09-02-2015, 02:09 PM
09-02-2015, 03:48 PM
Quote:And neither had a religious imperative for world domination either
Oh come on... the Germans were cult like in their belief of Hitler and the Aryan race. Japan had a similar cult love with the emperor having divine authority...
09-02-2015, 03:50 PM
Quote:It was partly Iran, but I agree that only happened because of incompetent US management of post-war Iraq. Bremer should never have disbanded the Republican Guard.
And we didn't implement a puppet regime in Iraq. Had we done so things might have been different. Instead they had open elections and the Shia majority elected a pro-Shia president.
I think I might have been hyperbolic regarding the puppet regime...
09-02-2015, 03:50 PM
Did you guys hear that apparently Obama has the votes to override a veto attempt?
09-02-2015, 04:05 PM
Quote:Did you guys hear that apparently Obama has the votes to override a veto attempt?
Heard it. Not really surprised or happy about it. Here's something to think about though. The final "vote" comes from a Senator that is retiring. Why do none of the other 10 democrats in The Senate that are voting against it not supporting the bill? Here's a hint. It could begin with either an E or an R.
09-02-2015, 04:22 PM
Quote:Did you guys hear that apparently Obama has the votes to override a veto attempt?
Thankfully. Can you imagine the US backing out of this deal, and then Iran decides to break the deal because the US backed out? And why would any country ever negotiate on our side again? The president agrees, and then congress backs out. all that work they put into making a deal, made worthless.
Backing out of the deal gives Iran an excuse to break their side of the agreement.
09-02-2015, 04:28 PM
Quote:Thankfully. Can you imagine the US backing out of this deal, and then Iran decides to break the deal because the US backed out? And why would any country ever negotiate on our side again? The president agrees, and then congress backs out. all that work they put into making a deal, made worthless.
Backing out of the deal gives Iran an excuse to break their side of the agreement.
Do you really think that Iran needs any excuse to break their side of the agreement?
09-02-2015, 04:37 PM
Quote:Do you really think that Iran needs any excuse to break their side of the agreement?
Do you understand that if they have the excuse to break their side of the agreement, that the other countries that agreed to this deal in the first place will see it as our fault, even if Iran would have broke the agreement anyway?
America backs out, and Iran has the perfect excuse. America sticks with the deal, and Iran has no excuse if they break the deal.
Too many Republicans Conservatives don't care about what Europe thinks. They want America to control the negotiations, and be the only party who has any say. Which is a terrible way to negotiate.
09-02-2015, 05:24 PM
Quote:Do you understand that if they have the excuse to break their side of the agreement, that the other countries that agreed to this deal in the first place will see it as our fault, even if Iran would have broke the agreement anyway?
America backs out, and Iran has the perfect excuse. America sticks with the deal, and Iran has no excuse if they break the deal.
Too many Republicans Conservatives don't care about what Europe thinks. They want America to control the negotiations, and be the only party who has any say. Which is a terrible way to negotiate.
You really need to take emotion and imagination out of the deal for a bit. Seriously. I don't say that in a demeaning way, I'm trying to say it from a real perspective.
Let me ask you this. Do you believe that America is Exceptional? Do you believe that we should be leaders in the world, especially today? What makes America great? What is a good sign of leadership? Do we under the current administration show leadership either globally or domestically?
09-02-2015, 05:56 PM
Quote:You really need to take emotion and imagination out of the deal for a bit. Seriously. I don't say that in a demeaning way, I'm trying to say it from a real perspective.
Let me ask you this. Do you believe that America is Exceptional? Do you believe that we should be leaders in the world, especially today? What makes America great? What is a good sign of leadership? Do we under the current administration show leadership either globally or domestically?
Me thinks you are the one that needs to "take emotion and inagination out of the deal." Like, read the second part of your post lol.......and I'll proudly STAND (long pause) UP...next to you...durr durr durr the USA!!!
09-02-2015, 06:16 PM
Quote:You really need to take emotion and imagination out of the deal for a bit. Seriously. I don't say that in a demeaning way, I'm trying to say it from a real perspective.
Let me ask you this. Do you believe that America is Exceptional? Do you believe that we should be leaders in the world, especially today? What makes America great? What is a good sign of leadership? Do we under the current administration show leadership either globally or domestically?
I don't think America is truly exceptional. Can we get there? Absolutely. But we still have a ways to go. America does exceptional things, but it's not truly exceptional.
A sign of good leadership, honestly, is listening to the needs of those other than yourself. It's a will to compromise, and to negotiate. It's the ability to realize that you (as the old Earth song goes) can't always get what you want.
Many here dislike the deal because there are people in Iran who cry "DEATH TO AMERICA!" Would any deal really satisfy them? It sounds to me as if they don't want a deal at all. Perhaps I'm wrong about that, but I suspect I'm not. Do you think that our European Allies want Iran to get the bomb? They don't. They believe this deal will stop them from getting the bomb. Our President thinks it will stop them from getting the bomb. Many Nuclear experts think it will stop them from getting the bomb. All of this of course hinges on them not breaking the deal -- but again, refusing to negotiate because they will break the deal means that there's no deal that would satisfy you and that you are putting negotiation off the table. Leadership is not forcing our allies to do what we want, and trying to force Iran to do the same.
"We want a better deal," many say.
Okay. So what's this better deal? And why does Iran (the most important country to agree to the deal) sign it? Why do they not say "Forget that, you're not going to undo our economic sanctions, so it's time we put all our focus on getting our nuclear bomb."
If the US decides to back out of the deal, do you think it hastens their development of the bomb, or slows it down? Keep in mind that only our sanctions would remain. And that even with the sanctions we've had recently that Iran isn't that far off from the bomb now.
09-02-2015, 06:31 PM
Quote:Okay. So what's this better deal?For many on the conservative side of the aisle, I strongly suspect that the "better deal" is a war.
In fact, I'm quite certain that Lindsey Graham and Mike Huckabee have wet dreams about war with Iran.
09-02-2015, 06:49 PM
Quote:I don't think America is truly exceptional. Can we get there? Absolutely. But we still have a ways to go. America does exceptional things, but it's not truly exceptional.
A sign of good leadership, honestly, is listening to the needs of those other than yourself. It's a will to compromise, and to negotiate. It's the ability to realize that you (as the old Earth song goes) can't always get what you want.
Many here dislike the deal because there are people in Iran who cry "DEATH TO AMERICA!" Would any deal really satisfy them? It sounds to me as if they don't want a deal at all. Perhaps I'm wrong about that, but I suspect I'm not. Do you think that our European Allies want Iran to get the bomb? They don't. They believe this deal will stop them from getting the bomb. Our President thinks it will stop them from getting the bomb. Many Nuclear experts think it will stop them from getting the bomb. All of this of course hinges on them not breaking the deal -- but again, refusing to negotiate because they will break the deal means that there's no deal that would satisfy you and that you are putting negotiation off the table. Leadership is not forcing our allies to do what we want, and trying to force Iran to do the same.
"We want a better deal," many say.
Okay. So what's this better deal? And why does Iran (the most important country to agree to the deal) sign it? Why do they not say "Forget that, you're not going to undo our economic sanctions, so it's time we put all our focus on getting our nuclear bomb."
If the US decides to back out of the deal, do you think it hastens their development of the bomb, or slows it down? Keep in mind that only our sanctions would remain. And that even with the sanctions we've had recently that Iran isn't that far off from the bomb now.
I'm going to wait to comment further because I can't believe what I just read. I need to step away from my computer right now because I would probably say some things that would get me banned. For other posters, look at the part that I highlighted in bold. Think about it.
Also think about how the world has changed since the founding of this country.
09-02-2015, 06:58 PM
I'm not goin to start a new thread despite this deserving one. I'll just leave this here as it is highly relevant. 900 million from US to Pakistan just this year so they can buy our guns btw. And Pakistan is a nuclear power.
http://m.timesunion.com/news/article/Pak...477253.php
http://m.timesunion.com/news/article/Pak...477253.php
09-02-2015, 07:02 PM
Quote:I'm going to wait to comment further because I can't believe what I just read. I need to step away from my computer right now because I would probably say some things that would get me banned. For other posters, look at the part that I highlighted in bold. Think about it.
Also think about how the world has changed since the founding of this country.
This is one of your largest problems. You are living a fantasy if you really think America is exceptional. What are #1 at anymore? Besides bomb building?
09-02-2015, 07:15 PM
America is exceptional, dating back to its very founding. The concept of a democratic republic was the sort of thing left for philosophers to speculate on up until the US actually did it. The fact that a nation that most of the world expected to collapse was able to hoodwink France out of the vast majority of its North American land for pennies, survived a Civil War, exploded into a superpower after surviving two world wars (leading the charge in one) that it wanted nothing to do with and ultimately stared down the Soviet Union to win the Cold War is pretty amazing, no matter how you cut it.
We're becoming less exceptional, though. The rest of the world is catching up to us. To be blunt about it, the Cold War is over. We're no longer the voice of the west. The EU is as important as we are these days. The Soviet Union might be gone, but Russia is still a major player in world politics. China...yeah. China has blown up as their economy has grown to the rest of the world.
Point being, the old dynamic of "America says go, the west goes" no longer exists. We no longer get to pound on the table until the other party relents. This deal is a perfect example of that. Instead of the "deal" that the right wing would have preferred--release the prisoners, give us all your nuclear material and research, destroy the reactors, allow an American "supervisory force" to stick around and make sure you're behaving, sanctions stay in place anyway but hey, we won't invade you today--we got something that every country involved signed off on. Does it keep Iran nuke-free forever? Probably not, but it means that there are now several European nations, not to mention Israel, that would turn Iran into a parking lot if it fired a nuke.
The US no longer gets to decide who can and can't have a nuclear bomb. Israel has eighty. Eight, zero. The rest of the Middle East has none combined. You think the fact that Israel, Iran's mortal enemy, is protected by the US and allowed to have more than enough nukes to leave a smoldering green hole in the ground where Iran used to be might be causing some resentment? You think the fact that Iran was heavily sanctioned by the west while Israel, which commits war crimes against Palestine, is coddled and supported might have something to do with it? The simple truth is that the US has gone out of its way historically to enhance hostility with Iran, whether we intended to or not, and the world government will no longer allow us to do so.
America has an exceptional history, and we're used to being "exceptional" meaning that we aren't just a world leader, we are the world leader. That's not the case anymore. We don't get to set the rules. As hard as this concept is for some people (not necessarily you, JIB) to grasp, we can be exceptional without being the only voice at the table. I think this Iran deal is an example of new American exceptionality. I don't know what President Obama wanted out of this deal. I somehow doubt that he went in with these terms. In fact, I suspect the original framework was very different, and much more harsh. Thing is, we don't get to just put take-it-or-leave-it deals down anymore. We worked with multiple nations, Iran included, to come up with a deal that was made in good faith and acceptable to everyone. That's not Neville Chamberlain. That's getting [BLEEP] done, and that is the sort of exceptionality America needs to pursue going forward. Telling everyone which rules they'll play by is no longer an option. Sitting down and getting everyone to agree on those rules and enforce them equally? That's the future we're already living in.
We're becoming less exceptional, though. The rest of the world is catching up to us. To be blunt about it, the Cold War is over. We're no longer the voice of the west. The EU is as important as we are these days. The Soviet Union might be gone, but Russia is still a major player in world politics. China...yeah. China has blown up as their economy has grown to the rest of the world.
Point being, the old dynamic of "America says go, the west goes" no longer exists. We no longer get to pound on the table until the other party relents. This deal is a perfect example of that. Instead of the "deal" that the right wing would have preferred--release the prisoners, give us all your nuclear material and research, destroy the reactors, allow an American "supervisory force" to stick around and make sure you're behaving, sanctions stay in place anyway but hey, we won't invade you today--we got something that every country involved signed off on. Does it keep Iran nuke-free forever? Probably not, but it means that there are now several European nations, not to mention Israel, that would turn Iran into a parking lot if it fired a nuke.
The US no longer gets to decide who can and can't have a nuclear bomb. Israel has eighty. Eight, zero. The rest of the Middle East has none combined. You think the fact that Israel, Iran's mortal enemy, is protected by the US and allowed to have more than enough nukes to leave a smoldering green hole in the ground where Iran used to be might be causing some resentment? You think the fact that Iran was heavily sanctioned by the west while Israel, which commits war crimes against Palestine, is coddled and supported might have something to do with it? The simple truth is that the US has gone out of its way historically to enhance hostility with Iran, whether we intended to or not, and the world government will no longer allow us to do so.
America has an exceptional history, and we're used to being "exceptional" meaning that we aren't just a world leader, we are the world leader. That's not the case anymore. We don't get to set the rules. As hard as this concept is for some people (not necessarily you, JIB) to grasp, we can be exceptional without being the only voice at the table. I think this Iran deal is an example of new American exceptionality. I don't know what President Obama wanted out of this deal. I somehow doubt that he went in with these terms. In fact, I suspect the original framework was very different, and much more harsh. Thing is, we don't get to just put take-it-or-leave-it deals down anymore. We worked with multiple nations, Iran included, to come up with a deal that was made in good faith and acceptable to everyone. That's not Neville Chamberlain. That's getting [BLEEP] done, and that is the sort of exceptionality America needs to pursue going forward. Telling everyone which rules they'll play by is no longer an option. Sitting down and getting everyone to agree on those rules and enforce them equally? That's the future we're already living in.
09-02-2015, 08:27 PM
Quote:I'm going to wait to comment further because I can't believe what I just read. I need to step away from my computer right now because I would probably say some things that would get me banned. For other posters, look at the part that I highlighted in bold. Think about it.
Also think about how the world has changed since the founding of this country.
It's all you need to know about those you're arguing with, those arguing in favor of a deal that endangers America and her allies.
09-02-2015, 09:29 PM
One is exceptional when someone besides oneself thinks theyre exceptional.
09-02-2015, 10:30 PM
Quote:
Point being, the old dynamic of "America says go, the west goes" no longer exists. We no longer get to pound on the table until the other party relents. This deal is a perfect example of that. Instead of the "deal" that the right wing would have preferred--release the prisoners, give us all your nuclear material and research, destroy the reactors, allow an American "supervisory force" to stick around and make sure you're behaving, sanctions stay in place anyway but hey, we won't invade you today--we got something that every country involved signed off on. Does it keep Iran nuke-free forever? Probably not, but it means that there are now several European nations, not to mention Israel, that would turn Iran into a parking lot if it fired a nuke.
The US no longer gets to decide who can and can't have a nuclear bomb. Israel has eighty. Eight, zero. The rest of the Middle East has none combined. You think the fact that Israel, Iran's mortal enemy, is protected by the US and allowed to have more than enough nukes to leave a smoldering green hole in the ground where Iran used to be might be causing some resentment? You think the fact that Iran was heavily sanctioned by the west while Israel, which commits war crimes against Palestine, is coddled and supported might have something to do with it? The simple truth is that the US has gone out of its way historically to enhance hostility with Iran, whether we intended to or not, and the world government will no longer allow us to do so.
America has an exceptional history, and we're used to being "exceptional" meaning that we aren't just a world leader, we are the world leader. That's not the case anymore. We don't get to set the rules. As hard as this concept is for some people (not necessarily you, JIB) to grasp, we can be exceptional without being the only voice at the table. I think this Iran deal is an example of new American exceptionality. I don't know what President Obama wanted out of this deal. I somehow doubt that he went in with these terms. In fact, I suspect the original framework was very different, and much more harsh. Thing is, we don't get to just put take-it-or-leave-it deals down anymore. We worked with multiple nations, Iran included, to come up with a deal that was made in good faith and acceptable to everyone. That's not Neville Chamberlain. That's getting [BAD WORD REMOVED] done, and that is the sort of exceptionality America needs to pursue going forward. Telling everyone which rules they'll play by is no longer an option. Sitting down and getting everyone to agree on those rules and enforce them equally? That's the future we're already living in.
There's no such than as a ' Palestinian people' in the context of an Arab people that have an historic homeland on Israeli land. The purpose of having an entity called a 'Palestinian ' people is to destroy Israel. If there was a ' Palestinian' people in the land of Israel, there would be historic rulers and currency associated with these people. These individuals are nomad Arabs. They have no legit claim to the land of Israel. Newt Gingrich told the truth about these fake beasts:
Romney vs Gingrich on Israel-Palestine Issues: Gingrich's Controversial "Invented People" Comment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7VdrtFAuyA
09-02-2015, 10:36 PM
Quote:There's no such than as a ' Palestinian people' in the context of an Arab people that have an historic homeland on Israeli land. The purpose of having an entity called a 'Palestinian ' people is to destroy Israel. If there was a ' Palestinian' people in the land of Israel, there would be historic rulers and currency associated with these people. These individuals are nomad Arabs. They have no legit claim to the land of Israel. Newt Gingrich told the truth about these fake beasts:
You just lost all credibility--all right to participate in basic human debate--when you painted all Arabs from the historic region of Palestine, a region which has been under Arab control for most of its existence, with the incredibly racist "fake beasts" brush. You actually might be the first and only person on my ignore list for that. Still deciding.
*Edit: My reasoning for labeling you as an overt racist is not that you're against the concept of a Palestinian state, because many people are, and they are for a variety of non-racially-motivated reasons. My problem, and the reason I'm calling you out as racist slime, is that you happily refer to millions of people, including children, as "beasts". Know who else thought that millions of people were the equivalent of animals or beasts? Nathaniel B. Forrest. George Wallace. Adolf Hitler. Osama bin Laden.
Go do yourself a favor and read up on the history of the region of Palestine. It may not have always been called "Palestine" in a governmental sense, but it was always a homeland for millions of people, most of whom happened to be Arabic. "False beasts." If you can really say that with a straight face, then the only false beast in the this thread is you pretending to be some kind of scholar on Middle Eastern affairs.