Cautious optimism over Iranian nuclear deal as talks resume in Geneva

Who gives a rat's ass about Hiroshima or Nagasaki, compared to the 1,000,000+ American and Allied casualties that would otherwise have been suffered in finishing-off Japan? Cry me a friggin' river.

Your genocidal nature certainly shines so very brightly through for all of us to so clearly see in posts like this one.

You are Testimony of the evil in our world.

Thank you for so openly discosing to all of us who you are.

This is another really, really stupid insertion of the "genocide" slogan you hurl around without the slightest clue that you come across as a total buffoon for using it.

Why not spend some time looking to understand the terms you use?

Genocide is a vague term subject to interpretation and an even more vague crime. Sherry is certainly entitled to her interpretation.

Genocide, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of - - Prevent Genocide International

Rather than just calling someone a buffoon, perhaps you could offer some more substantial and constructive criticism.
 
Who gives a rat's ass about Hiroshima or Nagasaki, compared to the 1,000,000+ American and Allied casualties that would otherwise have been suffered in finishing-off Japan? Cry me a friggin' river.
Read some friggin' History.
The Soviet invasion and conquest of Manchuria and Korea finished Japan.
 
Who gives a rat's ass about Hiroshima or Nagasaki, compared to the 1,000,000+ American and Allied casualties that would otherwise have been suffered in finishing-off Japan? Cry me a friggin' river.
Read some friggin' History. The Soviet invasion and conquest of Manchuria and Korea finished Japan.
The Soviets jumped into the fight only a couple of weeks before the end of the war, interested only in picking-up territory in Manchuria and Korea, and not in the invasion of the Japanese mainland, in order to finish off the Imperium.

Far more intelligent and competent people than either you or I assessed the need to invade the Japanese mainland, in order to finish them off, and had been making such plans and preparations for quite some time, before it became widely known that a workable atomic weapon existed.

The seizure of the final few major island-bases held by the Japanese and their months-long Kamikaze campaign demonstrated just how fiercely and fanatically suicidal that the Japanese would be when defending their home soil, and projections of 1,000,000 -plus Allied casualties - and far more Japanese casualties, including civilian militias - were at the forefront of the decision of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and President Truman to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Better 250,000 Japanese dead than 1,000,000 Allied dead, with another 2,000,000 to 3,000,000 million Japanese dead in defense of their homeland; the lesser of two evils.

Those intelligent, competent people were on-the-scene at the time as sentient adults, skilled in wartime operations and assessments and projections and decision-making.

Pissant fifth-columnists and surrender-monkey revisionists of 70 years later don't get to time-travel and un-do such difficult but entirely correct judgment calls.
 
Last edited:
Who gives a rat's ass about Hiroshima or Nagasaki, compared to the 1,000,000+ American and Allied casualties that would otherwise have been suffered in finishing-off Japan? Cry me a friggin' river.

Your genocidal nature certainly shines so very brightly through for all of us to so clearly see in posts like this one.

You are Testimony of the evil in our world.

Thank you for so openly discosing to all of us who you are.
Better 250,000 of them than 1,000,000 of us.

That's called protecting your own.

It's what happens in war.

War is, indeed, an evil, messy, bloody, godawful business.

The trick is to win.

With the fewest possible losses to your own side.

Which is why incompetent, delusional sissy-mary goody-two-shoes Rebecca-of-Sunnybrook-Farms unicorn-rainbow types don't bubble to the top in the hierarchy of the Armed Forces.
 
Last edited:
Who gives a rat's ass about Hiroshima or Nagasaki, compared to the 1,000,000+ American and Allied casualties that would otherwise have been suffered in finishing-off Japan? Cry me a friggin' river.
Read some friggin' History. The Soviet invasion and conquest of Manchuria and Korea finished Japan.
The Soviets jumped into the fight only a couple of weeks before the end of the war, interested only in picking-up territory in Manchuria and Korea, and not in the invasion of the Japanese mainland, in order to finish off the Imperium.

Far more intelligent and competent people than either you or I assessed the need to invade the Japanese mainland, in order to finish them off, and had been making such plans and preparations for quite some time, before it became widely known that a workable atomic weapon existed.

The seizure of the final few major island-bases held by the Japanese and their months-long Kamikaze campaign demonstrated just how fiercely and fanatically suicidal that the Japanese would be when defending their home soil, and projections of 1,000,000 -plus Allied casualties - and far more Japanese casualties, including civilian militias - were at the forefront of the decision of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and President Truman to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Better 250,000 Japanese dead than 1,000,000 Allied dead, with another 2,000,000 to 3,000,000 million Japanese dead in defense of their homeland; the lesser of two evils.

Those intelligent, competent people were on-the-scene at the time as sentient adults, skilled in wartime operations and assessments and projections and decision-making.

Pissant fifth-columnists and surrender-monkey revisionists of 70 years later don't get to time-travel and un-do such difficult but entirely correct judgment calls.
"Soviets jumped into the fight a few weeks before the end of the war"?
Is that right, Hitler?
How many of your divisions did Russia gut on the Eastern Front?
Why do you suppose Eisenhower felt the war was over prior to impressing Stalin with the twin war crimes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
The lesser of no evils maybe.
 
"...Is that right, Hitler?..."
My, my, my... testy wee little boggit today, aren't you?
tongue_smile.gif


"...How many of your divisions did Russia gut on the Eastern Front?..."
What does the Soviet campaign against Nazi Germany have to do with their participation in the war against Japan?

Non sequitur.


"...Why do you suppose Eisenhower felt the war was over..."
Last I heard, Eisenhower was in charge of the European theater of operations, with Nimitz in charge of the Pacific theater.

I'll take Nimitz' judgment calls, and those of the Joint Chiefs and the President, over yours any day.


"...prior to impressing Stalin with the twin war crimes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?..."
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not war crimes.

Not that an America-hating, roll-over-and-serve-up-your-backside surrender monkey such as yourself would have the slightest clue about matters that concern men in wartime.
 
"...Is that right, Hitler?..."
My, my, my... testy wee little boggit today, aren't you?
tongue_smile.gif


"...How many of your divisions did Russia gut on the Eastern Front?..."
What does the Soviet campaign against Nazi Germany have to do with their participation in the war against Japan?

Non sequitur.


"...Why do you suppose Eisenhower felt the war was over..."
Last I heard, Eisenhower was in charge of the European theater of operations, with Nimitz in charge of the Pacific theater.

I'll take Nimitz' judgment calls, and those of the Joint Chiefs and the President, over yours any day.


"...prior to impressing Stalin with the twin war crimes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?..."
Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not war crimes.

Not that an America-hating, roll-over-and-serve-up-your-backside surrender monkey such as yourself would have the slightest clue about matters that concern men in wartime.
What has given you the illusion you know something about men or war, Yeppers?

"...(T)he use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan...(I)n being the first to use it, we adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was taught not to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children." (In spite of what your kissing cousin, Adolph, may have told you)

William D. Leahy
Fleet Admiral US Navy
And Chief of Staff to the President
Back jacket quote: The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, Gar Alperovitz, 1995
 
"...What has given you the illusion you know something about men or war, Yeppers?..."
Please report back to the front-desk at the ward. Your morning medication is ready.
"...William D. Leahy..."
Obviously, Leahy was in the minority opinion on that one.

Easy enough to dig-up the majority opinion on the subject, I'm sure, but you don't seem worth the effort this morning.
 
Last edited:
"...What has given you the illusion you know something about men or war, Yeppers?..."
Please report back to the front-desk at the ward. Your morning medications is ready.
"...William D. Leahy..."
Obviously, Leahy was in the minority opinion on that one.

Easy enough to dig-up the majority opinion on the subject, I'm sure, but you don't seem worth the effort this morning.
Yet another of your epic FAILS.
Guess your hasbara isn't hitting on all cylinders this morning.
 
"...Yet another of your epic FAILS..."
You seem to copycat a lot of the verbiage and phrases that I use, within hours or a day-or-so of me using it (as I did with 'Epic Fail' in lambasting your Sherri-buddy yesterday when she got too arrogant and erroneous in her assertions about Israeli deportations of African illegal aliens).

Are you one of those symbiotic types who plagiarize the verbiage and style of others in order to overcome a deficiency of imagination and creativity in your own right?

This would not be overly surprising, given your blinkered one-trick-pony approach to some of this, and to stalking your colleagues.

Not that you demonstrate any particularly interesting technique nor content nor talent in such lackluster stalking.

You can do better than that, can't you? Bring it, punk.


"...Guess your hasbara isn't hitting on all cylinders this morning."
I have NO idea what you are talking about, with respect to either a particular 'Epic Fail' nor 'Hasbara'...

However, I am comforted by the idea that YOU have no idea what you are talking about, either.
tongue_smile.gif


Not to mention that none of this has anything whatsoever to do with Iran and recent developments pertaining to their attainment of nuclear weaponry.
 
Last edited:
"...What has given you the illusion you know something about men or war, Yeppers?..."
Please report back to the front-desk at the ward. Your morning medications is ready.
"...William D. Leahy..."
Obviously, Leahy was in the minority opinion on that one.

Easy enough to dig-up the majority opinion on the subject, I'm sure, but you don't seem worth the effort this morning.
Yet another of your epic FAILS.
Guess your hasbara isn't hitting on all cylinders this morning.

Sorry George, but I read all the posts between you guys, and it seems like there's only one person who failed, and it ain't Kondor

Kondor, I commend you for getting under George's skin, no one has done that to him before like you did .
 
Please report back to the front-desk at the ward. Your morning medications is ready.

Obviously, Leahy was in the minority opinion on that one.

Easy enough to dig-up the majority opinion on the subject, I'm sure, but you don't seem worth the effort this morning.
Yet another of your epic FAILS.
Guess your hasbara isn't hitting on all cylinders this morning.

Sorry George, but I read all the posts between you guys, and it seems like there's only one person who failed, and it ain't Kondor

Kondor, I commend you for getting under George's skin, no one has done that to him before like you did .
Much obliged for the shout-out, Toastman.
teeth_smile.gif


All part of the friendly service.

I'll be here all week... two shows a day...
wink_smile.gif
tongue_smile.gif


Have a good Thanksgiving holiday!
 
Last edited:
Yet another of your epic FAILS.
Guess your hasbara isn't hitting on all cylinders this morning.

Sorry George, but I read all the posts between you guys, and it seems like there's only one person who failed, and it ain't Kondor

Kondor, I commend you for getting under George's skin, no one has done that to him before like you did .
Much obliged for the shout-out, Toastman.
teeth_smile.gif


All part of the friendly service.

I'll be here all week... two shows a day...
wink_smile.gif
tongue_smile.gif


Have a good Thanksgiving holiday!

Same to you. Although here in Canada, we already had Thanksgiving ;)
 
"...Yet another of your epic FAILS..."
You seem to copycat a lot of the verbiage and phrases that I use, within hours or a day-or-so of me using it (as I did with 'Epic Fail' in lambasting your Sherri-buddy yesterday when she got too arrogant and erroneous in her assertions about Israeli deportations of African illegal aliens).

Are you one of those symbiotic types who plagiarize the verbiage and style of others in order to overcome a deficiency of imagination and creativity in your own right?

This would not be overly surprising, given your blinkered one-trick-pony approach to some of this, and to stalking your colleagues.

Not that you demonstrate any particularly interesting technique nor content nor talent in such lackluster stalking.

You can do better than that, can't you? Bring it, punk.


"...Guess your hasbara isn't hitting on all cylinders this morning."
I have NO idea what you are talking about, with respect to either a particular 'Epic Fail' nor 'Hasbara'...

However, I am comforted by the idea that YOU have no idea what you are talking about, either.
tongue_smile.gif


Not to mention that none of this has anything whatsoever to do with Iran and recent developments pertaining to their attainment of nuclear weaponry.
I suppose you are actually arrogant enough to believe you were the first to use the phrase "epic fail" on USMB, right? Must be tough being a legend in your own mind and a one hasbara-hack parade, constantly revealing itself to be less than literate and void of any sense of Reality?

Are you "comforted" by the idea that rich Arabs and rich Jews are united in their fear of rich Persians?


"Saudi Arabia, as everyone that follows this story, has been certainly one of the driving force in what's unfolding in Syria. The armed opposition in Syria has been armed by Saudi Arabia, and the Saudis have been putting enormous pressure on the American government to directly militarily intervene.

"United States is now involved in negotiations with Iran to make some kind of a pact that would have the Iranians back off on any nuclear program they have. The Iranians say it's not a weaponized program, and so does American intelligence, but there's a lot of fear or concern on the part of many that in fact it could become a weaponized program.

"So negotiations are finally taking place, but it's fairly well known that the Saudis are not very happy about these negotiations, along with Israel, at least behind the scenes.

"The Saudis have been saying these negotiations should not even take place.

"Prince Bandar, head of the Saudi National Security Council, recently told European diplomats that the United States was losing its credibility in the Middle East because it wouldn't militarily intervene in Syria and because of what they see as backing down to Iran."

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=11103
 
"...I suppose you are actually arrogant enough to believe you were the first to use the phrase 'epic fail' on USMB..."
Nope, but it's not part of YOUR stock-in-trade, until you see somebody else using it to good effect; being the unimaginative, uncreative copycat that you are.

"...Must be tough being a legend in your own mind and a one hasbara-hack parade, constantly revealing itself to be less than literate and void of any sense of Reality?.."
Oh, I can be dumb as a box-o-rox often enough, and there are many worthy souls haunting this board who do a better job in articulating and advancing positions than I can.

I am merely content in the knowledge that YOU are NOT one of those.


"...Are you 'comforted' by the idea that rich Arabs and rich Jews are united in their fear of rich Persians?..."
I couldn't give a rat's ass less, except for how this impacts upon the security of the United States and her allies and friends, both now and in the future.
 
"...I suppose you are actually arrogant enough to believe you were the first to use the phrase 'epic fail' on USMB..."
Nope, but it's not part of YOUR stock-in-trade, until you see somebody else using it to good effect; being the unimaginative, uncreative copycat that you are.

"...Must be tough being a legend in your own mind and a one hasbara-hack parade, constantly revealing itself to be less than literate and void of any sense of Reality?.."
Oh, I can be dumb as a box-o-rox often enough, and there are many worthy souls haunting this board who do a better job in articulating and advancing positions than I can.

I am merely content in the knowledge that YOU are NOT one of those.


"...Are you 'comforted' by the idea that rich Arabs and rich Jews are united in their fear of rich Persians?..."
I couldn't give a rat's ass less, except for how this impacts upon the security of the United States and her allies and friends, both now and in the future.
And you think advancing the interest of 7-8 million Jews in Israel over 1.6 billion Muslims world wide favorably impacts the security of the US? Do tell.
 
"...And you think advancing the interest of 7-8 million Jews in Israel over 1.6 billion Muslims world wide favorably impacts the security of the US? Do tell."
Yes.

Israel serves as a tripwire and early warning system for the US and The West against a resurgent and militant and re-militarizing Islam.

The West (secularized Christendom) needs outposts and proxy-warriors and staging-areas on the frontier of this re-emerging threat.

We (the West) let the Israelis get away with a lot, partly out of guilt and penance over the Holocaust, partly out of strategic and tactical interests in having a strong proxy and ally on the frontier when needed.

Numbers don't matter.

Good and brave friends do, however.

And we like the Jews MUCH better than we like the Muslims.

Always have.

Always will.
 
Obama's Iran Deal


Stephens: Worse Than Munich

In 1938, Chamberlain bought time to rearm. In 2013, Obama gives Iran time to go nuclear.

By BRET STEPHENS

Nov. 25, 2013 6:47 p.m. ET

To adapt Churchill : Never in the field of global diplomacy has so much been given away by so many for so little.

Britain and France's capitulation to Nazi Germany at Munich has long been a byword for ignominy, moral and diplomatic. Yet neither Neville Chamberlain nor Édouard Daladier had the public support or military wherewithal to stand up to Hitler in September 1938. Britain had just 384,000 men in its regular army; the first Spitfire aircraft only entered RAF service that summer. "Peace for our time" it was not, but at least appeasement bought the West a year to rearm.

The signing of the Paris Peace Accords in January 1973 was a betrayal of an embattled U.S. ally and the abandonment of an effort for which 58,000 American troops gave their lives. Yet it did end America's participation in a peripheral war, which neither Congress nor the public could indefinitely support. "Peace with honor" it was not, as the victims of Cambodia's Killing Fields or Vietnam's re-education camps can attest. But, for American purposes at least, it was peace.

By contrast, the interim nuclear agreement signed in Geneva on Sunday by Iran and the six big powers has many of the flaws of Munich and Paris. But it has none of their redeeming or exculpating aspects.

Consider: Britain and France came to Munich as military weaklings. The U.S. and its allies face Iran from a position of overwhelming strength. Britain and France won time to rearm. The U.S. and its allies have given Iran more time to stockpile uranium and develop its nuclear infrastructure. Britain and France had overwhelming domestic constituencies in favor of any deal that would avoid war. The Obama administration is defying broad bipartisan majorities in both houses of Congress for the sake of a deal.

As for the Vietnam parallels, the U.S. showed military resolve in the run-up to the Paris Accords with a massive bombing and mining campaign of the North that demonstrated presidential resolve and forced Hanoi to sign the deal. The administration comes to Geneva fresh from worming its way out of its own threat to use force to punish Syria's Bashar Assad for his use of chemical weapons against his own people.

The Nixon administration also exited Vietnam in the context of a durable opening to Beijing that helped tilt the global balance of power against Moscow. Now the U.S. is attempting a fleeting opening with Tehran at the expense of a durable alliance of values with Israel and interests with Saudi Arabia. "How to Lose Friends and Alienate People" is the title of a hilarious memoir by British author Toby Young —but it could equally be the history of Barack Obama's foreign policy.

That's where the differences end between Geneva and the previous accords. What they have in common is that each deal was a betrayal of small countries—Czechoslovakia, South Vietnam, Israel—that had relied on Western security guarantees. Each was a victory for the dictatorships: "No matter the world wants it or not," Iranian President Hasan Rouhani said Sunday, "this path will, God willingly, continue to the peak that has been considered by the martyred nuclear scientists." Each deal increased the contempt of the dictatorships for the democracies: "If ever that silly old man comes interfering here again with his umbrella," Hitler is reported to have said of Chamberlain after Munich, "I'll kick him downstairs and jump on his stomach."

And each deal was a prelude to worse. After Munich came the conquest of Czechoslovakia, the Nazi-Soviet pact and World War II. After Paris came the fall of Saigon and Phnom Penh and the humiliating exit from the embassy rooftop. After Geneva there will come a new, chaotic Mideast reality in which the United States will lose leverage over enemies and friends alike.

What will that look like? Iran will gradually shake free of sanctions and glide into a zone of nuclear ambiguity that will keep its adversaries guessing until it opts to make its capabilities known. Saudi Arabia will move swiftly to acquire a nuclear deterrent from its clients in Islamabad; Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal made that clear to the Journal last week when he indiscreetly discussed "the arrangement with Pakistan." Egypt is beginning to ponder a nuclear option of its own while drawing closer to a security alliance with Russia.

As for Israel, it cannot afford to live in a neighborhood where Iran becomes nuclear, Assad remains in power, and Hezbollah—Israel's most immediate military threat—gains strength, clout and battlefield experience. The chances that Israel will hazard a strike on Iran's nuclear sites greatly increased since Geneva. More so the chances of another war with Hezbollah.

After World War II the U.S. created a global system of security alliances to prevent the kind of foreign policy freelancing that is again becoming rampant in the Middle East. It worked until President Obama decided in his wisdom to throw it away. If you hear echoes of the 1930s in the capitulation at Geneva, it's because the West is being led by the same sort of men, minus the umbrellas.

Write to [email protected]

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303281504579219931479934854
 
Last edited:
"...And you think advancing the interest of 7-8 million Jews in Israel over 1.6 billion Muslims world wide favorably impacts the security of the US? Do tell."
Yes.

Israel serves as a tripwire and early warning system for the US and The West against a resurgent and militant and re-militarizing Islam.

The West (secularized Christendom) needs outposts and proxy-warriors and staging-areas on the frontier of this re-emerging threat.

We (the West) let the Israelis get away with a lot, partly out of guilt and penance over the Holocaust, partly out of strategic and tactical interests in having a strong proxy and ally on the frontier when needed.

Numbers don't matter.

Good and brave friends do, however.

And we like the Jews MUCH better than we like the Muslims.

Always have.

Always will.
"Secularized Christendom" has needed outposts and proxy warriors in the Middle East since 1099 when the Holy Roman Empire sent its hired killers to "free the Holy Land from the infidel", and, incidentally, I'm sure, take control of trade routes to the Far East. The Crusaders set up assorted Christian states and Islam vowed jihad to regain control.

Jews are merely the latest colonial chapter in a thousand year Reich of plopping proxy states composed primarily by people of European origin wherever the Empire most needs them: "A little, loyal Jewish Ulster in the heart of Arab hostilism."

Israel would never have survived without the continuous financial and military and diplomatic support it receives from the greatest purveyor of violence in the world, and even a few Israeli historians might remember the long habit the US has of abandoning allies whenever it suits the prevailing political winds.

The sooner the better.
 
"...And you think advancing the interest of 7-8 million Jews in Israel over 1.6 billion Muslims world wide favorably impacts the security of the US? Do tell."
Yes.

Israel serves as a tripwire and early warning system for the US and The West against a resurgent and militant and re-militarizing Islam.

The West (secularized Christendom) needs outposts and proxy-warriors and staging-areas on the frontier of this re-emerging threat.

We (the West) let the Israelis get away with a lot, partly out of guilt and penance over the Holocaust, partly out of strategic and tactical interests in having a strong proxy and ally on the frontier when needed.

Numbers don't matter.

Good and brave friends do, however.

And we like the Jews MUCH better than we like the Muslims.

Always have.

Always will.
"Secularized Christendom" has needed outposts and proxy warriors in the Middle East since 1099 when the Holy Roman Empire sent its hired killers to "free the Holy Land from the infidel", and, incidentally, I'm sure, take control of trade routes to the Far East. The Crusaders set up assorted Christian states and Islam vowed jihad to regain control.

Jews are merely the latest colonial chapter in a thousand year Reich of plopping proxy states composed primarily by people of European origin wherever the Empire most needs them: "A little, loyal Jewish Ulster in the heart of Arab hostilism."

Israel would never have survived without the continuous financial and military and diplomatic support it receives from the greatest purveyor of violence in the world, and even a few Israeli historians might remember the long habit the US has of abandoning allies whenever it suits the prevailing political winds.

The sooner the better.
George the Jihadi hates America so much, it seems like he's suffering here.

Why don't you just get up and leave? I'm sure Hamas or Hezbollah could use a good foot soldier like you. What are you doing wasting your time on these boards?
 

Forum List

Back
Top