This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Never Say "Never"
»
- 67657 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Contact Information:
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Suggested Reading:
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer, our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure. Here's our Cookie Policy.
Cuba?
Why not draw a cartoon about the National Intelligence Estimate which states that Iran is not building nukes, that we would know about it if they tried and that they are rational actors.
Or draw a cartoon about a country that has nukes but won't admit it while planning a "Samson Option" in which they destroy the world if they don't get their way.
Now those would be funny.
Cartoonist Ramirez is sucking some major neocon cock in his career. Thomas Nast, he ain't.
weak cartoon...not ZH worthy
Ramírez will NEVER get a clue...
Sanctions worked on keeping nukes from North Korea, we should have just stayed the course with Iran. Payback for kicking out the Shah. Incidentally, shouldn't the NPT signed by a dictator installed by direct American intervention against democracy be less of a cause for sanctions than Israel's free pass granted by their refusal to sign the NPT in the first place? Yet Iran is somehow the aggressor, after not starting a war in over 200 years. Our media so gleefully spinning comments like "Israel is temporary" into "We want to bring about the extermination of all Jewish people." 25 years of torture under the US-Shah's dictatorship? Followed by: here's some chemical weapons Saddam. We actually have a track record of doing to them what we accuse them of "wanting to do", all so BP could have another sip at the straw.
Yeah, the Iranians traded 25 years of torture undeer the Shah's dictatorship for 36 years of torture under a shia theocracy. That'll teach BP a lesson
The Iranian people overthrew the Shah. If they found the Ayatollahs to be equally objectionable they could overthrow them as well but they haven't. I don't imagine that the Ayatollahs are all that great but the Shah was basically the agent of a foreign government. That sort of thing generally pisses people off.
"I don't imagine that the Ayatollahs are all that great but the Shah was basically the agent of a foreign government. That sort of thing generally pisses people off."
I believe anyone who has escaped the lunatic asylum that is the nation of Iran today can confirm to you that the mullah's are not all that great.
But at least we've gotten past all the positively glowing pretenses of a "peaceful nuclear energy program" (overseen by these very same mullah's) in the wonderfully theocratic, flowers in the hair, non-dogmatic luna, errr...nation of Iran (lmao!) and have moved on...to not a question of IF they will get nuclear weapons...but WHEN.
Apparently best estimates by our own "zio-controlled government" (if we are to believe the paid Storm Front Troopers, GE, Siemens, Westinghouse-Toshiba etc. shills) says that'll be in about ten years.
So party on Garthinian's ;-)
I'm sure that having their "great satan" has let them extinguish freedom after freedom to get where they now are. Sound familiar? Only in their case they had more to work with than just people's baseline stupidity.
Yes, it does sound familiar...lol...it's really pretty easy to herd stupid cats ;-)
ebay? But that's the last last straw. When they sell them at the dollar store with smart phones...
Why do they do Obamas ears like that? They used to do W's like that too... I don't get it...
Because that's what political cartoonists do, emphasize the most noticeable feature about someone and magnify it 10-fold. That, plus they both do look like Jugheads.
They've got them, no one wants to explicitly acknowledge it, far better to continue to pretend it hasn't happened, Iran will cooperate and keep quiet because if they blab or test it just kicks along nuke proliferation and all other options with it. Ambiguity is far more useful, and also why Israel keeps using it as well.
Pretending worked well for Saddam.
Complete rubbish, are you just an idiot or what?
Sadam didn't 'pretend', he actually had none, and his govt claimed repeatedly, for over a decade, that he had no WMDs. And that was proven correct.
So you are trying to implant an alternative version of the history (that we actually lived though fool). There were no Iraqi WMDs found in 2003, because there never were any that needed to be removed.
Apparently best estimates by our own "zio-controlled government" (if we are to believe the paid Storm Front Troopers, GE, Siemens, Westinghouse-Toshiba etc. shills) says that'll be in about ten years.
Weren't they saying the same thing 20 years ago?
A group of mullahs over threw the Shaw having fomented a seemingly popular revolution.
In their view , The Shaw was violating their fundamentalist Mohammedan catechisms.
I am no fan of Savak, though we allow multiple agencies here to have the same , if not more latitude to impose their unelected wills on us.
i have never had any contact with fundamentalists of any faith, but the Persians I worked with feared Savak as well, even though they were well on their way to becoming US citizens.
For the average Persian , and the well skilled and educated, The Shaw was a good thing, raising the country into the twentieth century.
But, it all fell apart.
When I was in college 3/4s of my Mechanical Engineering class were Iranians...I wont say kids..because some of them were in their 30s....they got $75,000 a year to go...they all bought trans ams and lived the high life for them..for me...I could not understand one word in class....and they did not help you out at all.....they all got As...me not so good...I actually was a little mad that a US citizen was second class in his own college....
The Shah was secular...the Muslim people will never overthrow anyone that is an agent of the 'The Prophet'. The moment they take the Ayatollah and give him the Saddam treatment for abuses...I'll believe the Muslim people are thinking for themselves.
The CIA admits that they overthrew the elected government of Iran (which was secular) and installed the Shah. The American people say they love freedom and when they overthrow the CIA for abuses at home and abroad I'll believe them.
Schwarzkopf's daddy played a major role in forming/training SAVAK (Mossad also pitched in). He was also instrumental in the forced removal of popularly-elected Mohammad Mosaddegh.
http://www.ibtimes.com/irans-feared-savak-norman-schwarzkopfs-father-had...
And the zionist propaganda keeps infiltrating ZH.
The difference being that it simply doesn't cut it around here. I'd love to see an IQ comparison between ZH and say Huffington post or drudge - and all the other usual suspects for that matter; I have a feeling the others would be left eating dust.
"cartoonist Ramirez is sucking some major neocon cock in his career. Thomas Nast, he ain't."
Ignorantius....SUCKING SOME SOCIALIST/COMMUNIST PARTY COCK, by repeating socialist/communist party name calling and propaganda......Don't you stupes even know the ETyMOLOGY OF THE WORD NEOCON?
What the fuck is conservative about these people? Stupid people parrot words when they don't even know what they mean.
The problem with the word "neocon" runs far deeper than the generalization that the group is was actually founded and lead largely by Jewish Democrats who were aiming to redefine "conservative" foreign policy. The word is now mostly nothing more than a dog whistle to the useful idiots of various factions.
How many of those people who use the word neocon can:
1) Even name the other competing schools of thought in US foreign policy circles?
2) Much less compare and contrast the policy differences between those schools of thought?
3) Identify the areas of conflict and consensus between each school of foreign policy thought and the major political parties and ideological divisions of the Americans political class
4) Explain why certain famous foreign policy figures like Henry Kissinger are not neocons and explain the similarities and differences between their respective philosophies and neo conservatism
5) Identify the ideological brethren and key allies and adversaries of the neoconservatives in the G20 nations other than the US
6) Identify the historical predecessors of the neoconservatives and the other schools of thought in US foreign policy in #1 and explain how we got from point A to point B and what has and hasn't changed among those schools of thought.
If someone cannot answer all six of those questions and they are using the word neocon or neoconservative - they are a useful idiot. But more importantly- whose useful idiot are they and do they even understand that they are only a useful idiot?
Even if you can't answer all six of those questions, I went to the trouble of writing them because examining the correct answers strikes some familiar and alarming chords that prompt introspection in those whose who cannot answer, but have a functioning brainstem and don't like being caught naked when the tide goes out...
1) Rinse, Repeat
2) False Dichotomies and distinctions without differences
3) The names change, but the song remains the same
4) Same Same, but Different
Now the person who can actually interpolate those four themes and the correct answers to those six questions would impress me, but it's a high bar... my brother actually has a degree in International Relations from a respected school and works for the State Department, and (probably) couldn't answer them correctly off the top of his head, but he'd also be the first to admit that what they "teach" you at school and the "reality" of the job are two very different things.
Knowing all that does not indicate that someone is smart. It indicates that most likely they wasted 4 or more years of their life getting a useless degree.
I will also make a not so radical assumption that someone who acquired one of these degrees most likely has a world view that puts him or her squarely in the statist camp.
It does not indicate that they are smart, but it does indicate that they can talk knowledgeably about foreign policy and can reasonably be expected to identify which strategic ambitions are served by the propaganda that is public foreign policy and publicly disseminated foreign policy analysis.
What's sad and frightening for America's future is that those simple six questions should be covered in any 100-level elective survey course of US foreign policy or international relations at their local community college, but even a decade or two ago when my brother got his degree- the bulk of those undergraduate receiving undergraduate degrees specializing in the field couldn't answer those simple questions, and graduate and post graduate degree seekers would not be any more successful unless the answers were relevant to their specialization.
As to the "statist" camp- THEY ARE ALL STATISTS. Foreign policy is a function of the nation state, not of the natural human. ---
Seriously, if you are reading ANYTHING that implies that some group has some magic holier than thou non-statist solution to the worlds international policy ills... you need to RUN (or LAUGH) and get some more serious and diverse sources of information upon which to form your own opinions. Even isolationism is inherently Statist.
---
Moreover, if someone cannot answer those simple six questions, why would you trust ANYTHING they have to say about US foreign policy?
---
The bullshit that flew when people primarily received their information from newspapers, news weekly's, and think tank policy papers was bad enough (unfortunately along with information many also received all their biases, soundbytes, one-sided analysis, and psychological programming from them)... Now we have the interwebs and social media and "thoughts" are measured in characters... even with the paid propaganda of TV commercials, they generally have 30 seconds to get their point across.
The neocons are nothing new, nothing special and nothing uniquely American (or even uniquely Jewish, except for their misguided [I'm being polite today] enhancement of the existing alignment between the US and Israel). They are however, dangerous, counter productive, imperialistic and amoral - just like a lot of other people who are entrusted with managing and influencing US foreign policy.
They don't need nukes. They have something far better. And they have em via a nuclear engineer. Probably a living Tesla ..
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Keshe_Foundation
Notice who signed on first. Those that signed towards the end. Iran has a four (4) year jump on everyone else, all things -- Tesla ..
So, fair to guess, who will have the very first operational Teleforce weapon? Basically a particle beam that can either deny an enemy the use of their weaponry, and/or destroy anything at will from a city block (or smaller) to an entire county, state, or province.
The current USA SDI (Star Wars) is nowhere near this capability. Russia has Magrav. The USA does not ..
"Keshe asserts that they will be making commercial space flight available as early as 2014, using anti-gravity technology as well as new power production technology. They hope to make commercial flights to the moon available by as early as the end of 2016. "
Umm, I'm not seeing any tickets sold for their 2014 commercial space flights, and I'm pretty sure they aren't going to make it to the moon any time soon.
Yep sounds like Keshe needs to step back away from the Hookah for a little while. Did you check out the picture of the plasma reactor.....made out of a soda bottle. Thats some funny shit right there. The next Tesla? Nope, not even close, Tesla actually built shit that worked, not fantasy horse crap.
Keshe is Iranian. Iran is the target of the Anglo-American empire (or ZATO, or whatever you want to call it).
ERGO, Iran and Keshe are capable of extraordinary feats of research and technology that the West simply cannot possibly match. Because.
The NIE reports aren't all that reliable. The NIE overstated Iraq's WMD program and Dubya used the report to make his case to to invade Iraq.
The CRS has reported that NIE reports aren't all that good.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL33733.pdf
IThe Bush administration coerced the intelligence agencies into making statements they knew were not true. When it all came crashing down Tennet fell on his sword. It's apparent that after that some elements in the intelligence agencies decided not to let that happen again. bush wanted to attack Iran but according to his autobiography the NIE stopped him.
Obumboy's head looks like a cack and balls.
...euphemistically, a d*ckhead?
DaddyO
That much nukin' going on, we better just get outta the way...
pakistan, india and israel.
and moar
Well how ya sposed to protect yourself from Lloyd Blankfein if ya ain't got nukes. All them African countries need nukes. Brazil, Argentina, Peru, Venezuela, Mexico and Texas needs nukes too. Everyone needs nukes.
Ha, fucking Ha, Tylers.
Notice there no mention of "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel", "Israel"?
I'm more concerned with who actually controls US nukes, personally.
Point taken ..
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2014/05/20/too-classified-to-publish-bush-n...
This is the kind of stuff ZH and Tylers need to put more focus on, and front page and center ..
They start now, they will be only 1 year and ~3 months late to the party ..
Better late than never ..
so many hasbaras
never say never, tyler...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0fPZrPV3M
There is no mention of Israel because there was never a statement that they would never have nuclear weapons.
So whats your point???
And is probable the US helped them get nuclear weapons. We all know Israel is the USA's favourite little baby, and their lobby runs half congress. But that isn't anything to do with the story of this thread.
Because Israel's possession of nuclear weapons outside of the accepted non-proliferation framework makes foreign aid to that country illegal under the Arms Export Control Act
AECA Section 101(a) PROHIBITIONS; SAFEGUARDS AND MANAGEMENT. —Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, no funds made available to carry out the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 or this Act may be used for the purpose of providing economic assistance (including assistance under chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961), providing military assistance or grant military education and training, providing assistance under chapter 6 of part II of that Act, or extending military credits or making guarantees, to any country which the President determines delivers nuclear enrichment equipment, materials, or technology to any other country on or after August 4, 1977, or receives such equipment, materials, or technology from any other country on or after August 4, 1977, unless before such delivery—
(1) the supplying country and receiving country have reached agreement to place all such equipment, materials, or technology, upon delivery, under multilateral auspices and management when available; and
(2) the recipient country has entered into an agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency to place all such equipment, materials, technology, and all nuclear fuel and facilities in such country under the safeguards system of such Agency.
(b) CERTIFICATION BY PRESIDENT OF NECESSITY OF CONTINUED ASSISTANCE; DISAPPROVAL BY CONGRESS.—
(1) Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, the President may furnish assistance which would otherwise be prohibited under such subsection if he determines and certifies in writing to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate that—
(A) the termination of such assistance would have a serious adverse effect on vital United States interests; and
(B) he has received reliable assurances that the country in question will not acquire or develop nuclear weapons or assist other nations in doing so. Such certification shall set forth the reasons supporting such determination in each particular case.
(2)(A) A certification under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall take effect on the date on which the certification is received by the Congress. However, if, within thirty calendar days after receiving this certification, the Congress enacts a joint resolution stating in substance that the Congress disapproves the furnishing of assistance pursuant to the certification, then upon the enactment of that resolution the certification shall cease to be effective and all deliveries of assistance furnished under the authority of that certification shall be suspended immediately.
(B) Any joint resolution under this paragraph shall be considered in the Senate in accordance with the provisions of section 601(b) of the International Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act of 1976
Well played sir.
Hey! Who's up for a little nuclear proliferation for breakfast?!
Hey nmewn, "Christian" Zionist extraordinaire, which religion shows Christianity more respect - Islam, whose holy book teaches that Jesus was a prophet, and urges its followers to treat Christians with respect... or Judaism, where the Talmud tells Jews that Jesus is in hell, being tortured by 'the sages' in a pit of boiling excrement?
Hey BJ, "Islamic" nationalist extraordinaire that you are, selecting someone as "a dhimmi" and forcing them to pay the jizya is not showing respect for their religion or ANY one elses religion.
But of course, you already knew that.
And on a side note, Abraham DID NOT BUILD the Kaaba, Muhammad did. Muhammad basically riffed (or ripped off) of what religions were already established elsewhere, trying to get "the people of the desert" away from worshipping rocks & trees (lol) and assert his total control over them.
But of course...you already knew that too ;-)
I'm not an Islamic "nationalist". I just don't think it's a Christian act to throw 3/4 of a million people off their land on the basis of their religion, and then drop white phosphorus on their kids whenever some adults - who may or may not be related to them - get a bit uppitty.
But of course, you already knew that.
So still waiting to hear how Christianity teaches you to unflinchingly back the side that thinks the Son of God should be punished for eternity by trapping him in boiling excrement.
Or is taxation so much more important to you than how someone views Christ? Interesting.
BTW - no modern, established Muslim state imposes Jizya.
Oh right... there is ONE state that does; the Christian-slaughtering ISIS, who have been receiving aid by your heroes the Israelis.
But of course, you already knew that.
I really, really wonder how you're going to explain your preferences to the Prince of Peace when you meet your maker :-)
Laws were never designed to be universally enforced. They are more of a guideline, like a pirate's code. Just there for when they "need" them. I should be pretty obvious by now. They do this for our own good, cause they luv us.
+1
Sounding a bit anarcho-capiitalist this evening, Woodman. I like it.
I have little argument with you on many subjects, only with your focus. There are a lot more threats than just Israel. We live in a world chocked full of hostilities with many nuances. The whole world is looking as complex as the middle east where there are no clear lines of alliances and enemies. If you haven't noticed it is everyone for themselves, everyone simultaneously using each other as push and pull, enemies when advantageous and friend likewise. We can dislike much of what our country has done and currently represents, but i believe it is folly to think we should abandon our own interests.
We have NO friends...Jewish, Muslim or otherwise.
Israel is the only country I know of which has been caught spying on the US dozens of times and has attacked our servicemen and installations and yet receives billions of dollars in funds and munitions every year. The deck of the Liberty was littered with .50 BMG casings from strafing runs by Israeli aircraft which were supplied to them by the United States. They are one enemy whom we don't even have to attack in order to weaken. We could simply stop paying them.
A friend of my mother's from parochial school was killed on the deck of Liberty when he was struck by rocket fire. The Numec plant which the Israelis used to produce nuclear material to be smuggled illegally out of the US is now a toxic waste dump so deadly that it is guarded by Homeland Security 24/7. It's a a few miles from my house. This stuff hits home for me almost literally.
Look at this logically. Why did the USG do this at a time when Israel was still struggling to survive against its Arab (low quality threats)? What did Israel hold for leverage? I think nothing. I think Israel is a personal pet project of a western cabal that is still in the west. The cabal is the real threat, not Israel. Remove the cabal and unconditional US support and I believe the people of Israel would have a 'come to Jesus' moment and greatly change their ways.
If you don't remove the cabal then nothing changes.
Yeah, not sure if that was funny or punny.
Helping Americans become aware of the crimes of Israel against the US and encouraging them to question US support for Israel unmasks members of the cabal when they try to convince people that giving weapons to those who have attacked them is a good idea.
When facts become known people can wake up. I've been looking at comments from all over the web regarding Russian involvement in Syria. I'm seeing widespread approval for Russian actions on websites from various nations and divergent political backgrounds. The average guy everywhere understands that fighting ISIS is the way to beat ISIS and that the US strategy of fighting those who fight ISIS is just plain crazy. Someday people may have the same clarity in regard to the real relationship between the US and Israel.
So explain to us how a weakened Israel helps stabilize the region? If the Muslim states still see Israel as a potential threat, will not their weakened state incentivise attacks, especially if they believe America will not back Israel in such a situation? Or is your preference that of Iran, to see Israel as a Jewish state, eliminated?
You're coming very close to openly admitting that your real priority is Israel and not the United States. How many Americas should die in defense of Israel in your opinion?: How many American servicemen should be machine gunned by Israelis before you will be satisfied that Israel is safe? To how many more of our enemies should Israel give US defense plans like they gave the NATO plans stolen by Pollard to the USSR before you'll be satisfied that Israel will not come to harm?
So, no answer. Just more Zionist crap. It's a honst question. Answer it.
It's really no business of mine so why should I have an answer? Iran and Israel are foreign nations which will have to work out their problems for themselves. The United States should not risk any American lives or waste any American money in such a conflict.
But why are you so upset about not getting the answer you wanted having said this:
Sat, 09/19/2015 - 01:40 | 6568321 OldwoodVote up!
1Vote down!
-2Silly billy. I have never defended Israel,
And as a self declared non-defender of Israel who would you like to see prevail in an Israel v. Iran contest and how many American lives and how much American money should be spent on determining the outcome?
Game. Set. Match! Well done and kudos!
The battle of those two states is a frame of mind within ideologies, they can both be wrong and dislike one another, we support isreal with financial laws designed to aid their cause, we dislike Iran because their ideologies can control ours. It's an educational blender of failure that lead to war like tendencies culimnating? with nuclear technology as the end of all discussions on their matters, except they never end.
we dislike Iran because their ideologies can control ours
Iran's ideologies can control our? What? All I see looking across the US political landscape is Israel's ideologies dominating.
And how does this refute what I had written? You are obsessed with Israel which I think blinds you to all other threats. Further your obvious disgust for your own country prevents you from any real analysis of threats. It's almost like you carry a self destructive guilt that tells you our past sins as a nation destine us to suffer and we should somehow embrace its horror as inevitable. I can accept our failures without finding the need to impose punishment on our people through simple neglect or surrender.
Lots of people hate us...for good cause potentially. Either accept and prepare or ignore and delude. We face threats, foreign and domestic, and don't think for a moment that our domestic threats are not above using foreign ones as their proxy. God knows we have done it.
Further your obvious disgust for your own country prevents you from any real analysis of threats.
You're the one who is dead set against any talk of defunding Israel despite the fact that they spy on us and attack us. You are the one who hates America while you claim to defend it. You also claim to be a Christian but you have no problem with the US killing non-combatant Christians or funding those who do. You are one seriously warped individual. People like you are a bigger threat to America than Iran ever could be.
Silly billy. I have never defended Israel, never discussed their funding and never suggested that Christian lives should be taken for any reason other than to win a war in which those same Christian lives were dedicated to the taking of my countrymen, Christians and all. You are really reaching here. I am pointing out that Iran IS a potential threat, and that Obama, who has a proven track record of destruction IN America is not acting in regard to Iran in our best interest. Further Iran is NOT a Christian nation, so why are you so concerned with my assessment of their threat as being anti Christian. You are definitely not a threat as your arguments lack logic. Only illustrating anti Zionist bias...which you are entitled to and possibly justifiably. Just not ALWAYS relevant.
I have never defended Israel, never discussed their funding
Have you forgotten that you said the following in this very thread?
So explain to us how a weakened Israel helps stabilize the region? If the Muslim states still see Israel as a potential threat, will not their weakened state incentivise attacks, especially if they believe America will not back Israel in such a situation? Or is your preference that of Iran, to see Israel as a Jewish state, eliminated?
I am pointing out that Iran IS a potential threat,
Yet you refuse to say who provided you with that information and why you consider it to be more reliable than the determination of all sixteen intelligence agencies and the Pentagon that Iran is not seeking nukes and that the Iranians are "rational actors."
You are definitely not a threat as your arguments lack logic.
You're spending an awful lot of time arguing with me for someone who thinks that that is the case.
Seriously you should read what I wrote rather than read INTO what I wrote. I asked how a weaken Israel helped to stabilize the ME and if your goal.was the destruction of Israel. I made no case FOR Israel whatsoever. You implied that. The potential threat of a nuclear Iran real OR perceived is my point and I NEVER said Israel was NOT a threat. Your bias bleeds everywhere.
So my belief that the US should avoid foreign entanglements just as Thomas Jefferson said proves my bias? Perhaps you should hop in your time machine and confront Mr. Jefferson for his hatred of the future state of Israel. He's far more eloquent than I am and might do damage to the Israeli cause -- a cause which seems to excite you a great deal despite the fact that you are a self proclaimed non-defender of Israel.
"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." -- Thomas Jefferson
"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." -- Thomas Jefferson
I do wonder if the founding fathers, despite the foundation they built, would be considered laughable today.
The answer is yes. The world of their time was no less complex. They handled it well.
The corollary is , would I want a "modern" to establish our fundamentals?
Hell No.
Seriously you should read what I wrote rather than read INTO what I wrote. I asked how a weaken Israel helped to stabilize the ME and if your goal.was the destruction of Israel. I made no case FOR Israel whatsoever. You implied that. The potential threat of a nuclear Iran real OR perceived is my point and I NEVER said Israel was NOT a threat. Your bias bleeds everywhere.
By stating (or implying) that our goal is/should be to "stabilize" a region - or even to stop it becoming less stable - you are (de facto) implying intervention in favour of the status quo; i.e, the perpetuation of Israel's existence.
Furthermore, one of the major sources of that region's instability was the creation of the State of Israel. And the West's maintenance of Israel's existence by covert and even outright military interventions and support for coups against any MENA regime that looked like it might start asserting an independent foreign policy can hardly be considered "stabilizing".
You're either being stupid or being disingenuous.
Israel Expansion project explained. "Us" is stealing land. Pull out your fucking wallet and pay for what you want like the rest of us.
O'Keefe - http://mp4videos.org/play/LM2Fi1rhYqc.html
Balkanization of surrounding countries/destability areas around Israel - Greater Israel Project
I would posit that you do not fully appreciate and/or understand/comprehend ..
The RKM ..
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/05/08/proposed-declaration-of-war-agai...
The .. (only one layer of the onion at a time for some)
The Law ?
... racuous laughing in the back of the room.....
The law!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5s9lMzMhAU
Ah, law writing.
Then, the Supreme Court redefines the words. Then, the President ignores them.
Billy
Well there ya go. It's illegal, so dad gum it, our leaders will abide by the law.
I feel so much better now.
K
Kina
You stated:
There is no mention of Israel because there was never a statement that they would never have nuclear weapons.
NOT CORRECT!
Actually, a weasel worded pledge by Israel was made in 1965
"' Israel would not be the first country to "introduce" nuclear weapons to the Middle East'"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi_Eshkol
Israel is the Real Terrorist State
Please watch, make your our conclusion.
Roi Tov would agree with you ..
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/02/10/roi-tov-missing-and-perhaps-sile...
Can we have a seperate thread for people to scream out of context Israel, Israel and Jew Jew etc all day long.
It kinda fucks the general threads it makes it look as though ZH populated by a bunch low IQ biggoted rednecked neaderthals.
I get the statements when they are put in the right context of the story, but simple Jew jew jew, Israel Israel blah blah... is 5 year old kid stuff.
*It kinda fucks the general threads it makes it look as though ZH populated by a bunch low IQ biggoted rednecked neaderthals.*
And your point would be . . . ?
That you just woke up this morning and discovered that the sun rises in the East?
Can we have a seperate thread for people to scream out of context Israel, Israel and Jew Jew etc all day long.
The entire premise that the US must bleed itself dry in order to prevent Iran from acquiring weapons which our own intelligence agencies say they are not trying to acquire is based on the idea that nuclear armed Israel must be protected form conventionally armed Iran. It is the friends of Israel who link Israel and Iran in their arguments. And for some reason you think that anyone with a different opinion should be silenced.
This cartoon is making a point that has nothing to do with Israel. It is about false reassurances, or down right lies, not about who should or shouldn't have nukes.
Yeah, the fact that every nation or organization mentioned is a perceived threat to Israel is merely a coincidence.
Come on now. You think Jordan, UAE, SA and Egypt are threats to Israel? Most have treaties and reasonably good relations. This about a ME nuke arms race. Even though Israel had had nukes for years it was never officially stated by the US until recently for the express purpose of avoiding an arms race. Regardless of your disgust for Israel, surely you can't believe that to have all of these countries pursuing nukes is a good thing. This is what virtually everyone has feared. AQ Khan did more than enough damage with real threats of open nuke warfare between India and Pakistan... Still an issue. With what's going on now in the ME and the world, does anyone feel safer with all of these actors armed up with nukes?
If the cartoon is about "a ME nuke arms race" then why is the only Middle Eastern nation with nuclear weapons specifically not mentioned? . Why pretend that you fail to understand the message which the cartoonist is trying to convey?
Regardless of your disgust for Israel, surely you can't believe that to have all of these countries pursuing nukes is a good thing.
In the National Intelligence Estimate all sixteen US intelligence agencies agree with "high confidence" that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons technology. The Pentagon has agreed with the assessment. The only people I know of who insist that Iran is building nuclear weapons are US and Israeli politicians and various pro-Israel interest groups. If a cartoon bomb drawn by Benjamin Netanyahu is considered to be more convincing to you than the combined determination of all US intelligence agencies and the Pentagon then I'd like to know how you arrived at that conclusion.
Again, no president has claimed we were going to prevent Israel from getting a bomb, which is why it is not indicated as having been predicted as such or anticipated in the future in this cartoon. Again, the premise is false or failed proclamations. Many other ME nations have pursued nukes including SA, but the US has not obliged to avoid this arms race. As far as Iran is concerned their nuke capability is almost all centered about their available enriched fuel. They already have the rockets and the delivery and bomb tech is readily available. Even in Obama's justification for this "treaty" he claims Iran would have the bomb within months to a year or two Max without it. Ten years with it. Are you calling our president a liar? About what? The terms of the deal or what the deal is supposed to accomplish? This is the core of the issue. Why is he doing it? What does it accomplish? What has Iran done that would demonstrate their position has changed for seven years ago? Why now? Do we need cheaper oil? I don't mean to over estimate Iran's threat as much as to question Obama's motives. What has he done for US lately... Or ever?
Again, no president has claimed we were going to prevent Israel from getting a bomb, which is why it is not indicated as having been predicted as such or anticipated in the future in this cartoon.
If the point of the cartoon is to highlight a ME nuke arms race then why put parameters on it (a president predicting who might have nukes in the future but not who has them now) which makes it impossible to present all the facts regarding ME nukes?
Even in Obama's justification for this "treaty" he claims Iran would have the bomb within months to a year or two Max without it. Ten years with it. Are you calling our president a liar? About what?
Yes! Where is Obama getting this information? All US intelligence agencies and the Pentagon say that Iran is not pursuing nukes at all! Is Obama holding hands with Bibi and staring into a crystal ball or what?
What has Iran done that would demonstrate their position has changed for seven years ago?
The National Intelligence Estimate says that Iran gave up nuke plans in 2003. So nothing has changed since seven years ago. Where are you getting your information? Why do you consider it to be more conclusive than the combined determination of sixteen intelligence agencies and the Pentagon?
AGAIN! the cartoon is about false assertions...lies made by past, present and potentially future presidents. NOT a nuke arms race. The reason to deny any single nation declared nukes was to prevent an arms race. The cartoon simply implies that all of these nations will likely aquire nukes.due to the resultant arms race. And again...if you think this is a good thing, I think you hate Israel too much. And you are saying Obama is lying about it and potentially acquiring nukes, BUT NOT ABOUT THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT. But still not why now. If they dropped their nuke ambitions in 03, why wait till now?what has changed?
AGAIN! the cartoon is about false assertions...lies made by past, present and potentially future presidents. NOT a nuke arms race.
You are the one who said the cartoon is about a ME arms race. Read your post AGAIN!
- reply
Sat, 09/19/2015 - 00:13 | 6568177 OldwoodVote up!
0Vote down!
-1Come on now. You think Jordan, UAE, SA and Egypt are threats to Israel? Most have treaties and reasonably good relations. This about a ME nuke arms race.
God this is stupid. The fact that THOSE countries are listed as implying future nukes is derived from the common belief that if Iran possesses nukes all other states will.want them. They see Iran as a threat.
But the cartoon is using this point to disparage lying politicians that constantly do this. Do you understand the difference?
Cartoon about lying politicians.
The reason their statements are lies is because of the belief that this will cascade into a fully nuked up ME.
The reason we should care is because a nuked up ME is unstable in the worse way. People who have warring each other forever and believe their highest calling is to die for Allah, may not be the best repository for a nuclear arms race, ya think?
Where did you receive your information that Iranian nukes are a threat and why do you consider that source to be more reliable than the sixteen US intelligence agencies and the Pentagon who say that the Iranians have no nuclear weapons program and are "rational actors?"
Like POTUS #41 (especially, especially), 42, 43, and ................... #44?
Let's give "W" a pass, just to be a bit generous. Then there is Cheney. No way he was clueless on these matters. Same for Barry Soetoro. Grant it, a [Bush]CIA grad, but not the sharpest knife in the drawer. Biden? And how well did his son profit from the Ukraine? Now Billy Boy, I think I could sit down and enjoy a beer with him. Hillary? Are you serious? Ask Lee Wanta. Personal friend of Vince Foster. Do you know why she is called the Lizard Queen?
I suggest you give that newly ingested "red pill" just a little more time to dissolve in your belly. Permeate the blood stream. The nervous system. Soak in well into ALL your synapses. In the interim, take a chance. Go ahead, you can do it! Go upstairs and take a peak in mom and dad's top dresser drawer ..
Take a course in learning how to -- read between the lines ..
AGAIN .. ask Roi Tov ..
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/02/10/roi-tov-missing-and-perhaps-sile...
So now the towers were nuked...by Jews???
Thread over and out.
Please explain why israeli demolitions experts were posing as art students on the 93 floor of the world trade center before the demolitions. If you can tell me why art students need hundreds of yards of fuses.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg7Qt4bV0B8
RIPS
Fat fingered phone dupe
This would have been a fine opportunity for you to answer the question: from whom are you getting your information that Iranian nukes are a threat when all sixteen US intelligence agencies and the Pentagon say they are not? But for some reason you just won't reveal your sources.
Maybe you should ask Iran's neighbors and not just Israel. They seem to have concerns. They are the ones threatening an arms race, not me. I know nothing because I only read, just like you. There have been a lot of conflicting intelligence regarding Iran's nukes, and our unemployment rates. Go figure. Who you going to believe? Who you want to believe right? My point remains, if this does result in a nuke arms race, EVEN IF ONLY BECAUSE IRAN'S NEIGHBORS BELIEVE THEY ARE BUILDING NUKES, then how in hell is this a good thing. Many are but looking for an excuse. And if they think Iran IS building nukes and also think America is deliberately turning a blind eye to it, they will only be further incentivised. There is nothing simple or even necessarily Zionist about this. These people really don't get along that well and don't need a lot of reason to kill.
Remember, Obama is still saying iran WILL have nukes, sooner OR later. HE is keeping what you believe a myth alive. Why. He knows the dangers right? Why would he want the rest of the ME to think Iran is and has been and will continue to pursue nukes? Huh?
In this thread you said: "I am pointing out that Iran IS a potential threat,"
Now you say that you believe this because "IRAN'S NEIGHBORS BELIEVE THEY ARE BUILDING NUKES" and those neighbors are "Who you want to believe."
So now we know where you got your information. You still haven't explained why you give more credibility to unsubstantiated guesses from Iran's neighbors whom "you want to believe" (and whom you failed to cite directly) rather than a detailed intelligence document generated by all sixteen intelligence agencies with high confidence in concurrence with the Pentagon.
And if they think Iran IS building nukes and also think America is deliberately turning a blind eye to it, they will only be further incentivised.
That would be an excellent reason to support and promulgate the National Intelligence Estimate rather than to ignore it. All sixteen US intelligence agencies and the Pentagon concur with high confidence that Iran has no nuke program and that there was an inspection regime in place which was effective enough to alert us if the Iranians did try to start developing nukes even before this new even more diligent agreement was made. The NIE solves every problem you envision.
I worry less about the truth of a situation than what the guy holding the gun thinks is the truth. I have no idea where you get your enlightenment but from everything I have read, virtually every nuclear fuel refinery Iran has was built and operated has been in secrecy until discovered and at no time including now did these discoveries in any way slow their refinement or resolve to do more. The proposed new inspection plan is a joke and you know it. A 24 day advance notice, no military sites inspected and a reliance on self inspections with no American inspections allowed. Who made this deal?
But I'm glad that you are so confident, and I'm happy that no matter what comes, we can be reliably sure that you will be able to effectively point out to us how it is undoubtedly Israel's fault. Glad I'm not a Jew. With people like you blinded with hate, their lives are worth less than a conservative at Berkeley.
w
I have no idea where you get your enlightenment
I've told you a dozen times in the past three hours and you still don't know? The National Intelligence Estimate by all sixteen US intelligence agencies says that Iran has no nuke program and no way to start one without our knowledge. Have you got that yet or should I type it a dozen more times?
everything I have read, virtually every nuclear fuel refinery Iran has was built and operated has been in secrecy until discovered and at no time including now did these discoveries in any way slow their refinement or resolve to do more.
Have you shared this information with the US intelligence agencies and the Pentagon? Because they say Iran has no nuke program.
But I'm glad that you are so confident
All sixteen US intelligence agencies state with "high confidence" that Iran has no nuke program. But you said that you have confidence in "IRAN'S NEIGHBORS" whom "You want to believe."
Who made this deal?
The deal was made by China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States; plus Germany. These other countries have already agreed to the deal. If you want to sanction Iran and all nations that do business with Iran then the US would have to cut itself off economically from these and many other countries as well. What do you think the implications of the US not trading with most other countries would be?
If all those agencies tout the iranian message, then why are our congressmen so paranoid about Iran obtaining the nuke, they make policys about Iran obtaining the nuclear potential and then follow up on it within the MSM. The bottom line is, it's all about the control of information with, disinformation.
Oldwood,
I agree with much you say in zh on many topics. However you should consider that on this one the reason the agreement is a bit lose is because the Iranians have had HEU nukes for probably well over a decade now. Can you imagine why this is being pretended away on every level now?
Look, seriously consider this. You have the US as a 'Great Satan' based just next door, and across the ditch, and you are given AQ Khan's tech and designs back in the early 1990s. Do you seriously think it would take you in that situation, 25 to 35 years to build a bomb with it, when Pakistan managed to do it in about 10 years, from as long as 35 years ago, in far less ideal technical and financial conditions?
Or would you have managed to do it in five years - ten years max?
If you don't think you couldn't do it within 10 years, please explain why, and make it good, because its going to be pretty hard to accept it, if you've actually been making a serious effort for ten years. ;-)
Frankly, people who still think it would take Iran more than ten years to get it done make me laugh. There's not a chance they were not done in ten years. They were totally committed to the bomb, you only need to look at the facilities they secretly built under mountains, within military bases. South Africa never had anything remotely like what the Iranians have constructed, nor did they have the tech the Iranians have, and yet SA managed to produce 7 bombs unnoticed 40 years ago.
Eventually people will work it out. I wish they would hurry up as I'm getting tired of the melodrama, claims and BS narratives. ;-)
......they have had heu nukes ove a decade " ? Where is your proof ? by that logic south koreans also posses nukes because they had enough enriched uranium to make a bomb since 2000s
There is no direct evidence. But there is logic, and there is much precedent regarding how long it actually takes to develop an A-bomb, via both for HEU and Pu routes.
When Russia was given the US's specs, data, technology and weapon designs on a platter 70 years ago, it took the Russians a bit over 4 years to develop and test an A-bomb, within a national crash program.
But even without the US specs and data or US assistance, the UK still only took 7 years to test an A-bomb, and the UK was broke and entire country still on food rations, btw.
It took France 15 years to replicate it, without any assistance.
It took China 19 years to figure it out, with no assistance.
AQ Khan gave Iran very detailed specs and HEU information and weapon design information to Iran in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The same sort of information an competent nation could build an A-bomb with in under about 5 years. So it's perfectly reasonable and valid to ask why Iran wouldn't have been able to do it in less than 10 years? It is simply utter nonsense to presume Iran would struggle for 25 years, from 1990s to now, to even get this close. Rubbish! Iran's technical levels of competency and capacity are far more developed than Russia's was in 1945, and they have vastly more advanced technology to do it with, than Russia had 70 years ago.
The people putting forward this dreary assertion that Iran could not possibly manage to do it between ~1990 to 2003 are just being thoroughly unrealistic. So they are people I ignore.
My own assessment is Iran has had an A-bomb capability for well over a decade - at a minimum.
The IAEA are a joke too, they never found Israel's weapon program during any inspections and monitoring. They also failed to find Australia's 4 separate uranium enrichment programs that operated from 1965 to 1972, then again from about 1979 to 1986, then two more laser enrichment programs operated in parallel from 1986 to 1994, and 1986 to 1998. Inspectors and monitoring systems found none of them over a sum of about 27 years of operation. So if the IAEA and other inspectors and agencies reported finding no evidence of a dedicated weapon program, I'm not at all surprised.
But the fact remains the Iranians were doing all this in secret, in huge complexes under mountains within Iranian military bases, amid sprawling industrial complexes and hundreds of weapon bunkers. It was definitely not a civilian program and it was all protected by SAMs and fighters under solid rock in the middle of the country to prevent successful military interdiction.
Try explaining that behavior away.
They let the inspectors in because they had already completed their initial HEU acquisition program and were happy to demonstrate the industrial scale of their HEU enrichment program, to generate the ambiguity they wanted to pervade discussions, and use that ambiguity to serve the interests of deterrence of the US and Israel.
And it has worked.
--
Atomic spies - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Atomic spies" or "Atom spies" were people in the United States, Great Britain, and Canada who are known to have illicitly given information about nuclear weapons production or design to the Soviet Union during World War II and the early Cold War. ... One such Soviet spy was Theodore Hall, who had been a developer on the bombs dropped in Japan. Hall gave up the specifications of the bomb dropped on Nagasaki [the Pu bomb the Russian directly copied for Joe-1]. This information allowed the Soviet scientists a firsthand look at the successful set up of an atomic weapon built by the Allied team. Although Hall's information was helpful to the Soviet cause, the most influential of the atomic spies was Klaus Fuchs. Fuchs was a German-born British physicist who was sent to America to work on the atomic project where he became one of the lead scientists. ... The Soviet nuclear program would have eventually been able to develop a nuclear weapon without the aid of espionage. But a basic understanding of the usefulness of an atomic weapon, the sheer resources, and the talent weren't present until much later. The information passed helped the Soviet scientists identify which methods worked and prevented wasting valuable resources on techniques proven ineffective in the development of the American bomb. The speed at which the Soviet nuclear program achieved a working bomb with so few resources was driven by the amount of information acquired through espionage. During the Cold War trials it was touted as one of the most significant intelligence coups in the history of man.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_spies
RDS-1 - From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The RDS-1 (Russian: ???-1), also known as Izdeliye 501 (device 501) and First Lightning (?????? ??????, Pervaya molniya), was used in the Soviet Union's first nuclear weapon test. The United States assigned it the code-name Joe-1, in reference to Joseph Stalin. It was exploded on 29 August 1949 at 7:00 AM, at Semipalatinsk, Kazakh SSR, after a top-secret R&D project. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_1
---
There is no chance it took Iran more than ten years. People just don't want to accept that it has already occurred, and probably long before the turn of this century.
As to your ignorant Korea nonsense, the S Koreans never had more than a research level reactor program using HEU. HEU is >20% enrihment, it is nowhere near weapon grade levels, and it ws simply reactor fuel under full safe gards.The were not enriching anything, they were using reactor fuel.
So no, S Korea is not even remotely similar to the Iranian situation, where actual enrichment was occurring under military bases in secret with no safeguards at all, and zero inspections, and operated on an vast industrial scale for most of a decade before it was 'discovered'.
Or rather, it was revealed to the West and Israel at the time.
The U.S. has intelligence agencies???? Isn't that some kind of oxymoron???
How come they haven't been able to tell us who the hell that guy is squatting in the rainbow house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?
I don't recall hearing Isreal threaten to blow Iran off the map, never to be remembered, because it has no right to exist.
Nowadays, you can always tell or can nearly always tell when FOX "News" is having a word from its sponsors because the post count on ZH surges for 2-4 minutes.
Who still watches the 'newly' liberal Fox News?
Fox News has fallen prey to the high-school graduate, blonde-bimbo, liberal eruption. If you can't flash cleavage and pubic hairs, you can't broadcast on Fox. The same for Fox Business. 17 year old twits, with cleavage and pubic hair, analyzing international corruption and crass stock peddling.
Stuart Varney and Charles Payne are nothing but unreformed token male carnival barkers trying intently to suck the last few coins out of the pockets of retail investors.
A simple solution would be to blast Israel with nukes until there's nothing left except glass lined craters. Problem solved!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDWOP_McMHA
youre not part of the paid Israeli trolling group are you?
Shalom bitch.
Let's see what country actually used nukes? It is not on the list is it. Iran is the bogeyman. U.S. only nukes for the good of mankind.
Fucking hypocrites.
After that comment perhaps you should change your alias to "byteback". I'd give you two green ones if I could.
OH yeah, FUCK ABC MEDIA, LTD.
The cartoon shown above is an annoying bit of clickbait but apart from that why the hatred for a little Bulgarian based corporation which brings us one fine website?
Agree Billy.
Agreed, and we should have prosecuted WWII in the same manner as Iraq and we could STILL be at war with Japan and Germany....maybe building them schools and water treatment plants in between bombings and drone runs.
America did a fine job of slaughtering the Christian population of Japan just as it did in Iraq and is now doing in Syria.
Unwelcome Truths for Church and State Concerning the Bombing of Nagasaki August 9, 1945Prior to the bomb exploding over St. Mary’s Urakami Cathedral on 11:02 AM, Nagasaki was the most Christian city in Japan. The Nagasaki cathedral was the largest Christian cathedral in the Orient.
So it was the height of irony that the massive Cathedral – one of only two Nagasaki landmarks that could be positively identified from 31,000 feet up (the other one was the Mitsubishi armaments factory complex) became Ground Zero for the infamous bomb. The Bock’s Car bombardier identified the landmarks through a break in the clouds and ordered the drop.
At 11:02 am, during Thursday morning mass, hundreds of Nagasaki Christians were boiled, evaporated, carbonized or otherwise disappeared in a scorching, radioactive fireball that exploded 500 meters above the cathedral. The black rain that soon came down from the mushroom cloud surely contained the mingled remains of many Nagasaki Shintoists, Buddhists and Christians. The theological implications of Nagasaki’s Black Rain surely should boggle the minds of theologians of all denominations.
Most Nagasaki Christians did not survive the blast. 6,000 of them died instantly, including all who were at confession. Of the 12,000 church members, 8,500 of them eventually died as a result of the bomb. Many of the others were seriously sickened.
Three orders of nuns and a Christian girl’s school disappeared into black smoke or became chunks of charcoal. Tens of thousands of other innocent non-combatants also died instantly, and many more were mortally or incurably wounded. Some of the victim’s progeny are still suffering from the trans-generational malignancies and immune deficiencies caused by the deadly plutonium and other radioactive isotopes produced by the bomb.
And here is one of the most important ironic points of this article: What the Japanese Imperial government could not do in 250 years of persecution (destroy Japanese Christianity) American Christians did in 9 seconds.
Even after a slow revival of Christianity over the decades since WWII, membership in Japanese churches still represent a small fraction of 1% of the general population, and the average attendance at Christian worship services has been reported to be only 30. Surely the decimation of Nagasaki at the end of the war crippled what at one time was a vibrant church.
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/08/gary-g-kohls/unwelcome-truths/
What is the relevance of their religion?. Was not Germany virtually all Christian after their expulsion of the Jews? It's odd given the remaining hostility korrans and Chinese still have for the Japanese, that you still are willing to villify America for winning the war. Should we have done as I suggested and fought with one hand behind our back as we did in Iraq. Refuse to fire on "holy" sites? Put more American soldiers in their grave rather than only our enemy? Do you understand what war is...has always been, until recently? It's not for our soldiers to die for their country, it is for their soldiers to die for their country. War should be avoided whenever possible and only fought to win...decisively. Something we have NOT done since WWII.
You said: and we should have prosecuted WWII in the same manner as Iraq and we could STILL be at war with Japan and Germany
I pointed out to you that we have prosecuted the wars in Iraq and Syria with some of the same results as were accomplished in WW2, namely the destruction of the Christian populations. The idea that the US has directly or indirectly caused entire nations to be nearly drained of their Christian populations stuns me despite my atheism. I can't comprehend how a professed Christian like you can be so blasé about the matter.
you still are willing to villify America for winning the war
Why do you believe it is necessary to deliberately target non-combatant Christians in order for the US to win wars?
You can't win wars by defeating military only, you must defeat the will of those people who support, who enable them. Are you suggesting that Christian Japanese did not support their emperor and the war effort? We did not prosecute WWII the same as Iraq. We won the former and lost the latter. We used overwhelming force where ever possible and we bombed civilians.....those people building weapons and making uniforms and growing food for their militaries. A significant difference. And we did it in half the time that it took to LOSE both Iraq, Afghanistan AND Vietnam.
You can't win wars by defeating military only, you must defeat the will of those people who support, who enable them. ... We did not prosecute WWII the same as Iraq. We won the former and lost the latter....And we did it in half the time that it took to LOSE both Iraq, Afghanistan AND Vietnam.
You're contradicting yourself. The Vietnamese did not come to America and kill civilians which you say is necessary to win a war and yet you say they won the war. Likewise Iraq and Afghanistan did not come to America and kill civilians.
And the Russians routed Napoleon without killing French civilians. And the colonists defeated Britain without killing British civilians and so on and so on. Deliberately targeting and killing civilians did not come into vogue until the sainted Mr. Lincoln came on the scene and even today not all winning parties target civilians as cited above.
Exactly making my point. Vietnam did not defeat our military. We withdrew, surrendered or whatever because of THE PEOPLE of America no longer supported the war. Our will to support our military was defeated...mostly by our own press. Towards the end of the war our military had it well in hand, we were not losing battles, but every lost on life was broadcast as a defeat on our will was crushed. Germany and Japan demonstrated no such lack of public support. Not until seemingly they were left with nothing to fight with.
It is not necessary to kill civilians until it is. All that is required is surrender. Many battles are avoided completely as parties will surrender before the first blow. French have this down pretty well. Americans are catching up quickly so you should have hope. We will be able to submit to tyranny without a shot fired.
Pacifists rejoice. Tyranny without bloodshed! At last.....
Exactly making my point.
No, your point was that America can only win a war when it bombs civilians. Once again, your own words:
Sat, 09/19/2015 - 01:05 | 6568282 OldwoodVote up!
0Vote down!
-1You can't win wars by defeating military only, you must defeat the will of those people who support, who enable them. Are you suggesting that Christian Japanese did not support their emperor and the war effort? We did not prosecute WWII the same as Iraq. We won the former and lost the latter. We used overwhelming force where ever possible and we bombed civilians.....those people building weapons and making uniforms and growing food for their militaries. A significant difference. And we did it in half the time that it took to LOSE both Iraq, Afghanistan AND Vietnam.
Billy, if you would only READ.
"You can't win wars by defeating military only, you must defeat the will of those people who support, who enable them."
"Defeat the WILL of those people"
To defeat one's will is not necessarily to kill them. Can you grasp that notion? Our WILL was defeated in america regarding Vietnam, but they did not have to come here and kill us.
READ WHAT I WRITE, NOT WHAT YOU THINK I AM SAYING.
Israel has over 300 nukes but whine when Iran wants them-IRAN needs to protect itself from Jewish takover
Yeah, tell Iran to get their own nukes .... and leave Israel's 300 nukes alone ?
Another ignorant liberal wipes his ass to see what he thinks..
Leaked report: Israel acknowledges Jews in fact Khazars; Secret plan for reverse migration to Ukraine
The Passionate Torah: Sex and Judaism - Amazon.com
~>~> Romeo Void - Never Say Never
I have the original Iran video offline. Look, another hostage attempt gone wrong. all dressed up and heading home. 2008 crisis gone tits up, again.
Commander of soldiers captured by Iran is removed from post after hostage farce
Like the taxman, except none for you and nineteen for me.
So far only US had used and so without any real military purpose. They went and murdered hundreds of thousands of people. And you are scared about Iran and North Korea??? Nobody will attack US because that would mean a suicide. They all hold nuclear weapons to keep US away. Without US there everybody would give it up!
Suicide, huh? Guess you never heard of the 12th Imam.
Exactly, That "little" fact does not make it to mainstream media, and, of course, most folks have no clue.
You make a down-syndrome child look like Einstein.
The biggest terrorist in ME already have them.
How embarrassing for the Oldwood troll. As always, the lady gives the game away by protesting too much. When a bag of shopworn, flag-humping, statist tropes is all you've got, I guess volume and hand-waving sophistry will have to suffice.
glass lives matter
Who cares? ... every man has the right to self-defense.
Billy, would you please list the 16 government agencies .... that are convinced Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program .... it might be great material .... for another excellent Ramirez cartoon .... BTW, Rush was lauding Ramirez' cartoons the other day ?
The US had a virtually monopoly on nukes at the end of WWII .... we behaved responsibly .... Israel has had a virtual monopoly on nukes in the ME .... and has behaved responsibly .... would the Islamists do the same ?
August 6th and August 9th 1945 just ooozes responsibility.
I have a very hard time accepting BB nuttyhoo has ever behaved responsibly, he tends to do all sorts of things that are anything but. Even Israeli intel sources have openly said his policies are idiotic, dangerous and counterproductive to Israeli national security.
If by "Israel... has behaved responsibly" you meant that they were "responsible" for attacking the USS Liberty or "responsibile" for dancing on 9/11, or "responsible" for most of the problems in the world today including but not limited to a mass exodus of the native people of the region into Europe then I'd probably agree with you.