Re: Iran rejects diplomacy: its time for war
Thank goodness, a leftist with a brain, this forum has precious few of them
If you consider me a leftists, then you are in the lot with Navy Pride who considers massive government, fiscally liberal policies and world police to be conservative policies. :2wave:
I lived there for 30 years, that is unlikely.
Oh yay. Circumstantial evidence. Want to bet how far that will get you?
I was referring to the endless terroism and suicide bombings israel has endured for decades by iranian poodles such as hezboolah, hamas and islamic jihad.
And look where Israel is now. The most productive country in the Middle East with the exception of Turkey. Granted, much of that was built upon US handouts and welfare, but that's neither here nor there. In fact, the constant threats upon Israel have often acted as a stabilizing force shoving internally damning problems within the country to the backburner. It was often said that giving Israel months of peace could do what no Arab country could do: destroy it by internal schisms.
Pursuing interests is one thing, conducting suicide bombings murdering hundreds of people is another.
So now it's just "hundreds" that count eh? Care to examine the US role in Chile? How about what Venezuela is doing now? Or the clandestine operations of the SAS? Or the numerous historical incidents by countries over the years? You act like countries haven't done this. Unlike you, I can be objective in realizing that terrorism is not a tool limited to Iran.
Spare me, the colonialism ended decades ago, its funny how this pathetic argument has been quietly dropped from excuses for african incompetence and mal-government, the leftist sympathy for arab muslim failings appears bottomless.
I see you completely ignored what I wrote. Can you define "Dutch Disease" for me? Furthermore, explain to me how that removes blame on the government. And I do find it amusing how you implicitly argue I'm not blaming the governments despite me doing just that later in the post. :rofl Not a careful reader are you?
So are you claiming that islam is not a religion of peace?
Depends who's interpretation we're looking at. Some are. Some aren't.
I guess this is a fine example of the abject leftist racism against arab muslims, where they cannot be held to the same norms and demands of civil society.
Based on....what? Your inability to argue without labeling people in the hopes that that will somehow free you from providing an intellectual reply? You're going to get hammered here if that is all you have in your debate skill locker.
These regimes, while wretched, are not applying terrorism in other nations as a political method.
As a political method? So apparently terrorism is only terrorism when it's political. And you are wrong. Syria exports its radicals as a way of reducing political threats to the Druze Assad Regime.
And why the crocodile tears for un-free regimes, who treat their own citizens so badly, yet no complaints about iran who in the most recent fabricated "elections" murdered and tortured so many of their own people?
Generally, it helps to read the prior posts of people before making such accusations. Please research those threads before first assuming I never said anything on them. You clearly assume much to plug the gaps in your inability to debate, and it's painfully obvious. And you are off tangent. While those regimes are scum as is the Theocracy in Iran, this is a discussion about
your claim that removing the Iranian regime would fix the ME's problems. As my point still stands, removing Iran's regime does not remove the others which are part of the problem thereby rendering your assertion false.
I realize you likely came from a board which did not challenge you and therefore let whatever skills you had at the time stagnate and decay to nothing. You should realize that without a Rocky like training regime, you will be crushed here.
This statement, while laughable to people like me who lived there, would probably get you killed if said aloud right now if overheard in teheran or ifshahan.
Ever heard of a country called "Saudi Arabia?" :rofl
We already are, these troops are on active duty. You do understand that yes?
Wow. I'm not sure what to say to this. First, those troops, while on active duty, are not in combat. Combat operations and peacetime operations are two entirely different concepts. Peacetime doesn't result in huge uses of material. Peacetime doesn't involve in massive medical needs. Peacetime doesn't involve in extreme constant stress on soldiers. Peacetime does not in most ways resemble combat operations.
Do not understand this question, as the divisions already exist.
Tell me, do you think that the materials required to sustain a division in combat and occupation are the
same as those to sustain a division that is not actively in combat and undergoing largely training operations in a friendly country? :rofl
The US would be going in to liquidate the regime leadership and its republican guard. This is a much shorter, more narror mission than what was needed - and occurred - in iraq.
Except to do that, we'd need to replace it with something else. And we'd need to hunt down the Republican Guard. Ever seen a topographical map of Iran? Because it sounds like you think it's rolling deserts. Furthermore, you really think that we could just roll in there and not have to worry about the massive population? :rofl
Wow you are Rummy. Wishful thinking on the borderlines of delusions.
