Bombing Iran?

[ima]

I'll explain:
That you belive nobody around the world, except SOME Americans, will care if Israel gets nuked clearly proves the point that you don't understand the global effect of a Iran/Isreal nuclear exchange.

So who's going to care? China? No. Russia? maybe, since Iran is an ally of theirs, but they'll never get involved, meaning they don't really care about iran all that much. Europe? They won't care. Africa? Too busy starving. South America? Don't think so. Australia? Might pretend to care, but don't really. Other arabs countries? Almost all hate both Iran and Israel. So you're left with the Axis of Zionism, which is tiny. Please try again.

You continue to prove my point, that you don't understand the global effect of a Iran/Isreal nuclear exchange. Thank you.

You should be thanking me for explaining it to you. So far, you've said nothing to prove me wrong.
Oil might spike, but probably only for a while, we don't get any oil from Iran and Israel has none. What else you got?

 

[M14 Shooter]

So who's going to care? China? No. Russia? maybe, since Iran is an ally of theirs, but they'll never get involved, meaning they don't really care about iran all that much. Europe? They won't care. Africa? Too busy starving. South America? Don't think so. Australia? Might pretend to care, but don't really. Other arabs countries? Almost all hate both Iran and Israel. So you're left with the Axis of Zionism, which is tiny. Please try again.

You continue to prove my point, that you don't understand the global effect of a Iran/Isreal nuclear exchange. Thank you.

Oil might spike but probably only for a while, we don't get any oil from Iran and Israel has none. What else you got?

I need nothing else -- you have, yet again, proven that that you don't understand the global effect of a Iran/Isreal nuclear exchange.

To wit:
"Oil might spike" is the greatest understatement of all history.

It doesn't matter where we, or anyone else, gets their oil, the sudden disappearance of Iranian exports and the sudden unavailability of their reserves will do far, far more than cause oil to spoke for a little while - especially if the Iranians are able to close the Straits of Hormuz.

Please - keep proving me right.

 

[Circe]

That reminds me of the statement of Martin Niemöller, ever heard of it?

He's dead.

Let him rest.

Niemöller isn't a good reason for Israel to own our firepower. Sorry, you all are going to have to take care of your own country. And high time, too.

 

[Truthseeker420]

I thought Jews top leader was Jehovah?

 

[Dot Com]

Liberals are such scum.

whats that inserted in there for?

As to the OP, you prefer to use tax-payer money to prop up dictatorships? I thought the Republican voters were overwhelmingly for cutting "foreign aid"? Peace at any price is expensive not to mention oppressive. You want to pay for it?

That phrase was inserted in there so he could call me scum without getting banned from the forum, I presume. The idea is that if you say stuff like that generally, rather than saying it directly to the poster you want to villify, it won't be reported. I don't know how well this works.

I'm interested in your substantive point: that we are propping up a dictatorship in Iran by not going to war on Iran? I don't know if I'd go that far......not doing something (war) isn't the same as the opposite (propping up the dictatorship).

You say "peace at any price is expensive, not to mention oppressive," but it didn't work when we attacked both Iraq and then Afghanistan to get rid of bad dictators, or in Afghanistan's case, the Taliban. We lost both wars, took ten years doing each. This was terrible, and a WHOLE lot more expensive and oppressive for everyone than peace would have been.

Rumsfeld wanted to try a new way to get rid of bad dictators who were against us because sanctions had been a sort of Fountain of Youth for all of them --- Saddam, Chavez, Castro, Qaddafi, Kim Jong-Il, etc. Okay, he did the experiment, decapitation. It failed BIGTIME. Here's an idea: let's don't go through all that again with Iran!!! We KNOW this tactic doesn't work, and what's more, it leaves us with a huge, huge crippling financial deficit as we wage incredibly expensive foreign wars off the budget by borrowing money from China.

I was referring to Egypt in that post.

As for Iran, one would think that they would want Arabs to be able to live in Palestine again & nuking it would not further that goal. How many antagonistic wars has Iran started in recent memory anyway. Not many.

 

[Lipush]

That reminds me of the statement of Martin Niemöller, ever heard of it?

He's dead.

Let him rest.

Niemöller isn't a good reason for Israel to own our firepower. Sorry, you all are going to have to take care of your own country. And high time, too.

Nothing to do with what I was saying

 

[Lipush]

I thought Jews top leader was Jehovah?

We do not refer to God in such a way.

 

[sealadaigh]

the thing i obect to though is here we have this very prominant american businessman whose organisation contributes very heavily to political causes i am sure, having a very public meeting with a foreign head of state and publically criticises our president for an action by our military.

first of all, i am pretty sure obama had very little to do with that decision...but for someone to criticise our government and military that way to the head of a foreign nation on a public stage is just wrong, no matter who is in office.

Remember, he probably does not consider himself an American, exactly. Many Jews DO have dual citizenship....if he does, I am not so sure his behavior was inappropriate, though I do disapprove of dual citizenship in general. Let people be either fish or fowl, friend or foe, you know?

What *I* didn't like was Romney going to that Jerusalem hotel and making a lot of promises about supporting Israel if he became president!!!!!!! I thought that was truly seditious. What is an American presidential candidate doing going to a foreign country and soliciting money from foreign rich people???? His campaign SAID they were all "Americans," but you know ---- they weren't, they were dual citizenship Israelis living in Israel at the time. It's just wrong: it's illegal.

I always used to support Israel, but this sort of thing, suborning our political candidates to pledge to do whatever Israel wants and trying to get us to fight their wars for them, I don't like any of that.

i didn't like that either. i think our internal disputes, our dirty laundry, need not be aired in such a public manner in foreign countries.

personally, i think the united states should go back to the "one citisenship" deal. i grew up in different places and have citisenship rights in other countries, even though i have renounced my citisenship (they don't accept that) but i have always declared my loyalty to america, and they recognised only that loyalty. they chaanged all that.

 

[Truthseeker420]

i thought jews top leader was jehovah?

we do not refer to god in such a way.

יהוה ?

 

[sealadaigh]

I'm sure that all those people now carping about Jews having dual citizenship fully support mexican dual citizenship. They don't mind at all the Bill Richardson is a dual citizen who actively campaigns for mexican interests, nor Antonio Villaraigosa, Mayor of Los Angeles being a dual citizen, nor any of the other dual citizens who campaign for the interests of their home country.

All those liberals who complain that no one should criticize the president had no problem at all complimenting all those who went around the world criticizing Bush. obama included on his great American apology tour.

XXXXXXX

Israel is our only ally in the middle east. They are our source of information and the bell weather of muslim sentiment. They are fighting our war for us. They are absorbing attack after attack because the American government told them to. Even if muslims achieved their fondest dream of killing all the Jews, in the world, take out Israel and then on to communities elsewhere, it would not be enough. Infidels are just as bad and unless you plan on converting in the near future and living under shariah, you are on the list.

while the story was about a jewish businessman and israel, i made a very general statement that would apply.

if the cases you presented fit into that category, and they do not seem to do sso, but if they do, i think they are equally bad.

what you say about israel is not entirely true, but it is also off topic and probably should be on another thread.

 

[Lipush]

i thought jews top leader was jehovah?

we do not refer to god in such a way.

יהוה ?

 

[sealadaigh]

What? That only the Axis of Zionism will care (that's the US and the 8 dwarves who voted at the UN recently to support Israel)? And even in the US, not many care. There's the christians who want armageddon in the ME so that Jesus can come back (is that you?) and the Jews and their lobby. So not many would actually care and the christians who would actually be happy.

This is harsh, and sad for Israel no doubt, but I'm coming to think it's true. Who will care?[/U]

That reminds me of the statement of Martin Niemöller, ever heard of it?

"first they came for the palestinians"?

was that niemoller or the king of jordan?

 

[Lipush]

This is harsh, and sad for Israel no doubt, but I'm coming to think it's true. Who will care?[/U]

That reminds me of the statement of Martin Niemöller, ever heard of it?

"first they came for the palestinians"?

was that niemoller or the king of jordan?

Wow.

Was that an attempt of being funny?

 

[georgephillip]

That reminds me of the statement of Martin Niemöller, ever heard of it?

"first they came for the palestinians"?

was that niemoller or the king of jordan?

Wow.

Was that an attempt of being funny?

When do you expect the annexation of Area C?

 

[sealadaigh]

That reminds me of the statement of Martin Niemöller, ever heard of it?

"first they came for the palestinians"?

was that niemoller or the king of jordan?

Wow.

Was that an attempt of being funny?

was yours?

the quote seems to vary according to the situation as niemoller morphed it. the meaning behind remains the same.

no, not funny. sad. perhaps prophetic.

this thread, i think, was about an american businessman with deep pockets and with the aquantance of other deep pocketed businessmen meeting with the head of a foreign state and criticising military decisions made by my country, the USA, on a very public stage.

i suppose we could ask about why this businessman felt so emboldened. the situation would actually fit in very well with niemollers quote in the sense that he was warning about a lack of vigilence. i certainly wouldn't want a rich iranian-american businessman heading off to tehran, meeting with achmadinejad on iranian tv, and discussing the captured drone.

 

[Sallow]

Obama has no desire for a military action in Iran or any other arab country. He may be "commander-in-chief" but in name only. He hasn't the personal fortitude to stand up to anyone nor is he a democrat. He ran on the democratic ticket but he is a disruptive, polarizing sneak that is out to make the USA into a socialistic democracy. He broke his "solemn oath" to defend and protect the constitution by unlawfully using executive orders to appoint people to positions without congressional support. The man wants to be a dictator - not a president.

I just hope the USA can recover from 8 years of his crap.

Targeted Killing Program Used Against Anwar Al-Awlaki Will Remain Under Wraps After Judge's Ruling

yeah..because everyone knows Yemen is in Asia.

 

[Intense]

Obama has no desire for a military action in Iran or any other arab country. He may be "commander-in-chief" but in name only. He hasn't the personal fortitude to stand up to anyone nor is he a democrat. He ran on the democratic ticket but he is a disruptive, polarizing sneak that is out to make the USA into a socialistic democracy. He broke his "solemn oath" to defend and protect the constitution by unlawfully using executive orders to appoint people to positions without congressional support. The man wants to be a dictator - not a president.

I just hope the USA can recover from 8 years of his crap.

Targeted Killing Program Used Against Anwar Al-Awlaki Will Remain Under Wraps After Judge's Ruling

yeah..because everyone knows Yemen is in Asia.

From your link.

McMahon said there were "legitimate reasons" to question the legality of killings like al-Awlaki's.

The Obama administration has aggressively employed a fleet of robotic drone aircraft to kill people with suspected ties to al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. President Barack Obama has additionally taken the step of using drones against citizens like al-Awlaki, an American-born Islamist preacher who United States officials accused of being a "regional commander" of al Qaeda. Officials linked him to the 2009 "underwear bomber" plot to blow up a plane over Detroit.

A secret Department of Justice memo justified the strike on Awlaki -- but it has never been made public, despite pleas from members of Congress, including Senate Intelligence Chair Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Armed Services Chair Carl Levin (D-Mich.). They supported killing al-Awlaki, but thought the administration needed to explain its legal reasoning.

Targeted Killing Program Used Against Anwar Al-Awlaki Will Remain Under Wraps After Judge's Ruling

There are gaps here, that All should be questioning.

 

[Lipush]

"first they came for the palestinians"?

was that niemoller or the king of jordan?

Wow.

Was that an attempt of being funny?

When do you expect the annexation of Area C?

There is no way to correctly answer that question.

 

[Desperado]

I'm sure that all those people now carping about Jews having dual citizenship fully support mexican dual citizenship. They don't mind at all the Bill Richardson is a dual citizen who actively campaigns for mexican interests, nor Antonio Villaraigosa, Mayor of Los Angeles being a dual citizen, nor any of the other dual citizens who campaign for the interests of their home country.

Honestly, anyone holding dual citizenship should be unable to hold any government position in the US. Elected or otherwise. If it good enough for a Presidential qualification it should be for all political positions:
The Constitution contains the term "natural born" for a US president. This term was used to prevent anyone with the possibility of having a foreign allegiance from becoming commander-in-chief of US forces, for obvious reasons (super fifth column, anyone?) A person with dual citizenship owes allegiance to both the US and the foreign government. They are required to obey the laws of both countries, which of course for a sitting US President would be disastrous to the US nation.

 

[MHunterB]

Obama has no desire for a military action in Iran or any other arab country. He may be "commander-in-chief" but in name only. He hasn't the personal fortitude to stand up to anyone nor is he a democrat. He ran on the democratic ticket but he is a disruptive, polarizing sneak that is out to make the USA into a socialistic democracy. He broke his "solemn oath" to defend and protect the constitution by unlawfully using executive orders to appoint people to positions without congressional support. The man wants to be a dictator - not a president.

I just hope the USA can recover from 8 years of his crap.

Actually it takes greater personal fortitude to stand up to the warmongering right, Pentagon establishment, and ‘defense’ industry.

War is the coward’s ‘solution,’ those truly brave seek peace.

Nobly stated. Unfortunately it only takes one to have a war, but two for peace.