Select Company Escorts

"Iran cannot have nukes" Trump warns

wigglee

Well-known member
Oct 13, 2010
10,491
2,444
113
You also want to compare Biden's mental state that was hidden by his party for his term, to Trump, who has achieved more leading up to taking office and in his first week than many?
Trump proudly shows his sad mental state every day and his minions pretend it is acceptable and normal. Cancelling all equity regulations and LGBTQ rights is not a big achievement. He just fired a bunch of independent watchers of government departments for partisan reasons. Many of his fascist sharpie rulings are unconstitutional and are being challenged in court. He is a crude bully who picks on weaker ally nations with lies and aggressive behaviour. Meanwhile nothing on Putin or China... what a coward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankfooter

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
93,153
23,098
113
Your statement was that I've previously wanted war and that I still want war. ("Do you still beat your wife? is also just a question.) The question was wondering what my reasons were. I've never stated that I want war and you can't find anywhere that I've stated as such. That is the only response you require.

This thread is about trump and Iranian nukes. Your post is totally off topic.
No, my post is entirely on point.
The only reason this thread is here is because of the 30 years of crying wolf about Iran being just months away from building nukes and destroying Israel in order to justify war. Attitudes like yours and basketcase are the reason, your claim that Israel needs to protect themselves from everyone they want to attack is the same message AIPAC has their american politicians repeat.

Trump pulled the US out of the JCPOA and just sent more 2000 lb bombs in case they find something they missed in Gaza. He's also talked about supporting ethnic cleansing and having Jared come in to build some luxury beachfront property.

The only question is whether he posted this video on his SM because he's senile or he won't start a war with Iran.

 

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
9,262
7,464
113
GWB wasn't at war for 8 years like Obama was.
Obama increased drone attacks so no he didn't really "step down" wars...he just replaced human soldiers.
Obama also put kids in cages at the border...you remember that right? You know...when a picture surfaced of kids in cages during Trump's first term and everyone assumed it was Trump doing that only to find out it was a pic from Obama's era...then crickets.
Yes GWB was at war for 8 years. Sept 11 2001 was on his watch, his first year. He was at war the entire time he was president from that moment onward. Obama presided out of the troops leaving iraq. That's not a step down? Look at his casualties v Bush.
Cmon man. This is all publicly available information.
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
7,308
4,419
113
When did I say that?

You're the one who brought in Trump and Obama's record back in post 101.



I pointed out that they both started zero wars.

I never said Trump was a war monger and Obama was too nice to even be considered that.
I never brought up Obama's "niceness" at all.
Why would I?



I'm quite fond of experts.



Good find!
This is excellent stuff by your expert.

"Then Trump went on to repeat the very same pirouette from anti-war candidate to endless war president that Obama had performed."

[...]

"By comparison, Trump’s augmentation of the military budget (which he constantly bragged about), his escalation of the use of the Special Forces even beyond the high-water mark Obama reached, and his expansion of the drone empire with ever more strikes, encountered little bipartisan complaint. After all, it was just the policy of the prior two presidents, only more so."

And so on.

It's a good read, and supports my point quite strongly.



No problem with this one either.
I think you posted it earlier.

Again, nothing that contradicts what I've been saying.



Indeed there were.
The whole shift to covert missions and air strikes was a big thing that happened under Obama.
The US's record since 9/11 hasn't been anything to brag about.


And Trump loved him some air strikes.

" More US strikes have hit Yemen in President Donald Trump's first 100 days in office than in all of 2015 and 2016 combined, "


Trump relaxed the whole "try not to kill civilians" thing, too.

For someone who jumped into this conversation trying to poke holes in my comments you sure are tap dancing right now.

Maybe go back and capture the essence of what I was saying and don't just jump in with comments without understand the context of the argument.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Valcazar

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
7,308
4,419
113
Yes, because it is wrong.
They both have a pretty shitty record for both.
"Obama's is much worse than Trump's" is pretty clearly wrong by the data.
Wrong.
Main reason being Obama was in office for 8 years, so those numbers alone are greater than Trump could ever have had.

That's just one point.

No other president in history was at war for 8 years. Obama was. You can make excuses but by definition and stats, he was a war monger. He chose to remain at war for that long.

It must be an inconvenient truth for anyone who is just looking to justify their hatred for Trump and then realizing Obama's record was much worse. Did I mention "Deporter in Chief"?

Don't be hypocritical. Everyone sees through it.
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
7,308
4,419
113
Trump proudly shows his sad mental state every day and his minions pretend it is acceptable and normal. Cancelling all equity regulations and LGBTQ rights is not a big achievement. He just fired a bunch of independent watchers of government departments for partisan reasons. Many of his fascist sharpie rulings are unconstitutional and are being challenged in court. He is a crude bully who picks on weaker ally nations with lies and aggressive behaviour. Meanwhile nothing on Putin or China... what a coward.
Yeah sure...keep telling yourself that as he makes tremendous progress if it makes you feel better. Peddling lies doesn't help your cause either.

Explains why they turfed the Dems after a single term...people like you and your smug attitude.

Sad.
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
7,308
4,419
113
you were bragging about Trump being so peaceful... well sometimes killing is appropriate.
Yes and that's why Obama did it for longer than any president in US history. He alone holds that distinction.
Now do you understand my point?
 

Skoob

Well-known member
Jun 1, 2022
7,308
4,419
113
Yes GWB was at war for 8 years. Sept 11 2001 was on his watch, his first year. He was at war the entire time he was president from that moment onward. Obama presided out of the troops leaving iraq. That's not a step down? Look at his casualties v Bush.
Cmon man. This is all publicly available information.
No other US president has been at war every year of their presidency. Obama alone holds that distinction. I've already posted that info here several times.
Do you guys read? Or is it too shocking to believe that "nice guy" Obama could really be such a war monger?
 

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
9,262
7,464
113
No other US president has been at war every year of their presidency. Obama alone holds that distinction. I've already posted that info here several times.
Do you guys read? Or is it too shocking to believe that "nice guy" Obama could really be such a war monger?
Obama alone? So the fact he drew it down and ended involvement made him a war monger? Thats not the definition. In fact the opposite of the definition.
If you know how things work you cannot out 400,000 troops overnight. There are force protection issues too. You're forgiven if you don't know that. But context matters.
..
But what is more concerning are these issues.

Nixon inherited the Vietnam war. US combat troops out (1973) just before his resignation (1974), though advisors were left behind and last troops off the roof in 1975. Thus depending how you classify troops and war..every year he had folks fighting.
More clearly, LBJ was at war every year of his presidency.
Kennedy sent first combat advisors and troops his first year, thus every year...
US government fought native Americans after Civil War through 1880s. Thus all president's implicated.
Lincoln was at war every year of his presidency, except last 3 or 4 days.

Please reconsider

.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Valcazar

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,971
6,853
113
Cause and effect would depend on when you want to start looking at this problem.
I look at it from the time of the Shah and I believe that set the stage for the current hostilities.
So I blame the US for it.
But we do not have to do all that.
Regardless of the why, you admit that there have been attacks on Iran.
You can justify those attacks any way you want to.
But they are attacks.
We do not have to agree on who started what.
We do not have to agree on who is right or wrong.
We do not need agreement on these things because these are matters of perspectives and they differ on both sides.
We can however agree that if Iran is considered a national security threat to Israel and the US, then by the same measure both countries are national security threats for Iran.
That would justify Iran developing nukes to protect itself.
The fact that the US and Israel are many times more powerful than Iran, legitimately makes this a bigger existential crisis for Iran than the other way around.
Of course the Shah had a lot of internal support and the Soviets were supportive of the anti-western factions in Iran both before and after. Geopolitics is a multi-layer puzzle and the blame for any conflict includes many local and many world powers, not just the US.

And yes, Iran's nuclear program has been attacked. Meanwhile Iran's military have been very active attacking other countries including Europe, the Caucuses, Africa, and South America. Your argument is the equivalent of punching a guy then pulling a gun when he wants to fight back.

Regardless, as long as Iran wants to be a NPT state, there are obligations and massively accelerating their enrichment to 60% can only be seen as a threat as Iran has no legitimate use for anything over 3.67% right now, not even a 20% research reactor online.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,971
6,853
113
Oh yes, because you know the Israelis were coming to hand out candy. lol. We know what happend to thise that stayed....
Yes, they became full citizens, currently active in all areas of Israeli society including government, the courts, and even the military. But that doesn't fit your world view so you just desperately ignore reality.

Unlike you, I don't think explanations are the same as justifications but much of Israeli society is shaped by their experiences. Until the peace deal with Egypt, they lived with the daily threat of military invasion or terror attack and since then, they've lived with the possibility of their neighbours blowing them up on busses.

That doesn't excuse the extremists in Israeli society, any more than the Nakba excuses the extremists in Palestinian society.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,971
6,853
113
So the proof of your conspiracy is an op/ed from a guy with fringe beliefs?

The UN went into Iraq because Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and the second war was Saddam flouting the UN sanctions as an excuse for Western corporations seeing oil profits.

But you have a view that Jews control the world so you won't accept that reality.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,971
6,853
113
And it is naive to ignore the USAs.

A deal was stuck, then immediately torn up.
Iran made moves in response.

Assuming those moves would have been the same if the deal had not been torn up makes little sense.
We can't know the counter factual.

Does this mean we must now ignore the moves Iran has made? No.
I don't ignore the US. Unlike many posters here though, I understand that the US is just one of many players in the game.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,971
6,853
113
No, but it means that if you want peace you find a way to deescalate the situation through ending sanctions and renegotiating nuclear treaties.
Sadly neither trump or AIPAC are ever interested in peaceful solutions.

Iran hasn't attacked another country in hundreds of years while the US and Israel seem to do so every month.
And again the insanely anti-Jewish conspiracy theories that Jews control the US.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,971
6,853
113
The idea that Iran would attack the US backed and nuclear armed Israel is nonsense.
Just from the past year

Direct

indirect
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
61,971
6,853
113
No, your analysis is really quite clueless.
Iran's leaders are despots, but smart. They don't start wars they could lose, they would never attack nuclear armed Israel.
Again, all the US/Israeli pressure has done over the years is to pressure the government to keep the hardcore side in power and lessen the chance of reform.

If you don't want Iran to build nukes stop threatening them with war all the time.
Again, the inversion of history. If Iran doesn't want their aggressive nuclear program targeted, maybe they shouldn't have an aggressive nuclear program.

As you said, the Mullahs are smart and they know exactly what they want out of their nuclear 'ambiguity' and they know exactly how the world could react.
 
Toronto Escorts