a badass. Read River of Doubt. Unfortunately, he committed suicide-- lifelong battle with depression.

68 Gus  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:27:50pm

re: #62 Dark_Falcon

Perhaps, but that still only goes so far. Pres. Ahmadinejad and Grand Ayatollah Khameni are the ones to blame for the current crisis, not Kermit Roosevelt Jr.

Anyway. We'd all be jailed if we were in Iran. Considering all of our political chatter that is. This is how they rule their people. Could you imagine? You'd be considered a radical.

69 Ming  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:28:21pm

re: #15 Destro

How many wars has Iran started? I count zero in the 20th and 21st centuries. That sounds like a people who are not irrational.

Iran's financial and military support for Hamas and Hezbollah can be considered "acts of war", especially by Israelis whose loved ones are murdered by those groups. Iran is playing a very dangerous game.

70 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:28:33pm

re: #61 Gus

Why is Iran even whining all the time about Israel any way? They have 636,372 sq mi of land while Israel has only 8,522 sq mi. Iran has a huge maritime front. They have far more natural resources. Why doesn't Iran start taking in Gaza refugees?

Anti-American feeling, an opportunity to pull strings and control players in the region, a skosh of religious ideology, bleed through from other regional conflicts...it's a bit of a mix, I think. God knows, they're not jealous of Israel's territory or natural resources. ("Forty years of wandering in the desert, and He finally leads us to the one spot with no oil?)

71 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:29:52pm

re: #65 SanFranciscoZionist

Who really suffered enough, just being named Kermit Roosevelt.

His father committed suicide, but Kermit Jr. did well in life. His father likely would have done better if bipolar disorder had he lived in a time when drugs capable of treating bipolar disorder were available. As it was, the eldest Kermit drank too excess, which strike me as self-medicating to deal with his undiagnosed condition.

72 ProGunLiberal  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:34:08pm

re: #66 ProGunLiberal

Unlike the supporters of Galloway, I find an outspoken and smart woman sexy, for lack of a better way to put it. If I find someone who loves me who is more intelligent than me, I will be a happy camper.

73 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:34:13pm

re: #67 Obdicut

His father-- same name, obviously-- was a badass. Read River of Doubt. Unfortunately, he committed suicide-- lifelong battle with depression.

Many, many, Roosevelts were badasses. Even considering Operation Ajax a strategic mistake, one cannot fail to be impressed by his sheer resolve in its execution. And those around him drew their strength from him. In that, Kermit Jr. truly showed himself to be TR grandson and FDR's cousin.

74 Gus  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:35:35pm

No but the The Boy Who Cried Wolf analogy doesn't work. Bibi might get a little hyper and goofy with cartoon bombs but Iran isn't kidding.

75 ProGunLiberal  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:37:07pm

re: #74 Gus

At the same time, I am not entirely sure they will make it to the bomb. Their economy is tanking, and every sort of economic indicator for them is dropping. I have to imagine something may give in the near future.

76 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:37:34pm

re: #74 Gus

No but the The Boy Who Cried Wolf analogy doesn't work. Bibi might get a little hyper and goofy with cartoon bombs but Iran isn't kidding.

Just so. It's not wrong to cry 'Wolf!' if you really do see a wolf.

77 Gus  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:38:41pm

re: #75 ProGunLiberal

At the same time, I am not entirely sure they will make it to the bomb. Their economy is tanking, and every sort of economic indicator for them is dropping. I have to imagine something may give in the near future.

That's why we employ tough sanctions. Obama has helped put in the toughest sanctions ever. Stronger than the previous administration.

Waits for Factcheck.

78 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:39:57pm

re: #74 Gus

No but the The Boy Who Cried Wolf analogy doesn't work. Bibi might get a little hyper and goofy with cartoon bombs but Iran isn't kidding.

There is no real reason to believe that if Iran got a nuke they'd use it on Israel. The only reason to think that is to think that everyone involved in the decision-making process for this act was fanatically suicidal.

It's possible. It's not likely. Iran most likely wants a nuke because having nukes gives you a better bargaining position, and because foreign attempts to destroy the nuke program help them maintain control.

79 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:41:36pm

re: #66 ProGunLiberal

Oh, this is a fun one:

From the Guardian.

What an ass. Thanks for posting that link. I also had not known that Galloway had won a byelection earlier this year and gotten himself back into Parliament. That choad's capacity for fooling people seems boundless.

80 Gus  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:43:14pm

re: #78 Obdicut

There is no real reason to believe that if Iran got a nuke they'd use it on Israel. The only reason to think that is to think that everyone involved in the decision-making process for this act was fanatically suicidal.

It's possible. It's not likely. Iran most likely wants a nuke because having nukes gives you a better bargaining position, and because foreign attempts to destroy the nuke program help them maintain control.

Yes but this seems to have become their raison d'être. They're climbing the castle on this. Making their last stand.

81 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:43:58pm

re: #77 Gus

That's why we employ tough sanctions. Obama has helped put in the toughest sanctions ever. Stronger than the previous administration.

Waits for Factcheck.

That's correct, but it should be noted that the US has consistently favored the gradual escalation of sanctions. Thus Obama could continue Bush's policy on Iran and still end up having imposed tougher sanctions.

Based on that, I rate Gus' claim as Mostly True. :)

82 Gus  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:44:29pm

re: #81 Dark_Falcon

That's correct, but it should be noted that the US has consistently favored the gradual escalation of sanctions. Thus Obama could continue Bush's policy on Iran and still end up having imposed tougher sanctions.

Based on that, i rate Gus' claim as Mostly True. :)

High five.

83 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:45:07pm

re: #76 Dark_Falcon

Just so. It's not wrong to cry 'Wolf!' if you really do see a wolf.

It's the figuring out what to do about it part that's tricky.

84 ProGunLiberal  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:45:22pm

re: #79 Dark_Falcon

He won because of the fact he was able to get very, very high turnout from hyper-Conservative Muslims in that district. The UK has absolutely failed to deal with Saudi (among others) influences. The US, for all of its issues, is much better at assimilating Muslims and keeping the radicalism at bay.

You should see in the story that many of Galloway's supporters did not like this woman, as she was an out-spoken Muslim Woman who didn't wear the Hijab. Apparently, his supporters don't believe in Women making choices for themselves.

85 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:45:48pm

re: #80 Gus

Yes but this seems to have become their raison d'être. They're climbing the castle on this. Making their last stand.

Really? What's changed from ten years ago? Seems like stuff is much like it ever was.

They're going to get nukes. If the regime remains in power, they'll eventually get nukes, because technology advances. Every asshole state on earth will be able to get nukes.

As technology increases, the size and power of conventional destructive devices is going to increase, too. If global warming doesn't devastate civilization, it's going to become an increasingly dangerous world.

The real problem to solve is "How do you actually do regime change?" and nobody knows the answer to that.

86 Gus  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:46:26pm

re: #85 Obdicut

Really? What's changed from ten years ago? Seems like stuff is much like it ever was.

They're going to get nukes. If the regime remains in power, they'll eventually get nukes, because technology advances. Every asshole state on earth will be able to get nukes.

As technology increases, the size and power of conventional destructive devices is going to increase, too. If global warming doesn't devastate civilization, it's going to become an increasingly dangerous world.

The real problem to solve is "How do you actually do regime change?" and nobody knows the answer to that.

Nothing much has changed. I never disagreed with that.

87 ProGunLiberal  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:49:10pm

re: #84 ProGunLiberal

Excerpt to what I was referring to:

Some men in Respect hated the fact that she was a non-hijab-wearing Muslim woman, she says. "The atmosphere around Respect was so hostile to women. I was seen as an outspoken, opinionated woman who had ideas, who made things happen, who organised events and the guys didn't like it at all."

She says she had poured her heart out to Khan, who sent her an email suggesting how to cope in the hostile environment of the constituency office. In the email, he reminds her that "all [Galloway's] previous PAs have had short shelf lives" and that the fact that his last PA, also called Aisha, had refused to talk to her was "always an indication".

He added: "You know that GG will do whatever to protect his name and an easy time [sic]." Knowing she was thinking of leaving, he warned her: "Be CAREFUL that u don't go from the frying pan into the fire. There were already issues within the Respect Brad[ford]."

88 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:51:09pm

re: #78 Obdicut

There is no real reason to believe that if Iran got a nuke they'd use it on Israel. The only reason to think that is to think that everyone involved in the decision-making process for this act was fanatically suicidal.

It's possible. It's not likely. Iran most likely wants a nuke because having nukes gives you a better bargaining position, and because foreign attempts to destroy the nuke program help them maintain control.

Iran knows that the Samson option is always on the table. While I don't feel entirely comfortable ruling out the idea that they would trigger that in an attempt to bring down Armageddon, my greater fear is that they will use an attack on their program as an opportunity to send missiles at Israel, thereby gaining high Israeli casualties that would not lead to nuclear retaliation. They'd pay, but they'd pay what they might consider an acceptable price for advantage.

89 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:54:15pm

re: #87 ProGunLiberal

Excerpt to what I was referring to:

This article is ten years old, but still useful in its description of contemporary Bradford:

The Man Who Predicted the Race Riots by Theodore Dalrymple

90 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:56:54pm

re: #88 SanFranciscoZionist

I'm not getting what the advantage they gain from that scenario, though.

91 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 8:59:04pm

re: #90 Obdicut

I'm not getting what the advantage they gain from that scenario, though.

The point of the attack would be to kill Israelis and damage Israel. The advantage gained would be a shift in the "correlation of forces" between Israel and her enemies.

92 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:01:26pm

re: #89 Dark_Falcon

Dalrymple is adored by racists and anti-immigrant assholes. I can't tell if he just doesn't get the uses to what he writes is put or encourages it, but either way, I find him a deeply shitty human being.

93 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:03:00pm

re: #91 Dark_Falcon

Israel wouldn't be weakened by that, though. I don't really know what would happen if Iran did that. It would probably spiral. That might actually be a WW III scenario. Yay.

But just killing people in another country doesn't weaken that country. Not unless you kill a lot.

94 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:03:30pm

re: #69 Ming

Iran's financial and military support for Hamas and Hezbollah can be considered "acts of war", especially by Israelis whose loved ones are murdered by those groups. Iran is playing a very dangerous game.

How many Iranians were killed by American and western supplied weapons to Iraq? Including the components for the chemical weapons used on Iranians. And Hamas gets most of it's support from Sunnis.

95 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:07:15pm

re: #92 Obdicut

Yet, having read his accounts of his travels in Africa and the Middle East alongside his writings about England, it seems clear to me that Dalrymple (really the sometimes pen name of Anthony Daniels) is no racist.

96 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:07:16pm

re: #90 Obdicut

I'm not getting what the advantage they gain from that scenario, though.

Potentially increased bargaining power, such as they might get from a functional nuclear weapon. Fear and anger at home and still further isolation from the Western powers, which they may feel increases their hold on the country. Iranians appear to poll favorably for the nuclear program, regardless of what they think about the government.

It's a pretty-bad-case scenario, and one I don't consider likely. I think it's far more likely that Israel will continue to snipe at and delay the program, and Iran will continue to pass on goodies to Hamas and Hezbollah.

A lot depends on how bad things get with Syria, as well.

And, as I say, I honestly don't know how crazy the powers that be may have actually gotten. I think Iran is crazy like a fox. I think the notion that they're fully prepared to bomb the whole region to hell and back in the hopes of the twelfth Imam making a guest appearance is almost certainly wrong, but damn, I would hate to make a mistake there.

Then again, for all I know, they just want a nuke so they can turn Iraq into one big parking lot for once and all.

Too many damn factors.

97 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:07:35pm

re: #94 Destro

How many Iranians were killed by American and western supplied weapons to Iraq? I

Very few. We didn't supply that many weapons to Iraq. We were supplying them to Iran, though. We supplied Iraq with targeting data and other intel, which allowed them to kill Iranians.

You know, facts and shit.

98 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:07:45pm

re: #37 palomino

I do tend to rile up the Bibi brigades on here though. Someone has to.

99 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:09:34pm

re: #38 Dark_Falcon

If you seriously support Assad over the FSA, then I consider you to be no better morally than Rodan of the Stalker Blog. You are by your own words willing to support murderous tyrants if they move things in directions you think are the right ones. If you'd been alive in the 1930's, I feel sure in saying that you would have supported Stalin!

By your words and links, Destro, you have revealed yourself to be an enemy of democracy and freedom. Being also unwilling to listen to the views of others, you are unworthy of future engagement or discussion from me.

I would have supported Stalin......against Hitler. So did the USA. Right wing really is brain damaged about facts? Does anyone else not remember the USA helped Stalin? Hello, anyone?

100 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:09:41pm

re: #98 Destro

I do tend to rile up the Bibi brigades on here though. Someone has to.

I fucking hate Netanyahu and I think you're a really narrow-minded, spoiled asshole. So try another rationale.

I still find it funny I had to spend like 40 posts convincing you that PBS was private and your Quixotic fight to prevent it from being privatized should instead be a fight to stop it getting defunded. That's going to be a classic to me for awhile.

101 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:10:43pm

re: #99 Destro

Germany didn't attack Russia until 1941.

Facts and shit again.

102 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:11:27pm

re: #40 Varek Raith

Assad can go fuck himself.

Assad can indeed go fuck himself. I am still fine with him killing Islamist rebels as he is doing the self fucking.

103 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:11:48pm

re: #97 Obdicut

Very few. We didn't supply that many weapons to Iraq. We were supplying them to Iran, though. We supplied Iraq with targeting data and other intel, which allowed them to kill Iranians.

You know, facts and shit.

Indeed. the majority of people killed by weapons the US supplied during the Iran-Iraq War (thus excluding those supplied to Iran prior to the fall of the Shah) were Iraqis, killed by Improved TOW ATGMs supplied to Iran as part of Iran-Contra. And those missiles were conventional weapons, almost exclusively used against military targets.

Note: Nothing in this post should be read to condone the Iran-Contra arms-for-hostages scheme in any way.

104 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:15:52pm

re: #101 Obdicut

Germany didn't attack Russia until 1941.

Facts and shit again.

Stalin wanted to attack Germany over Czechoslovakia in 1938 but the democracies declined. Booya!

Where did you learn your history?

How far back in time will you have to go till I don't support Stalin?

105 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:21:47pm

re: #104 Destro

Stalin wanted to attack Germany over Czechoslovakia in 1938 but the democracies declined. Booya!

Phase 1: Set up Argumentational Strawman.

Where did you learn your history?

How far back in time will you have to go till I don't support Stalin?

Phase 2: Set Strawman ablaze with inflammatory hostility.

And of course:

Phase 3: Profit!

106 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:23:01pm

re: #104 Destro

I didn't mention your overweening arrogance, but I guess that's covered under calling you spoiled.

Stalin didn't want to attack Czechoslovakia. He wanted to make an anti-Fascist alliance and tell Hitler he wasn't allowed to invade anywhere, thanks very much. Kind of a distinction.

Anyway, I don't get why you'd support Stalin just because he wanted to stop the annexation of Czechoslovakia because he feared it'd lead to a Nazi attack on Russia. It doesn't have to make sense, though, it's Destro.

107 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:23:33pm

re: #43 ProGunLiberal

No, it means the US Foreign Policy is schizophrenic. As it has been since the end of the Cold War.

I would not mind American policy if they did not try and make it seem America is motivated by morality and humanitarianism. American foreign policy does some good, does some evil and does some stupid.

But I don't respect it and in many cases I oppose foreign policy. I don't get why Americans support a Romney GOP clone like Netanyahu over more level headed Israelis and then claim to support Obama's foreign policy.

108 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:26:12pm

re: #52 Obdicut

Maybe it's something in the way I was raised, but I've never been into group blame. It's never made any sense to me.

Anyhoo, according to Destro:

Image: kurdish_children_polishing_shoes_in_hewler_np00433875.jpg

Not innocents.

According to the American State dept that was on Iran. In any case all I did is state that as a Westerner I rather live in Assad's Syria or Saddan's Iraq than Saudi Arabia's Wahhabist state or in Iran (and Iran is somewhat better than Saudi Arabia) or in any Islamist state.

It is your side of asshats that are trying to run away from that truth.

109 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:27:15pm

re: #107 Destro

I would not mind American policy if they did not try and make it seem America is motivated by morality and humanitarianism. American foreign policy does some good, does some evil and does some stupid.

But I don't respect it and in many cases I oppose foreign policy. I don't get why Americans support a Romney GOP clone like Netanyahu over more level headed Israelis and then claim to support Obama's foreign policy.

Your confusion might be helped if you actually listened when people told you they weren't Netanyahu supporters.

110 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:31:04pm

re: #108 Destro

I'm not trying to run away from the truth that you'd rather live in Saddam's Iraq than in Saudi Arabia. I'm mainly mocking you for it, and pointing out that it's a really stupid position to hold, especially since in either country you'd probably be suspected of being a spy and have some uncomfortable questions put to you.

It's a stupid, facile argument with absolutely no merit to it. Probably sounded good in your head though. Actually, probably still sounds good to you, and you really don't care, for some reason, that it impresses no one else.

111 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:31:22pm

re: #109 SanFranciscoZionist

Your confusion might be helped if you actually listened when people told you they weren't Netanyahu supporters.

Now: who do you like for PM?

112 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:35:53pm

re: #97 Obdicut

Very few. We didn't supply that many weapons to Iraq. We were supplying them to Iran, though. We supplied Iraq with targeting data and other intel, which allowed them to kill Iranians.

You know, facts and shit.

Targeting data used for chemical weapons since it requires knowledge of weather patterns, deployments and such.

113 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:38:49pm

re: #112 Destro

Targeting data used for chemical weapons since it requires knowledge of weather patterns, deployments and such.

That is supposition on your part, since planning of conventional offensives or even insurgent actions is aided by accurate maps and weather information.

114 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:39:20pm

re: #112 Destro

Targeting data used for chemical weapons since it requires knowledge of weather patterns, deployments and such.

Also targeting data for normal weapons, but yeah, Iraq used a shitload of chemical weapons in that war, some of which they got from us, but not actually that many. It's really pretty unimportant: We were arming the Iranians, we were giving data to Iraq, we were using the proceeds to fund right-wing terrorism. It was a stupid evil party and everyone was invited.

See how I manage to make extremely harsh criticisms of US foreign policy without ostracizing myself or making people laugh at me. It's fun! Give it a try sometime.

115 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:41:05pm

re: #106 Obdicut

One more time, asshat. I made a case that when faced with a choice of living in hellholes - say the secular leaning Ba'athists vs Islamist regimes I feel a Ba'athist regime is the better choice....and the USA is making such choices by backing rebellions manned by Islamists and few secularists in the hopes the secularists can bring the Islamists along.

In Syria you have a sectarian civil war being fought for Islamist visions of Syria rather than any form of 'freedom'.

How many such adventures does the west have to have till it learns from the several fuck ups of the past.

116 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:43:05pm

re: #114 Obdicut

It was a stupid evil party and everyone was invited.

QF major T.

117 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:43:40pm

re: #115 Destro

Calling Obdicut an 'asshat' is not only ugly but also wrong. He is a smart and thoughtful man who doesn't let his emotions rule him. It's a good way to live, you should give it a whirl sometime.

118 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:44:59pm

re: #115 Destro

Yeah. You'd rather sit in pig shit than sit in dog shit. Sorry if I don't find that interesting or sensible.

In Syria you have a sectarian civil war being fought for Islamist visions of Syria rather than any form of 'freedom'.

Cool that you know what everyone is fighting for. I'm kind of amazed there aren't any Syrians who want democracy, or even just some form of moderate Islamic state. Did you borrow Killgore's psychic radar to get this information, or is this part of your general knowledge?

How many such adventures does the west have to have till it learns from the several fuck ups of the past.

I dunno. You're a Westerner saying you'd support a dictator killing revolutionaries because their politics bother you-- that's a mistake the West has been making for a long time, so I'm really not sure where the lecture of wisdom on your part is coming from.

119 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:46:59pm

re: #114 Obdicut

Also targeting data for normal weapons, but yeah, Iraq used a shitload of chemical weapons in that war, some of which they got from us, but not actually that many. It's really pretty unimportant: We were arming the Iranians, we were giving data to Iraq, we were using the proceeds to fund right-wing terrorism. It was a stupid evil party and everyone was invited.

See how I manage to make extremely harsh criticisms of US foreign policy without ostracizing myself or making people laugh at me. It's fun! Give it a try sometime.

Yea, so why can't I be anti-American with a record you even consider shitty? You see that as moral? And now I am supposed to cheer Syrian intervention by this very same kind of people? Fuck that.

120 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:49:24pm

re: #117 Dark_Falcon

Oh, I don't care if he calls me an asshat. I love the word asshat. It conjures up a great mental image.

And besides, we have Destro angrily lecturing us about avoiding the classic mistakes of the West while saying he'd support a dictator oppressing his people. That's not going to get old any time soon.

121 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:49:49pm

re: #118 Obdicut

I dunno. You're a Westerner saying you'd support a dictator killing revolutionaries because their politics bother you-- that's a mistake the West has been making for a long time, so I'm really not sure where the lecture of wisdom on your part is coming from.

Maybe I'm just making this shit up, but I could swear I've heard a number of right-wing American voices over the years say we had to support the secular dictator, because if he was toppled the Islamists would get voted right in.

I could swear they even said that about SADDAM.

Must be mistaken. It's clearly new wisdom.

122 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:50:27pm

re: #118 Obdicut

I dunno. You're a Westerner saying you'd support a dictator killing revolutionaries because their politics bother you

Here is American allies 'The Free Syrian Army' doing what the Serbs did to the Bosnians but in this case the west looks away.

[Link: www.chicagotribune.com...]

In split between neighbors, Sunnis besiege 2 Shiite villages, showing Syria's divides

123 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:50:52pm

re: #119 Destro

You can be anti-American. I'm not sure what the fuck it means, except apparently that it makes you immune to irony, apparently.

Keep on cheering Assad's oppression of his people. It's not like Western support for a dictator has ever caused us problems, you gorgeous little loon, you.

124 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:53:09pm

re: #123 Obdicut

You can be anti-American. I'm not sure what the fuck it means, except apparently that it makes you immune to irony, apparently.

Keep on cheering Assad's oppression of his people. It's not like Western support for a dictator has ever caused us problems, you gorgeous little loon, you.

Maybe some freedom loving Americans will get killed from it down the line like in Lybia. Circle complete.

125 Mocking Jay  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:53:44pm
126 Obdicut  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:54:56pm

Hey guys, we should all avoid the classic military mistake of not having any reserves. Now, let's go invade Russia by land in the winter!

127 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:55:20pm

re: #122 Destro

what I don't get is how that justifies supporting a murderous asshole like Assad. He's not only oppressing his own people, but he oppresses the people of Lebanon as well. How could possibly think he should be supported, even with words?

128 Mocking Jay  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:58:38pm

Mystery Science Footballs 3,000

129 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 9:59:45pm

re: #128 Mocking Jay

Scottish Arms Dealer Screwball 3,000

Improved. ;)

130 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 10:15:54pm

re: #127 Dark_Falcon

This is why:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

131 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 10:17:32pm

re: #130 Destro

This is why:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Those towns are hostile to the FSA and supply militia to Assad. The laws of war allow for the blockade of a town in order to compel its surrender.

132 Mocking Jay  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 10:19:48pm

re: #130 Destro

This is why:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Do you think we should support Assad, the rebels, or none of the above?

133 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 10:21:39pm

re: #132 Mocking Jay

Do you think we should support Assad, the rebels, or none of the above?

None of the above. Stay out. By the USA helping the rebels (with the fucking Saudis importing al-qaeda like jihadists) how is this a good thing?

134 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 10:24:56pm

re: #131 Dark_Falcon

Those towns are hostile to the FSA and supply militia to Assad. The laws of war allow for the blockade of a town in order to compel its surrender.

But I am the evil one for saying this is bad and the rebels are bad?

And on the other hand your own words:

No nation can indefinitely tolerate having a city of 80,000+ people in a state of rebellion. - posted by Dark_Falcon on 10/20/2012 8:49:18 pm PDT

Unless of course they are Syrian nation against the rebels then they should tolerate it because - fuck you, Assad the State Dept said so that's why.

American hipocrisy. Thank you.

135 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 10:30:01pm

re: #134 Destro

No, because I'd rather the FSA wins the civil war. I hope they capture Bashar Assad, put him on trial, expose his murderous cruelties to the world, convict him of those same cruelties, and then hang him by his neck until he is dead.

136 Destro  Sat, Oct 20, 2012 10:58:21pm

re: #135 Dark_Falcon

No, because I'd rather the FSA wins the civil war. I hope they capture Bashar Assad, put him on trial, expose his murderous cruelties to the world, convict him of those same cruelties, and then hang him by his neck until he is dead.

So you are an al-Qaeda sympathizer after all?

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]
Despite Syrian rebels’ insistence to the contrary, there is evidence to support Syrian government contentions that more foreign fighters are heading to Syria to fight a “holy war” against the forces of President Bashar al-Assad.

137 Obdicut  Sun, Oct 21, 2012 5:50:52am

re: #136 Destro

The jihadists are not always welcomed by the Free Syrian Army, Abdeh added.

“They are wary of what they call the ‘Takfiri’ trend within the jihadist movement. The more extreme elements that don’t view the struggle in Syria as a struggle for democracy and freedom, but rather as a struggle to bring about an Islamic state.”

Do you just dismiss Abdeh's account out of hand, Destro, because after all he doesn't have access to your psychic radar?

138 Destro  Sun, Oct 21, 2012 9:36:34am

re: #137 Obdicut

Did you miss the report that the jihadis have taken over the Free Syrian Army on the ground?

Of coursre you did.

Americans like you are the stupidest of the species these days. They just ignore reality for their own made up bullshit view of they never leave Stateside to visit:

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Islamic Jihadists Are Now The Most Organized Force Of The Syrian Opposition

Michael Kelley | Oct. 11, 2012, 3:34 PM

Powerful Syrian Islamist brigades, frustrated by the increasingly fractured Free Syrian Army (FSA), are joining forces in an attempt to topple the regime of Bashar al-Assad, Reuters reports.

A citizen Deir Ezzor, a city in eastern Syria, told The Guardian that Islamist organizations “are the real fighters on the ground” while the FSA there “are only issuing statements” and “stockpiling weapons in the countryside for reasons we don’t understand.”

The man added that there is little coordination among FSA groups because there is “big conflict between the defected officers about who should be the commanders.” Consequently, people are now “more supportive of the jihadi organizations than the FSA.”

The jihadists brigades have decided to come together to form the “Front to Liberate Syria” and one jihadist leader told Reuters they have “more than 40,000 fighters now and the numbers are growing.”

139 Obdicut  Sun, Oct 21, 2012 9:38:16am

re: #138 Destro

I love when you cite a story that doesn't say what you say it says. That's always fun.

You're pretty adorable.

140 Dark_Falcon  Sun, Oct 21, 2012 9:38:30am

re: #136 Destro

So you are an al-Qaeda sympathizer after all?

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]
Despite Syrian rebels’ insistence to the contrary, there is evidence to support Syrian government contentions that more foreign fighters are heading to Syria to fight a “holy war” against the forces of President Bashar al-Assad.

And that does not invalidate the fact that most of the FSA wants peace and a freer society. But for the moment, they need the extra boots on the ground if they expect to prevail. War often requires ugly compromises, Destro. After all, Roosevelt and Churchill made an ugly compromise when they agreed to supply Stalin and the USSR, but it helped defeat Hitler.

141 Destro  Sun, Oct 21, 2012 11:53:18am

re: #140 Dark_Falcon

So jihadists and al-Qaeda are better than Assad?

Because in my view they are worse. That's my point.

142 Destro  Sun, Oct 21, 2012 11:55:41am

re: #139 Obdicut

I love when you cite a story that doesn't say what you say it says. That's always fun.

You're pretty adorable.

I am so cute - because I can read an article that states jihadists make up the bulk of the FSA but you can read that and say, nuh uh! And cite no reason for that assessment.

Because in your retard world: "Islamic Jihadists Are Now The Most Organized Force Of The Syrian Opposition" does not mean that somehow.....

143 Obdicut  Sun, Oct 21, 2012 12:00:44pm

re: #142 Destro

I am so cute - because I can read an article that states jihadists make up the bulk of the FSA but you can read that and say, nuh uh! And cite no reason for that assessment.

The article doesn't say that. It says one jihadist leader claimed they made up half of the forces opposing Assad. And moreover, it makes the point that the FSA-- who you've been railing against-- are not extremist Islamists.

That's what I mean about it being cute when you cite an article and claim it says something different. It's very Fox News of you, very Romney of you.

144 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Oct 21, 2012 6:48:18pm

re: #143 Obdicut

The article doesn't say that. It says one jihadist leader claimed they made up half of the forces opposing Assad. And moreover, it makes the point that the FSA-- who you've been railing against-- are not extremist Islamists.

That's what I mean about it being cute when you cite an article and claim it says something different. It's very Fox News of you, very Romney of you.

Very American of him...

///


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2016-01-01 10:29 am PST
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds Tweet

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Square Cash Shop at amazon
as an LGF Associate!
Recent PagesClick to refresh
#Thegreatpoolpondconversion - 191014After three weeks of meh pictures and invisible progress, we were determined to have something to photograph today. And we were eager to start on the upper shelf. We were close, but not quite there, and we were determined! To ...
DangerMan
1 day, 16 hours ago
Views: 193 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 3
Tweets: 0 • Share to Facebook
Jack Klatt - Highway Lines (Live at Radio Heartland)Jack Klatt performs 'Highway Lines' from his 2019 album, 'It Ain't The Same,' live in the studio of Radio Heartland at The Current.
Thanos
3 days, 17 hours ago
Views: 190 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
Brittany Howard Performing ‘13th Century Metal’ Live on KCRW Brittany Howard's solo debut album Jaime puts her powerhouse vocals on full display. It also takes us front and center to her very personal journey of loss, love and self-discovery. We're thrilled to welcome her back to KCRW to ...
Thanos
5 days, 11 hours ago
Views: 334 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
(15) Rodrigo Y Gabriela - Electric Soul (Live on KEXP) kexp.org presents Rodrigo y Gabriela performing "Electric Soul" live in the KEXP gathering space. Recorded July 14, 2019. Host: Stevie ZoomAudio Engineers: Kessiah Gordon & Kevin SuggsAudio Mixer: David MarchantCameras: Jim Beckmann, Alaia D'Alessandro, Luke Knecht & Justin WIlmoreEditor: ...
Thanos
5 days, 11 hours ago
Views: 357 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 1
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
Fresh Air (Remastered) Quicksilver Messenger Service Provided to YouTube by Universal Music Group Fresh Air (Remastered) · Quicksilver Messenger Service Classic Masters ℗ 2001 Capitol Records, LLC Released on: 2007-01-01 Producer: Quicksilver Messenger ServiceStudio Personnel, Mastering Engineer: Robert VosgienComposer: Jesse Oris Farrow Auto-generated by YouTube. ...
Thanos
5 days, 11 hours ago
Views: 381 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 2
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
Jon Anderson - Song of SevenFrom the 1980 album "Song of Seven".
Thanos
1 week ago
Views: 415 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
#Thegreatpoolpondconversion - 191006 Today we have to take a few steps back in explanation. The pond is going to have three levels. Sort of an upside down ziggurat. The lowest level, in the center we call ‘the channel’. After the liner is ...
DangerMan
1 week, 2 days ago
Views: 551 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 4
Tweets: 0 • Share to Facebook
Jon Anderson - Change We MustFrom the 1994 album "Change We Must".
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 611 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 2 • Share to Facebook
North Mississippi Allstars - ‘Drunk Outdoors’ [Audio Only]From the album 'Up and Rolling,' available October 4, 2019: geni.us
Thanos
1 week, 4 days ago
Views: 588 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 1 • Share to Facebook
Dr. Demento & John Cafiero - What’s in My Bag? Dr. Demento and John Cafiero go shopping at Amoeba Music in Los Angeles. Check out their picks:Cal Stewart - Uncle Josh's Letter from Home (78) Spike Jones - Ugga Ugga Boo Ugga Boo Boo Ugga (78) Johnny Otis Orchestra ...
Thanos
2 weeks, 3 days ago
Views: 909 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 0
Tweets: 13 • Share to Facebook