• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Unimaginable Horror In Tehran Today (Baharestan Square Massacre)

paris said:
It was a great success and it is still celebrated here each 14th of July!:2wave:
Click to expand...


How many innocent people were beheaded without a trial?
 
Laila said:
US came in late in the game.
Click to expand...

We showed up right before Great Britain was about to get her ass handed to her.

It was Britain and its commonwealth which intiated the operation on D Day
Click to expand...


That comment is inaccurate.
 
apdst said:
We showed up right before Great Britain was about to get her ass handed to her.

That comment is inaccurate.
Click to expand...

:rofl

History is not a strong point for you is it?
 
paris said:
ROFL!

What was the point of the French Revolution aside from removing the Monarchy?

It was a great success and it is still celebrated here each 14th of July!:2wave:
Click to expand...

Yeah, never mind the thousands of innocent people guillotined, the Great Terror, France almost losing a war, a complete economic collapse, must I go on....

That is almost as big a success as Napolean's invasion of Russia. They both achieved the same thing: Killing a whole bunch of French people for no apparent reason.
 
Laila said:
Oh please god. Not the US saved the world line ...

US came in late in the game.
It was Britain and its commonwealth which intiated the operation on D Day in France and not to mention it was Russia who arguably played the most important role. If it wasn't for the Russians, we'd be speaking German.
Click to expand...

And whose troops took most of the Western Front casualties pray tell?
 
WI Crippler said:
2. When we invaded this time, we went for style over substance. This was Rumsfeld fault for relying too much on the idea of "Shock and Awe" rather than something more appropriate like the Powell Doctrine. We allowed the country to destabilize too easily, after the overthrow was complete.
Click to expand...

Can I get one big "HELL YES!"

Finally, one other person on this forum that knows something about the Powell Doctrine.
 
Agent Ferris said:
What about the girl in the OP begging for help? Why do you think the demonstrators signs are in English not Farsi?
Click to expand...

OK, so one chick begged for help. This is supposed to be evidence that the Iranian people welcome and/or expect American involvement? :roll:
 
Truth Detector said:
You're from France; the only reason you currently do not speak German is because America got involved in a European War because Europeans are good at getting themselves into wars but not very good at getting themselves OUT of them.
Click to expand...
You shouldn't go slinging the word "ignorant" at anyone when you make stupid comments like this one. France didn't "get themselves into a war they couldn't get out of." Germany invaded France without just cause. We chose to fight in Europe because Hitler declared war on the U.S. and it was to our strategic advantage to actually join the fighting. Not because we wanted to rescue France or any other part of Europe. If we could have just continued supplying arms and material under Lend-Lease that would have been preferred. With the Russian front opened up Great Britain could have sustained under Lend-Lease until Soviet troops made it to Berlin, and they would have, with or without D-Day. Germany would have begun pulling resources off of the western front and worked towards stopping the Russians.

But...Hitler pushed the button and you have to act at that point. Which in the end worked out because the U.S. sphere of influence in Europe after the war was quite beneficial to all involved.
The only thing more amusing than the extreme arrogance of Europeans who presume to talk down to America is the historic ignorance exhibited by the current “ilk” of young Europeans like yourself who have the historic memory of a lemming.
Click to expand...
You need to read some books on the subject matter you think you understand.
Carry on. :roll:
Click to expand...
Yeah...:roll:
 
Lerxst said:
You shouldn't go slinging the word "ignorant" at anyone when you make stupid comments like this one. France didn't "get themselves into a war they couldn't get out of." Germany invaded France without just cause. We chose to fight in Europe because Hitler declared war on the U.S. and it was to our strategic advantage to actually join the fighting. Not because we wanted to rescue France or any other part of Europe. If we could have just continued supplying arms and material under Lend-Lease that would have been preferred. With the Russian front opened up Great Britain could have sustained under Lend-Lease until Soviet troops made it to Berlin, and they would have, with or without D-Day. Germany would have begun pulling resources off of the western front and worked towards stopping the Russians.

But...Hitler pushed the button and you have to act at that point. Which in the end worked out because the U.S. sphere of influence in Europe after the war was quite beneficial to all involved.

You need to read some books on the subject matter you think you understand.

Yeah...:roll:
Click to expand...

Except, that isn't what happened. The Japanese brought the U.S. into the war, but chances are we would have entered anyway. Germany's declaration of war came after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. Germany didn't want to go to war with the U.S.

Maybe you should read a history book;)
 
paris said:
You are the one spewing your conservative propaganda about the 2nd ammendment in this thread and you get upset because I called you on it? ROFL.
Click to expand...

Only someone wallowing in European arrogance can suggest that my comments regarding the 2nd amendment are somehow "conservative" propaganda.

The notion that I am upset by your ignorance is a long way from the truth.

paris said:
Also I am a young European? Well thank you but you are just talking out of your arse right now and your prose starts to stink so please...:2wave:
Click to expand...

I claim you are young because your nonsense suggests someone of either youth or someone who is extremely uninformed. Which is it? I am sure I have a few years on you.

So for my edification, what gets you on such an emotional rant regarding the 2nd ammendment? You have issues with freedom? :cool:
 
Laila said:
Oh please god. Not the US saved the world line ...

US came in late in the game.
It was Britain and its commonwealth which intiated the operation on D Day in France and not to mention it was Russia who arguably played the most important role. If it wasn't for the Russians, we'd be speaking German.
Click to expand...

Wrong again; the British could never have carried out D-Day. The French, they were useless. The Russians were only an ally in that they began a second front which would have never succeeded if not for the success of D-Day operations with which US soldiers took a terrible toll.

The notion that Europe could have been freed without US might is a laughable proposition.

The ONLY reason I bring it up is when Europeans smug in their uniformed arrogance feel obligated to insult or lecture America or Americans. It seems that they need CONSTANT reminders regarding history and REAL events.

By the way, if not for the US, Europeans would also be speaking Russian.

Carry on. :2wave:
 
Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector
You're from France; the only reason you currently do not speak German is because America got involved in a European War because Europeans are good at getting themselves into wars but not very good at getting themselves OUT of them.
Lerxst said:
You shouldn't go slinging the word "ignorant" at anyone when you make stupid comments like this one.
Click to expand...

First, learn to read before you spew your typically uninformed bile my direction. No where in my initial comments will you see the word "ignorant" until Mr. Paris started using it.

Once more this is your inability to follow a thread topic in a coherent fashion and your Liberal selective outrage operating which makes you look small and petty.

Lerxst said:
France didn't "get themselves into a war they couldn't get out of." Germany invaded France without just cause.
Click to expand...

You may want to brush up on your history. The fact that Liberals in both England and France continued to try and appease a tyrant like Hitler, much like Liberals today believe are the best political solutions, instead of using force suggests that Frances lack of leadership had more to do with their getting invaded and losing than the fact that Germany invaded them.

Lerxst said:
We chose to fight in Europe because Hitler declared war on the U.S. and it was to our strategic advantage to actually join the fighting.
Click to expand...

We never CHOSE to fight in Europe; it was forced upon us because of our lack of leadership and the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor by the German allies Japan, which was also entirely preventable had America not had the same poor and lame Liberal leadership England and France had.

Lerxst said:
Not because we wanted to rescue France or any other part of Europe.
Click to expand...

None of my comments suggest that we wanted to “rescue” France. It was a consequence of eliminating a vile murderous dictator whom the Europeans had originally sought to appease and didn’t take seriously until it was too late.

Lerxst said:
With the Russian front opened up Great Britain could have sustained under Lend-Lease until Soviet troops made it to Berlin, and they would have, with or without D-Day. Germany would have begun pulling resources off of the western front and worked towards stopping the Russians.
Click to expand...

This is of course pure speculation on your part. England could never have mounted a D-Day on their own.

But the pertinent FACT is that without a second front, Russia would never have been able to push the Germans back to Berlin, were reluctant to continue fighting without a commitment from the US and Britain to mount a second front and a more likely scenario would have been a truce between Russia and Germany partitioning the leftovers of Poland and other Eastern Block nations.

Russia couldn’t even initially beat a tiny army in Finland.

Lerxst said:
But...Hitler pushed the button and you have to act at that point. Which in the end worked out because the U.S. sphere of influence in Europe after the war was quite beneficial to all involved.
Click to expand...

The ONLY reason we acted was that the Japanese forced us to act. Up until then, we were quite happily selling steal to them while they bombed and murdered the people forced to subjugate to them.

Americans, much like today’s Americans, needed a major kick in the ass to act; they were perfectly willing to pretend it was Europe’s War just as we are currently willing to pretend the Middle East is none of our business.


Quote: Originally Posted by Truth Detector The only thing more amusing than the extreme arrogance of Europeans who presume to talk down to America is the historic ignorance exhibited by the current “ilk” of young Europeans like yourself who have the historic memory of a lemming.
Lerxst said:
You need to read some books on the subject matter you think you understand.
Click to expand...

Your hyperbole aside, the notion that you could lecture me on WWII history, or any history for that matter is truly as laughable as your own misplaced high opinion of yourself and your intellect.
 
americanwoman said:
Probably won't even hear a peep about this since Michael Jackson died. :roll: Nice priorities our media has, huh?
Click to expand...

The media will report anything to distract from Obama potentially blundering. Thousands could die, and the media will only report on Jackson until the funeral.
 
wbreese91 said:
Except, that isn't what happened. The Japanese brought the U.S. into the war, but chances are we would have entered anyway. Germany's declaration of war came after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. Germany didn't want to go to war with the U.S.

Maybe you should read a history book;)
Click to expand...

We didn't enter the EUROPEAN conflict until after Germany declared war upon us. It doesn't matter that they didn't want to go to war with us, they did. They initiated it, we responded. Those are the facts.

Try again.
 
Originally Posted by wbreese91
Except, that isn't what happened. The Japanese brought the U.S. into the war, but chances are we would have entered anyway. Germany's declaration of war came after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. Germany didn't want to go to war with the U.S.

Maybe you should read a history book
Lerxst said:
We didn't enter the EUROPEAN conflict until after Germany declared war upon us. It doesn't matter that they didn't want to go to war with us, they did. They initiated it, we responded. Those are the facts.

Try again.
Click to expand...

I am always baffled when you repeat the OBVIOUS; that is exactly what wbreese stated: "Germany's declaration of war came after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor"

So basically it is once again it is begging for a point from you; which was? :roll:
 
Truth Detector said:
Only someone wallowing in European arrogance can suggest that my comments regarding the 2nd amendment are somehow "conservative" propaganda.

The notion that I am upset by your ignorance is a long way from the truth.



I claim you are young because your nonsense suggests someone of either youth or someone who is extremely uninformed. Which is it? I am sure I have a few years on you.

So for my edification, what gets you on such an emotional rant regarding the 2nd ammendment? You have issues with freedom? :cool:
Click to expand...

Look, I just told you that we in Europe never needed your 2nd Ammendment to make revolutions. We did not need to have a right to bear arms in France to do so against our corrupted regime, we just did and toppled the monarchy because of our greater number of fighters; but you can keep ignoring that point as far as Im concerned.

Also I do not care how old you are, the fact you assumed I was young is just very revealing of your own shortcomings. Yes, you are so sure; but Im the European arrogant one?:spin:

Dang, this thread is about Iran; but you came in here to show off your 2nd ammendment propaganda. I just thought you could use a reality check mate, or should I say Shāh Māt?:cool:
 
Last edited:
paris said:
Look, I just told you that we in Europe never needed your 2nd Ammendment to make revolutions. We did not need to have a right to bear arms in France to do so against our corrupted regime, we just did and toppled the monarchy because of our greater number of fighters; but you can keep ignoring that point as far as Im concerned.

Also I do not care how old you are, the fact you assumed I was young is just very revealing of your own shortcomings. Yes, you are so sure; but Im the European arrogant one?:spin:

Dang, this thread is about Iran; but you came in here to show off your 2nd ammendment propaganda. I just thought you could use a reality check mate.
Click to expand...



First let’s put your nonsensical tirade into perspective; I made this comment to someone other than you. It wasn’t partisan, it wasn’t nonsense, it was FACT.

Truth Detector said:
It would be hard for "the people" to revolt against an armed Government when they don't have the same 2nd amendment rights to keep and bear arms that we have.

Just a reminder to those who think the ONLY people who should be armed in our societies should be the Government.
Click to expand...

Then came your incoherrent yammering;

paris said:
As if we Europeans ever needed your 2nd ammendment to have revolutions.:rofl
Click to expand...

So please, spare me any more of your intellectual bile.

Carry on. :2wave:
 
Truth Detector said:
First let’s put your nonsensical tirade into perspective; I made this comment to someone other than you. It wasn’t partisan, it wasn’t nonsense, it was FACT.



Then came your incoherrent yammering;



So please, spare me any more of your intellectual bile.

Carry on. :2wave:
Click to expand...

If you cant see the coherence in my comment, you must be retarded no matter how old you are!
 
Truth Detector said:
First, learn to read before you spew your typically uninformed bile my direction. No where in my initial comments will you see the word "ignorant" until Mr. Paris started using it.
Click to expand...
From the post I addressed....
Truth Detector said:
The only thing more amusing than the extreme arrogance of Europeans who presume to talk down to America is the historic ignorance exhibited by the current “ilk” of young Europeans like yourself who have the historic memory of a lemming.
Click to expand...
You fail.

Once more this is your inability to follow a thread topic in a coherent fashion and your Liberal selective outrage operating which makes you look small and petty.
Click to expand...
Blah blah blah. And you still failed.


You may want to brush up on your history. The fact that Liberals in both England and France continued to try and appease a tyrant like Hitler, much like Liberals today believe are the best political solutions, instead of using force suggests that Frances lack of leadership had more to do with their getting invaded and losing than the fact that Germany invaded them.
Click to expand...
This doesn't back up your stupid assertion that "Europeans are good at getting themselves into wars but not very good at getting themselves OUT of them." That doesn't even make sense given history. And it certainly doesn't counter my assertion. You really have no idea what you are doing.

You fail once again.

We never CHOSE to fight in Europe; it was forced upon us because of our lack of leadership and the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor by the German allies Japan, which was also entirely preventable had America not had the same poor and lame Liberal leadership England and France had.
Click to expand...
We absolutely did "choose" to fight in Europe. We chose the battlefield. The attack on Pearl Harbor didn't force us to fight on European soil. We chose a battlefield that was closer in proximity to the enemies homeland rather than wait until Germany actually posed an imminent threat to the U.S. Germany declared war upon us but was in no position to actually carry out any kind of practical military operations against the U.S. We had ample opportunity to ramp up our war machine and respond. We weren't forced to fight in Europe by anyone. No more than we were forced to fight in Africa. The rest of your anti-liberal gibberish is to be ignored.

You fail yet again.


None of my comments suggest that we wanted to “rescue” France. It was a consequence of eliminating a vile murderous dictator whom the Europeans had originally sought to appease and didn’t take seriously until it was too late.
Click to expand...
Your comments absolutely suggest it.
Truth Detector said:
You're from France; the only reason you currently do not speak German is because America got involved in a European War because Europeans are good at getting themselves into wars but not very good at getting themselves OUT of them.
Click to expand...
Epic fail.
This is of course pure speculation on your part. England could never have mounted a D-Day on their own.
Click to expand...
England wouldn't have had to. Russia would have forced Germany to capitulate. Try harder.
But the pertinent FACT is that without a second front, Russia would never have been able to push the Germans back to Berlin, were reluctant to continue fighting without a commitment from the US and Britain to mount a second front and a more likely scenario would have been a truce between Russia and Germany partitioning the leftovers of Poland and other Eastern Block nations.
Click to expand...
You're insane. Hitler held western Europe with substantially less forces than he fought with on the Eastern front. He actually shifted western front resources off to fight the Russians because he had overextended his lines of supply and his offensives were stalling out and being pushed back. His troops in Normandy were under equipped and almost devoid of air cover. It was only because of the eastern front that we could even mount a D-Day offensive, not the other way around. The Soviets had the Germans on the run after Stalingrad and Kursk. The eastern front had collapsed on the Axis and they were being steadily destroyed and pushed back before allied troops ever stepped foot on the beaches of Normandy. Nothing Germany could do would have stopped the Red Army from taking the Rhineland and ending the war. The only thing D-Day did was speed up the surrender of Germany and insure the French weren't speaking Russian. Over 70% of German casualties were at the hands of the Red Army. Stalin didn't get his second front until after he had decimated German forces on the eastern front and began his drive to Germany.

Russia couldn’t even initially beat a tiny army in Finland.
Click to expand...
So? They kicked the **** out of the Wermacht and it's allies. You're clueless about World War II.
The ONLY reason we acted was that the Japanese forced us to act. Up until then, we were quite happily selling steal to them while they bombed and murdered the people forced to subjugate to them.
Click to expand...
False, we had cut off oil and steel exports to Japan prior to Pearl Harbor, which they considered an act of war. They attacked Pearl Harbor because they had to take the oil fields in the Dutch East Indies in order to sustain their empire and they believed our fleet in Hawaii was the only thing that would stop them. That in no way forced us to send troops to Europe.

Fail.

Americans, much like today’s Americans, needed a major kick in the ass to act; they were perfectly willing to pretend it was Europe’s War just as we are currently willing to pretend the Middle East is none of our business.
Click to expand...
Yeah so?
Your hyperbole aside, the notion that you could lecture me on WWII history, or any history for that matter is truly as laughable as your own misplaced high opinion of yourself and your intellect.
Click to expand...
I have already shown how you are woefully ignorant of World War II history. My intellect doesn't have to be all that high to put you in your place.
 
Last edited:
Truth Detector said:
Originally Posted by wbreese91 said:
Except, that isn't what happened. The Japanese brought the U.S. into the war, but chances are we would have entered anyway. Germany's declaration of war came after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor. Germany didn't want to go to war with the U.S.

Maybe you should read a history book
Click to expand...
Lerxst said:
We didn't enter the EUROPEAN conflict until after Germany declared war upon us. It doesn't matter that they didn't want to go to war with us, they did. They initiated it, we responded. Those are the facts.

Try again.
Click to expand...

I am always baffled when you repeat the OBVIOUS; that is exactly what wbreese stated: "Germany's declaration of war came after Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor"

So basically it is once again it is begging for a point from you; which was? :roll:
Click to expand...

Which was you are clueless about the dynamics and history of World War II, "Mr. D-Day Saved the Russians." Japan brought us into the Pacific theater of the war. Germany's declaration brought us into the European theater.

:rofl
 
Last edited:
:shock:

Seriously, has this thread about the possible mass killing/wounding of people decended into an arguement about WHICH COUNTRY WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT IN WWII?!?!
 
The Mark said:
:shock:

Seriously, has this thread about the possible mass killing/wounding of people decended into an arguement about WHICH COUNTRY WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT IN WWII?!?!
Click to expand...

I enjoy checking his ignorance. It can't be helped. Just skip my posts and you should be fine.
 
Lerxst said:
I enjoy checking his ignorance. It can't be helped. Just skip my posts and you should be fine.
Click to expand...

Problem is, they are interesting in their own right, just IMO not in the correct thread.

But meh.
 
The Mark said:
Problem is, they are interesting in their own right, just IMO not in the correct thread.

But meh.
Click to expand...

I know, and I'm sorry that it got derailed. I just can't help myself.

:(
 
Laila said:
No .. We did not invade Iraq for that.
Quit trying to give Bush undeserved praise.

And thanks to the Iraq war, UK will most definetly NOT be taking part in any bombing campaign. Our military has been stretched too far already in Afghanistan, Iraq and numerous other peacekeeping countries.
Click to expand...

jallman said:
I dunno...I've always assumed occupation of Iraq was a staging ground for dealing with Iran when the time came.
Click to expand...
you can find many posts here from years gone by about the Bush plan to bring democracy to the Middle East, and how with teh Wars in Afghanistan and than Iraq, that we now had our military on both sides of Iran. How do you know this was not the long term goal, if only hoped for after dealing with the immediate reasons for going into those countries.
You do acknowledge that as we type, there are american agents, in Iran giving aid, support and guidance to the protesters in the hopes of, what many here have said for years, that Iran would fall from within
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom