What's new
By:

Oh Good! A War With Iran!

Bulletproof said:
If they are blowing holes in oil tankers they are acting as an aggressor despite sanctions...

But on that subject, I absolutely and vehemently disagree with your approach.

Sanctions and frozen monetary assets are an attack by us directed at the most vulnerable and most innocent people in Iran. Sanctions are far more cruel than bombings, and bombings are more cruel than a ground invasion. Why, as such a powerful nation, do we strongly prefer the most cruel and most inhumane ways of manipulating our adversaries? Not only that, but they know these tricks. Sanctions has been our go-to for more than 30 years. They know how to play that game. It's not a fun game, but they know how to shift the pain onto the poor, the women and children, and mostly shield themselves from any of it.

Sanctions are the cowards weapons. They aren't more humane. They aren't more civilised. They are the most despicable. They target the weak and the innocent.

We need to end that strategy.
Click to expand...

I can respect your position but there are only so many options if the attack is true and we have to act. What series of choices do you propose other than turning them into an ice skating rink?
 
Last edited:
DasJazz said:
I can respect your position but there are only so many options of the attackis true and we have to act. What series of choices do you propose other than turning them into an ice skating rink?
Click to expand...
If our hands are tied like that then we make an easy enemy for those who would lead us into folly.
 
Bulletproof said:
If our hands are tied like that then we make an easy enemy for those who would lead us into folly.
Click to expand...

Well hopefully it doesn't come to war but if it does, it's all about the exit strategy. I have no doubt we can cripple them with our military but we can't be sitting in a 20 year war because we haven't figured out a successful way to leave the region.
 
DasJazz said:
Well hopefully it doesn't come to war but if it does, it's all about the exit strategy. I have no doubt we can cripple them with our military but we can't be sitting in a 20 year war because we haven't figured out a successful way to leave the region.
Click to expand...
You talk like there is no war we could ever lose. Like there is no series of events that could ever neutralize our massive arms advantage.

I trust there are military leaders in the U.S. who DO understand the threat, but if they thought like using our military strength was like flipping a switch on and off with no potential for failure we'd be in big trouble.

Our adversaries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) are playing the long game. They are trying to maneuver us into a massive blunder and then strike (not necessarily with military force). Those nations do not have perfectly aligned interests, but they would all like to see a much less influential U.S..

We are not invulnerable.
 
Jazzta said:
From that very same wiki article:

“According to the Geneva Protocol, chemical attacks were banned, but in practice, to prevent an Iranian victory, the United States supported the Iraqi army in their use of chemical weapons.”
Click to expand...
Yep.

It's pretty disgusting how the U.S. has gotten in bed with countries like that simply because they oppose our current enemies.

Another example would be our close relationship with Saudi Arabia.

Another would be how we ignore many of the horrible things Israel does.
 
Lets not act like we haven’t antagonized Iran over the past half century.

We ousted their democratically elected prime minister in 1953 and empowered a horrible dictator. Once the dictator was overthrown in 1979, we offered him sanctuary instead of letting Iran’s new government prosecute him. And then there’s **** like this:

 
Bulletproof said:
You talk like there is no war we could ever lose. Like there is no series of events that could ever neutralize our massive arms advantage.

I trust there are military leaders in the U.S. who DO understand the threat, but if they thought like using our military strength was like flipping a switch on and off with no potential for failure we'd be in big trouble.

Our adversaries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) are playing the long game. They are trying to maneuver us into a massive blunder and then strike (not necessarily with military force). Those nations do not have perfectly aligned interests, but they would all like to see a much less influential U.S..

We are not invulnerable.
Click to expand...

I don't think we are not invulnerable, merely talking about the potential enemy at hand.

The one enemy I would never hope to see on the battlefield is China. They are extremely advanced in military prowess and capability.

Like I said, hopefully all of this is just posturing and won't end up in an armed conflict. The US does not need another war any time soon.
 
War with Iran? Only if we have a draft that starts with the military ages loved ones of those that support it drafted and sent in first.

No more precious American blood for ******** reasons. Stay out of **** till it’s real. Then go in and burn it all down. This isn’t even close to that.
 
LogGrad98 said:
I never said the war accomplished it's goals. It just gets beyond ridiculous hearing the revisionist history about it in convenient sound-bites when anyone with a brain that partially functions knows it was more complicated than "bush lied people died". Why did so many Democrats vote to go to war then when they had the same intelligence the republicans did?
Click to expand...
I didn't even get to vote on whether or not we were going to war. Wtf?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
The latest column in TomDispatch is a good read about two Iraqi peace activists....

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176574/tomgram:_laura_gottesdiener,_an_american_saddam_hussein_/

"There’s a dark joke going around Baghdad these days. Noof Assi, a 30-year-old Iraqi peace activist and humanitarian worker, told it to me by phone. Our conversation takes place in late May just after the Trump administration has announced that it would add 1,500 additional U.S. troops to its Middle Eastern garrisons.

“Iran wants to fight to get the United States and Saudi Arabia out of Iraq,” she began. “And the United States wants to fight to get Iran out of Iraq.” She paused dramatically. “So how about all of us Iraqis just leave Iraq so they can fight here on their own?”

Assi is among a generation of young Iraqis who lived most of their lives first under the U.S. occupation of their country and then through the disastrous violence it unleashed, including the rise of ISIS, and who are now warily eying Washington’s saber-rattling towards Tehran. They couldn’t be more aware that, should a conflict erupt, Iraqis will almost certainly find themselves once again caught in the devastating middle of it....

...“Years ago, I went to the United States on an exchange program and I discovered people didn’t know anything about us. Someone asked me if I used a camel for transportation,” Assi told me. “So I returned to Iraq and I thought: Damn it! We have to tell the world about us.”

In late May, I spoke with Assi and Mohammed separately by telephone in English about the rising threat of another U.S. war in the Middle East and their collective two decades of peace work aimed at undoing the violence wrought by the last two U.S. wars in their country. Below, I’ve edited and melded the interviews of these two friends so that Americans can hear a couple of voices from Iraq, telling the story of their lives and their commitment to peace in the years after the invasion of their country in 2003..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top