An Edit (Upon the sage advice of a friend): On second thought, I will post ANY comment submitted with such a theme. What's more, I will post any future "private" (email, etc.) attacks of such a nature publicly, here on the blog, for public discussion, debate, and possible public crucifixion.
For crying out loud, people. Really.
Attack my logic and my reasoning, if you will. That's what grown ups call a conversation, or a debate.
It seems folks of all stripes, left, right, and otherwise, resort to "racist!" and "anti-semite!" when logic fails. The Marxist / Liberal name calling / ad hominem idiotry is getting more than a little old.
As for "anti-semite"? You want to see Jews get hurt, for real? Push an attack on Iran. In addition to there being over 10,000 Jews in Iran, attacking Iran will, without any doubt whatsoever, result in immediate conventional and unconventional -military and "terrorist"- attacks on Israel. You think Jews in Iran are persecuted now? You think Israel is in physical danger now?
For the most part, this community has been supportive, or at least mostly tolerant, of my position. Others think that it is divisive and a distraction. I disagree, as this situation speaks to everything we talk about- debt, imperialism, the police state, expanding government, government propaganda and deceit, etc. This is the fuel, the dung heap, upon which government grows. It is unfortunate that after all we are seeing, we do not see this more plainly as a whole.
I know that my position deeply offends quite a few, however. I regret, but cannot change that. Based on some of the conversations I've had, one wonders if a First Amendment would indeed exist at all under some folks' version of a "restored", "constitutional" republic.
No matter. I will live, as far as I am able, in accordance with Jefferson's Pledge:
"I have sworn upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."Resist.
There is so much intolerance in this madness we see unfolding. Disagreement and debate is healthy from a moral and rational human perspective.
ReplyDeleteI dont think there's any saving anyone who hasnt realized this and continues to hang labels on any of us. Sticks and stones Bro.
The die is cast,and the cast will die.......
CIII
Not me AP, I agree with you 100% on this!
ReplyDeletePickdog
III
Reminds me of a comment from a friend stating that a member of a Confederate Heritage outfit had been accused of being "racist." I replied: Good Lord, we've got more important things to worry about, like the Marxist in the WH.
ReplyDeleteThere is an assumtion that if Iran gets the bomb they want use it to attack Israell anyways. Every single time we or Israel have pulled back Iran (the government) and their proxies have used the time to strengthen their position to go on an offensive.
ReplyDeletePast behavior is usually a pretty good indicator for future actions.
Hmmm... still haven't convinced me as to where I could be going wrong. Yes attacking Iran will be bad. A nuked Israel or even us would be even worse.
Side note did you know Che's on record saying that if they had if gotten the nukes onto their soil, they probable would of used them to strikeout at the US?
Hmmm....
Josh K.-
ReplyDeleteEvery single time we or Israel have pulled back Iran (the government) and their proxies have used the time to strengthen their position to go on an offensive.
Proof, friend. This is an unfounded statement.
What are you trying to say, anyway?
Does the US hit them or not?
Take a position. We cannot sit in the Straits forever.
AP
There is a third way.
ReplyDeleteWe can continue economic sanctions.
Those never hurt the common innocent person. Never.
They always hurt the rulers, right?
Read-
http://www.fff.org/freedom/0297c.asp
The name of the game is regime change. Iran threatened the international / US banking cartel.
Go politicians. Go bankers. Rah rah rah.
AP
I already told you my position Hit the Enrichment facilities suport an insurgency (Green Movment).
ReplyDeleteGaza... Israel pull out gives autonomy to them, Hasas uses it as a staging area to lauch rockets forcing blockade.
Lebonon... Israel pull out gives autonomy to them, Hezbollah use it as a staging area to lauch rockets into Israel. Two latest examples.
I'm sure The Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution had nothing to do with any of that.
You can believe we are the only agresors in this if you want.
We are in a 1500 yr old feud. Bothsides have to want the fighting to stop. You tell me how to get 'them' to not want to convert me or kill me (thst I feel isn't just wishful thinking), and I'll suport unconditionsl pull out.
So your position is to initiate a hot war of aggression.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you believe the US has been around for 1500 years.
I don't care if Israel and Iran, or Israel and whoever duke it out.
You believe we are justified in initiating a war of aggression on behalf of another nation.
I do not.
Guess that much is clear.
AP
My position is can take out their ability to maje nukes or you can live with the consequences what ever they happen to be.
ReplyDeleteNo my position is we are in hot war of aggression, not directly but threw proxies. We are also already in an economic war with them. You seem to be under the impression that if we discide not to fight that we want have to. Sometimes people or groups don't give you a choice. Sometime just walking away gives those that want to hurt you a better chance at doing more damage. To disengage with someone or group that wants a fight, you first must make them or convince them not to or it's not in there best interest.
Have we even attepted to do any of that, or are we just going to up and leave see what happens?
On to the Israel question.
Does our word as a nation means shit to you? That is what alliances are all about. We ineffect said your interest are our interest, and why I will never join a group that doesn't understand this. This is why most of the rest of the world doesn't trust us, because we never follow through on our commitments. Should we have intered into it thats debatable, but we did and this is where we are at.
Drop an ally when it becomes inconvenant is deplorable.
Screw Isreal, Iran, freefor, opfor, the US... everyone, because if our word doesn't mean anthing then none of it does.
Besides that wasn't my point those where just examples of how Iran operates.
Old world - Islams around 1500 years and they have been duking it out with wester culture ever since. This is a clash of cultures. Sharia law and Moses Law. thats the core of the dispute as I see it.
Will see...
Josh-
ReplyDeleteYes, we'll see.
You misrepresent my clearly stated position.
Defend allies when attacked, yes.
A pre-emptive strike?
Said ally is on its own.
I suppose we're done now, though.
AP
Speaking out of turn here but:
ReplyDeleteDoes our word as a nation means shit to you?
Not since we abandoned Vietnam. Our word is absolutely worthless.
So, Isreal only has the right to defend itself from a nuclear attack after said attack...
ReplyDeleteIsrael is the size of Rhode Island...
Again Josh, we disagree.
ReplyDeleteNot on Israel's size, but on the premises at work in this discussion.
Since we do not -and likely will not- agree on the premise this discussion is based on, going back and forth seems rather pointless.
Wouldn't you agree?
AP
Your asking Israel to gamble with every man woman and child that your premise is correct. To me this isn't about wether your premise correct or not. They don't get a second chance if they are wrong on this one. I think they have the right to error on the side of caution.
ReplyDeleteP.S. I was't trying to misrepresent your position, just show a posible outcome/consequence that your position my result in. Plan for the worst, hope for the best. I beleive in O'Tool's Law wich states, Murphy was an optimist.
I wouldn't call it pointless. More frustrating, but thought I give it another shot at representing thd otherside. Not all of us that suport intervention on the Iran/nuke issue are their because we are for warmongering, just sometime things are just necessary.
ReplyDeleteAll I'll say on this for now.
:-)
Your asking Israel to gamble with every man woman and child that your premise is correct..
ReplyDeleteNo, no, no, no, no.
I don't give two flying damns what Israel does. I care what the US does. Israel can have at it. Leave us out of an Israeli-started war.
*************
To address a second issue with your statement-
Your asking Israel to gamble with every man woman and child that your premise is correct..
So are you, Josh, don't you see this?
If you're wrong, and they start a war over nothing, this means very, very bad juju. I am taking the position of a possible evil befalling them, your course of action, this...
"I already told you my position Hit the Enrichment facilities suport an insurgency (Green Movment)."
(Attacking Iran and going for Regime change)
Guarantees a war. A bad one. A war that may end our nation's superpower days.
Where will Israel be then, Josh?
You are asking Israel to make a "gamble" that is not a gamble. It is a guarantee of war. You're also assuming Iran and its several nuclear allies have no nuclear weapons.
Bad mistake.
I don't care what they do.
I don't care what gambles Israel takes or does not take.
I DON'T CARE. That's my point. If they want to attack, fine.
Whatever. Have at it.
***********
Josh, the contradictions inherent in your position are interesting to me.
First, you claim that this is a 1,500 year old ongoing fight.
Then, you claim that limited surgical strikes and regime change will solve the problem. How will limited surgical strikes and attempted regime change solve a problem such as you describe? This course of action, if you are correct, will only encourage Iran to get nukes.
Cuz I guarantee you this- If Iran had them, we wouldn't be screwing with them.
If you're right, and this is a millenia-old cultural war that will not end until one side or the other is dead, the only solution that will end it is total war and genocide.
This is the logical outcome of your line of logic, taken to its end.
Funny. A holocaust for Israel's sake.
Since it would be my ass heading back to the damn middle east should the balloon go up with Iran, maybe my experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan hold a little merit?
ReplyDeleteA war with Iran would not produce "security" for anyone. The middle east has not been "stabilized" by US actions in either Iraq or Afghanistan and the "third times the charm" isn't going to happen with Iran.
Between Iraq, Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia they could end Iran militarily without blinking. However the Iranians speak Persian Dari and worship a hardline Shia version of Islam so that the only outcome would be "yet another inurgency."
So before anyone wants to send my ass back to the sand,
What circumstance requires the unique capabilities of the US?
What is the desired outcome of this "military action"? I mean Libya is turning out really great right?
Getting America out of the middle east (even if we continue to give aid to Israel) would do more for us than staying and opening a fourth front in the eternal struggle against a noun.