Sexy Friends Toronto
Toronto Escorts

New York Times: Trump abruptly called off military strikes

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,707
3,402
113
This guy does not believe in your two options as it was ridiculous in the first place:

https://www.salon.com/2019/06/23/bernie-sanders-scathingly-denounces-donald-trumps-iran-policy/

So my arguments are more in line with Sanders, while you and Trump are birds of the same feather. When are you going to support Sanders, instead of your passionate support for the crap when Trump gets his panties in a twist??
I'm pretty sure Sanders doesn't support military action against Iran........
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,707
3,402
113
The 3rd option would be not tearing up that treaty, which would have eliminated the first 2 options.
Perhaps. Or perhaps not. Iran was continuing its terror support. And the war hawks want this, no matter what excuse they have to contrive.

The USA would be in Syria right now as well. Full boots on the ground.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
The 3rd option would be not tearing up that treaty, which would have eliminated the first 2 options.
True, not aligning with Saudi Arabia and Israel and letting Bolton free would have allowed a working treaty to continue to work.
https://www.axios.com/scoop-us-and-...887-51be0529-3ff5-4d8f-89f1-6c89423d4dff.html

Salon notes all the crap Bolton and Pompeo are trying to push as justifications.
https://www.axios.com/scoop-us-and-...887-51be0529-3ff5-4d8f-89f1-6c89423d4dff.html
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
Perhaps. Or perhaps not. Iran was continuing its terror support. And the war hawks want this, no matter what excuse they have to contrive.

The USA would be in Syria right now as well. Full boots on the ground.
The two sides right now are Saudi/Israel vs Iran.
Backing either one of those sides is just stupid.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,707
3,402
113
The two sides right now are Saudi/Israel vs Iran.
Backing either one of those sides is just stupid.
And so does this mean you are going to say denounce Adam Shiff who has clearly stated it was lran and they should go to war?
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,899
1,172
113
I have no doubt that Trump would launch a war with Iran in the next year for the sole reason of staving off a horrendous defeat at the polls .
Butler1000, bver_hunter and others, see what happens when you wind everyone up with these binary, partisan arguments. You eventually get posts like this.

We all should think clearly and independently on important global matters. You can be for higher tax rates, environmental regulation, etc. Foreign affairs are far more complicated and not as simple as Obama good, Trump bad.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
27,331
5,556
113
I'm pretty sure Sanders doesn't support military action against Iran........
Would Sanders have got himself in a pickle like Trump did in the first place?? You have to take the whole issue and not nitpick as to:

Ahhhh, but see my idol did not trigger a war ten minutes before it could have taken place with the deaths of 150 people. So choose whether he should have said ayyy or nyyyy!!
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
27,331
5,556
113
Butler1000, bver_hunter and others, see what happens when you wind everyone up with these binary, partisan arguments. You eventually get posts like this.

We all should think clearly and independently on important global matters. You can be for higher tax rates, environmental regulation, etc. Foreign affairs are far more complicated and not as simple as Obama good, Trump bad.
Wigglee is not off the mark, as you may seem to believe so. Why did Trump cancel the Iran deal and with the support of very hardline advisers like Pompeo and Bolton? He wants his base to think that he can get a much better deal and Iran will comply just like North Korea did. He is deliberately creating all the turmoil with all those tariffs, sanctions and now even real military threats. All these actions just to appease his base in believing that he is solving not only Make America Great problems but globally as well!!
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,707
3,402
113
Would Sanders have got himself in a pickle like Trump did in the first place?? You have to take the whole issue and not nitpick as to:

Ahhhh, but see my idol did not trigger a war ten minutes before it could have taken place with the deaths of 150 people. So choose whether he should have said ayyy or nyyyy!!
Look up Realpolitik and its definition sometime.

But no I doubt Sanders would have found himself in the same situation. I also doubt he would have signed the Iran deal either.

What matters to me right now though is Trump didn't kill people for the sake of a drone. And unless you can that's a good thing that means you prefer war.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,707
3,402
113
Butler1000, bver_hunter and others, see what happens when you wind everyone up with these binary, partisan arguments. You eventually get posts like this.

We all should think clearly and independently on important global matters. You can be for higher tax rates, environmental regulation, etc. Foreign affairs are far more complicated and not as simple as Obama good, Trump bad.
Actually the vast majority of my posts are Congress bad, establishment bad, war machine bad.

Congress holds the purse strings, none of this happens without them enabling it. And the extra 150 billion added over 2years(A 25%increase) was a bipartisan effort.

This is now the third time they have tried to goad things into a war. Syria, Venezuela (using the same guy in charge of Iran/Contra? Really?) And now I think the evidence shows Iran.

And he wouldn't bite. Anytime a bomb isn't dropped that's a good thing, and I don't care who doesn't do it.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,899
1,172
113
He is deliberately creating all the turmoil with all those tariffs, sanctions and now even real military threats. All these actions just to appease his base in believing that he is solving not only Make America Great problems but globally as well!!
It's hard for liberals to believe that Trump could take a different approach than Obama and it would it be better for long-term global security. In fact, it has to be impossible. It has to be.

I spent some of my impressionable adult years constantly hearing the same thing about President Reagan. Outside Thatcher, Reagan didn't have a lot of European support.

Your being disingenuous to my initial comment. Trump's base supports tough stances with trade and embargoes, but is not wild about military interventionism. One of the fundamental problems we have is the Left could never say "What!!! Iran can produce nuclear weapons in a few years while they develop missile technology. That's the deal!??"
 

HungSowel

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2017
2,691
1,600
113
It's hard for liberals to believe that Trump could take a different approach than Obama and it would it be better for long-term global security. In fact, it has to be impossible. It has to be.

I spent some of my impressionable adult years constantly hearing the same thing about President Reagan. Outside Thatcher, Reagan didn't have a lot of European support.

Your being disingenuous to my initial comment. Trump's base supports tough stances with trade and embargoes, but is not wild about military interventionism. One of the fundamental problems we have is the Left could never say "What!!! Iran can produce nuclear weapons in a few years while they develop missile technology. That's the deal!??"
The deal is for Iran to freeze their nuclear program, this gives the US first strike capability without having to worry about nuclear retaliation. If you see no value in that then the problem is with you and not with the left.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
Actually the vast majority of my posts are Congress bad, establishment bad, war machine bad.

Congress holds the purse strings, none of this happens without them enabling it. And the extra 150 billion added over 2years(A 25%increase) was a bipartisan effort.

This is now the third time they have tried to goad things into a war. Syria, Venezuela (using the same guy in charge of Iran/Contra? Really?) And now I think the evidence shows Iran.

And he wouldn't bite. Anytime a bomb isn't dropped that's a good thing, and I don't care who doesn't do it.
Right now congress and the senate are trying to stop Trump from selling arms to Mister Bone Saw and only Trump is refusing.
Trump is the problem.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
It's hard for liberals to believe that Trump could take a different approach than Obama and it would it be better for long-term global security. In fact, it has to be impossible. It has to be.
Obama put in place a treaty that guaranteed that Iran wouldn't build a bomb.
Trump killed it and has nearly put Iran and the US at war.

How is that better?
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,899
1,172
113
I'll guarantee you I won't jack-off for the rest of the night. Beyond that......
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,707
3,402
113
Right now congress and the senate are trying to stop Trump from selling arms to Mister Bone Saw and only Trump is refusing.
Trump is the problem.
Lol. Do you really think it isn't just a stance for public consumption?

The deals are set. The arms dealers will continue.

Congress can override a presidential veto.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
Lol. Do you really think it isn't just a stance for public consumption?

The deals are set. The arms dealers will continue.

Congress can override a presidential veto.
Only Trump stopped selling weapons to the murderer MBS, saying the US needs to sell him weapons cuz they need the cash.
 

WyattEarp

Well-known member
May 17, 2017
5,899
1,172
113
Why does the resistance lambast Trump for the trade war with China, but want him to punish the Saudis? The Chinese are just as brutal as the Saudis if not more. The Chinese have set up re-education camps in Xinjiang.

Wouldn't the Saudis just buy Russian arms in the end anyway?
 

wigglee

Well-known member
Oct 13, 2010
9,819
1,603
113
Butler1000, bver_hunter and others, see what happens when you wind everyone up with these binary, partisan arguments. You eventually get posts like this.

We all should think clearly and independently on important global matters. You can be for higher tax rates, environmental regulation, etc. Foreign affairs are far more complicated and not as simple as Obama good, Trump bad.
Unfortunately, the man playing President right now is incapable of thinking clearly except when it comes to conning his base for his own personal gain. Peace and world order are not within his realm of concern or understanding. Egotistical breastbeating and energizing his base with the MAGA myth are his schtick.
 

HungSowel

Well-known member
Mar 3, 2017
2,691
1,600
113
Why does the resistance lambast Trump for the trade war with China, but want him to punish the Saudis? The Chinese are just as brutal as the Saudis if not more. The Chinese have set up re-education camps in Xinjiang.

Wouldn't the Saudis just buy Russian arms in the end anyway?
SA attacked the US on 9/11, SA is the largest sponsor of terrorism in the world, SA threatened Canada with terrorism a few months ago, SA still crucifies political prisoners in the literal sense as in they nail political prisoners to a cross and let them suffer until they die.

If arms sales is the only important thing, then why not sell to Iran or North Korea? Both countries have killed less americans than SA.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts