• 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!

Senate clears way for $1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia

apdst said:
You're just going to flat-out lie, now?
Click to expand...

Saying that Israel isnt part of America isnt a lie.

Are you going to answer the question or will you keep quiet about the Saudis like you always do?
 
HenryChinaski said:
They produce ****ing terrotists and lots of them.
Click to expand...

So does France. :shrug: Iran is the leading actor in state-sponsored terrorism. Look, for example, at what they've done in Lebanon (Report: Sealed Lebanon Assassination Indictment Points to Iran Regime - Tehran Bureau | FRONTLINE | PBS). Also, Saudi Arabia doesn't have a national holiday in which it celebrates the taking of our embassy and diplomats or shout "Death to America!" or burn the U.S. flag as a matter of routine after Friday prayers. At this point I'd ally with Palpatine just for tossing a banana peel in front of an Iranian or one of her proxies.

Iran Marks Revolution With "Death to America" Chants - NBC News
 
PoS said:
Islamic Jihad isnt Hezbollah, and many attacks you cited were against Isrealis, is Israel part of the US now?
Click to expand...

What? Blowing up our embassy, embassy annex, and Marine barracks in Lebanon aren't enough for you? And who cares what an Iranian proxy is called? Iran is Iran. That's all that matters:

Unknown to us at the time, the National Security Agency had made a diplomatic communications intercept on 26 September (the same date as the cease-fire ending the September War) in which the Iranian Intelligence Service provided explicit instructions to the Iranian ambassador in Damascus (a known terrorist) to attack the Marines at Beirut International Airport. The suicide attackers struck us 28 days later, with word of the intercept stuck in the intelligence pipeline until days after the attack.

https://news.usni.org/2013/10/23/beirut-bombing-30-came-peace
Click to expand...

I wish people wouldn't be so thick and would learn the difference between a "terrorist" and " and a "state-sponsored terrorist." :roll:
 
"We Lebanese are all too familiar with the violence, discord, sectarian hatred, brutality and terrorism that Iran and its allies inflict on other countries, whatever Iranian officials might try to claim to the outside world. Iran has been the world’s greatest state sponsor of terrorism since the late 1970s.

We have not forgotten the taking of Americans, and other Westerners, as hostages in the 1980s by Iranian proxies in Lebanon. We have not forgotten the bombing of the Marine barracks at the Beirut airport, which killed 241 United States Marines, sailors and soldiers. The amnesia in much of the world about these events, let alone what is happening today in Syria and elsewhere, leaves us dumbfounded."

Saad Hariri, member of Lebanon's parliament and son of slain prime minister Rafik Hariri
Click to expand...

It leaves me dumbfounded, too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/22/o...-must-stop-meddling-in-arab-affairs.html?_r=0
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Senate clears way for $1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia

A damn shame. I applaud Rand Paul and Chris Muphy's efforts in attempting to stop this sale of weapons to one of the worst human right abusing countries on this planet. While Saudi Arabis drops bombs indiscriminately in Yemen and commits war crime after war crime in Yemen, our government believes that we should be arming them with more weapons to commit war crimes with in Yemen. One thing is for sure, the military industrial complex is sure as **** going to be happy with some new contracts. This is so ****ed up. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

Good for the US and good for the Middle East.
 
Ahlevah said:
Since we're the Great Satan anyway, why not sell Saudi Arabia the weapons then? I mean, do we really want another Hezbollah or Badr Organization in Yemen, beholden to their benefactors in Tehran? No, we don't.
Click to expand...

If you want to resort to that rationalization, fine - I may even sympathize with it. What vexes me is this angelic image a preponderance of Americans have of the country and how it's unbecoming of it to be a Saudi ally, when in reality both share their fair share of similarities and questionable interests.
 
Gaztopian said:
If you want to resort to that rationalization, fine - I may even sympathize with it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I do. The only language some people understand is force. John Kerry is spinning his wheels in Geneva, no doubt under the illusion that Assad, Putin, and the Ayatollahs want a negotiated settlement to the conflict in Syria. I think we're being played for chumps. We got a clue from Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, who recently said that the only way this conflict will end is through warfare. They don't think there are any "moderate" rebels in Syria. There's only vermin to be eradicated. I doubt Nasrallah would say that publicly unless the Iranians agreed with it. In any case, I think we're about to find out.

Gaztopian said:
What vexes me is this angelic image a preponderance of Americans have of the country and how it's unbecoming of it to be a Saudi ally, when in reality both share their fair share of similarities and questionable interests.
Click to expand...

You've spent time on this board. Haven't you ever noticed how American liberals wallow in self-guilt? How they seem to view bashing America as their civic duty? I'll bet they can quote chapter and verse about the rise of the Shah in Iran or Salvador Allende's death in Chile, but haven't the faintest clue about the Truman Doctrine. When it comes to Iran, we don't need John Kerry in the State Department. We need a modern-day Dean Acheson.
 
Last edited:
joG said:
No. But abrogate military aggression absolutely is even worse than using it more often than necessary. That is rather elementary theory of peace.
Click to expand...

Well that elementary theory seems to have been proved invalid during these last 15 years or so, if pragmatic analysis is allowed.

You present sophistry here, nothing more. We have blood on our hands by selling weapons to the Saudis, but considering all the **** we do on our own, our hands are very bloody already.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Well that elementary theory seems to have been proved invalid during these last 15 years or so, if pragmatic analysis is allowed.

You present sophistry here, nothing more. We have blood on our hands by selling weapons to the Saudis, but considering all the **** we do on our own, our hands are very bloody already.
Click to expand...

What has been "proved invalid"? You are presenting falsehoods here, it is true. But you might not even realize it.
 
PoS said:
Saying that Israel isnt part of America isnt a lie.

Are you going to answer the question or will you keep quiet about the Saudis like you always do?
Click to expand...

I don't really believe you either, wehnn you say "the Saudis" have killed thousands of Americans.
 
Ahlevah said:
Yeah, I do. The only language some people understand is force. John Kerry is spinning his wheels in Geneva, no doubt under the illusion that Assad, Putin, and the Ayatollahs want a negotiated settlement to the conflict in Syria. I think we're being played for chumps. We got a clue from Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, who recently said that the only way this conflict will end is through warfare. They don't think there are any "moderate" rebels in Syria. There's only vermin to be eradicated. I doubt Nasrallah would say that publicly unless the Iranians agreed with it. In any case, I think we're about to find out.



You've spent time on this board. Haven't you ever noticed how American liberals wallow in self-guilt? How they seem to view bashing America as their civic duty? I'll bet they can quote chapter and verse about the rise of the Shah in Iran or Salvador Allende's death in Chile, but haven't the faintest clue about the Truman Doctrine. When it comes to Iran, we don't need John Kerry in the State Department. We need a modern-day Dean Acheson.
Click to expand...

You are certainly right, when you point out that Kerry and his boss are spinning their wheels. But, you know? I don't really think they even realize it. Or do you believe he and Obama are that disgusting and not just Very Good Willed People of the very ignorant kind?
 
joG said:
What has been "proved invalid"? You are presenting falsehoods here, it is true. But you might not even realize it.
Click to expand...

What has been proven wrong is your specious theory that to 'abrogate' military aggession (an illegal act) is worse than using it more than 'necessary'. Gawd, I feel like I'm talking to a Pentagon bot here. The 'logic' is so tortured.

I suppose you're saying that had we not invaded Iraq and Afghanistan we would have been "abrogating military aggression??" Lordy, what tortured logic.

We committed military aggression against both those countries, and peace was not the result.
 
joG said:
You are certainly right, when you point out that Kerry and his boss are spinning their wheels. But, you know? I don't really think they even realize it. Or do you believe he and Obama are that disgusting and not just Very Good Willed People of the very ignorant kind?
Click to expand...

I don't have a clue concerning what Obama and Kerry are thinking, other than their reticence at getting the U.S. more directly involved in Syria's civil war. I fully understand and appreciate that. At this point, it's clear that Assad isn't going anywhere. Once ISIS is run out of Iraq, Iraqi Shiite militias and their Iranian advisors will pour into Syria by the tens if not hundreds of thousands. They will not give ISIS or Nusra or FSA or anyone a moment's breath. So I have a feeling that the days of the Syrian resistance are numbered. Iran will maintain Syria well within its sphere of influence. The only wildcard is Turkey, but I don't see it performing a full-scale invasion of the country, although it might take advantage of an opportunity to expand its borders a bit on the pretext that it needs a larger buffer zone.
 
Thoreau72 said:
What has been proven wrong is your specious theory that to 'abrogate' military aggession (an illegal act) is worse than using it more than 'necessary'. Gawd, I feel like I'm talking to a Pentagon bot here. The 'logic' is so tortured.

I suppose you're saying that had we not invaded Iraq and Afghanistan we would have been "abrogating military aggression??" Lordy, what tortured logic.

We committed military aggression against both those countries, and peace was not the result.
Click to expand...

I was afraid that was, what you meant. You must think about what it means to "abrogate military aggression absolutely", when an aggressor realizes this and uses it against you over and again. Of course it is better not to let even the suspicion sneak in, that you will not attack mercilessly, if you consider it necessary. That is part of the problem with those red lines and everythings on the table threats that Obama was afraid to back up.
 
Ahlevah said:
I don't have a clue concerning what Obama and Kerry are thinking, other than their reticence at getting the U.S. more directly involved in Syria's civil war. I fully understand and appreciate that. At this point, it's clear that Assad isn't going anywhere. Once ISIS is run out of Iraq, Iraqi Shiite militias and their Iranian advisors will pour into Syria by the tens if not hundreds of thousands. They will not give ISIS or Nusra or FSA or anyone a moment's breath. So I have a feeling that the days of the Syrian resistance are numbered. Iran will maintain Syria well within its sphere of influence. The only wildcard is Turkey, but I don't see it performing a full-scale invasion of the country, although it might take advantage of an opportunity to expand its borders a bit on the pretext that it needs a larger buffer zone.
Click to expand...

Yep. Those two have really let their allies down and put the protesters in hot water, haven't they now. That is the problem, when you talk big and later wiggle a twig.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Read more @: Senate clears way for $1.15 billion arms sale to Saudi Arabia

A damn shame. I applaud Rand Paul and Chris Muphy's efforts in attempting to stop this sale of weapons to one of the worst human right abusing countries on this planet. While Saudi Arabis drops bombs indiscriminately in Yemen and commits war crime after war crime in Yemen, our government believes that we should be arming them with more weapons to commit war crimes with in Yemen. One thing is for sure, the military industrial complex is sure as **** going to be happy with some new contracts. This is so ****ed up. [/FONT][/COLOR]
Click to expand...

And yet the media ignores that and focuses all on the mess in Syria. It almost makes you think our opposition to Assad it really isn't really about human rights violations.
 
joG said:
I was afraid that was, what you meant. You must think about what it means to "abrogate military aggression absolutely", when an aggressor realizes this and uses it against you over and again. Of course it is better not to let even the suspicion sneak in, that you will not attack mercilessly, if you consider it necessary. That is part of the problem with those red lines and everythings on the table threats that Obama was afraid to back up.
Click to expand...

More Pentagon Psychobabble. :doh
 
joG said:
Yep. Those two have really let their allies down and put the protesters in hot water, haven't they now. That is the problem, when you talk big and later wiggle a twig.
Click to expand...

Well, if you're going to say "Assad must go," you'd better have more than rhetoric to back it up. Otherwise, you're just, well, weak and not worth paying attention to, sort of like Angela Merkel. Spending half a billion dollars to train four or five Arab rebels doesn't cut it, and using Kurds as your proxy has its limitations, mainly that they're limited to a historical geographic area and are mistrusted by the Arabs outside of that.
 
Secretary of State John Kerry warned his Russian counterpart on Wednesday that the United States would break off talks on Syria and abandon plans for the joint military targeting of Islamic jihadists unless the Russian and Syrian militaries stopped bombings Aleppo.

“The United States is making preparations to suspend U.S.-Russia bilateral engagement on Syria, including on the establishment of the Joint Implementation Center, unless Russia takes immediate steps to end the assault on Aleppo and restore the cessation of hostilities,” Mr. Kerry told Sergey V. Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, in a phone call.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/29/world/middleeast/syria-john-kerry-aleppo-russia.html?_r=0
Click to expand...

Can someone answer as to why this would matter to the Russians? Why would they give a ****?
 
Ahlevah said:
Yeah, I do. The only language some people understand is force. John Kerry is spinning his wheels in Geneva, no doubt under the illusion that Assad, Putin, and the Ayatollahs want a negotiated settlement to the conflict in Syria. I think we're being played for chumps. We got a clue from Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, who recently said that the only way this conflict will end is through warfare. They don't think there are any "moderate" rebels in Syria. There's only vermin to be eradicated. I doubt Nasrallah would say that publicly unless the Iranians agreed with it. In any case, I think we're about to find out.
Click to expand...

As I said, I can align with that. The reality in Syria exemplifies the failure of U.S's foreign and security policy - only an ignoramus or a partisan would argue otherwise. For some perverse reason, the U.S proved decisively belligerent against stabilizing and friendly forces in the region and permissively diplomatic with their destabilizing and hostile counterparts. It proved to be trigger-happy in deposing allied regimes and moderate forces in the region without provocation and excessively prudent with their adversarial and extreme counterparts.

Nevertheless, and for the sake of impartiality, to only assign blame to democrats and the Obama administration would be unjust. The inept preemptive wars of the past decade castrated the U.S and delegitimized military intervention in such a way that left Bush's successors with fewer options to work with and a shameful legacy to erase.

You've spent time on this board. Haven't you ever noticed how American liberals wallow in self-guilt? How they seem to view bashing America as their civic duty? I'll bet they can quote chapter and verse about the rise of the Shah in Iran or Salvador Allende's death in Chile, but haven't the faintest clue about the Truman Doctrine. When it comes to Iran, we don't need John Kerry in the State Department. We need a modern-day Dean Acheson.
Click to expand...

I don't wish to turn this into a partisan argument. The U.S has much to apologize and repent for and an unconscionable legacy past which to move, a reality that shouldn't be subject to partisanship.
 
Ahlevah said:
Well, if you're going to say "Assad must go," you'd better have more than rhetoric to back it up. Otherwise, you're just, well, weak and not worth paying attention to, sort of like Angela Merkel. Spending half a billion dollars to train four or five Arab rebels doesn't cut it, and using Kurds as your proxy has its limitations, mainly that they're limited to a historical geographic area and are mistrusted by the Arabs outside of that.
Click to expand...

That is exactly the problem. Obama said the man had to go but didn't walk the walk. He was quite right that it should have been the regional allies that should remove Assad and the UN to keep the peace, while the country came to terms with itself. But he did not manage it and let ISIS develop and grab land and Assad to regain his pace and let the Russians push in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom