It wasn't a statement, it was a question.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
American politics
- Thread starter Danishfurniturelover
- Start date
nayenezgani
Jimmy Neighbour
It was a question, which you followed up with a sweeping generalist statement.
No, because we deal with them ourselves - just fudge em up with a narwhal tusk.
It's very much their business - he's killed a lot of Americans. He's also high up in a regime that is continually refusing to follow any of the rules imposed on them. He's helped Hezbollah and Hamas.
There's no end of good reasons why killing him is every human being's business.
The godtards have yet to destroy Israel, the nutjobs in Iran have yet to achieve nuclear capability, US/UK interests in the region remain strong, etc.
What part of the plan isn't working?
It was a statement of how they're represented in western news media. If you have a problem with that, take it up with them
Do you consider my statement on their representation to be untrue?
nayenezgani
Jimmy Neighbour
Representation that you clearly side with. My assertion was that you should take any coverage of this issue with a pinch of salt. Especially given the 'interests' held by the US/UK that you mention.
There's never room for reason with you is there, it's just 'I've picked my stance and fudge the rest.'
Politics isn't sport. You're a fitting illustration of one of the biggest political challenges the world faces, moving forward.
nayenezgani
Jimmy Neighbour
Which Americans has he killed? What's the actual figure? Are you including soldiers that have invaded and occupied his country/areas? Why shouldn't he kill them if defending his country?
If you have proof that he's committed or organised terrorist attacks abroad that have killed innocent civilians, then fair enough. I don't have that information at hand and can't comment either way.
My understanding is that Iran were complying with the nuclear deal agreed with Obama. Trump tore it up, slapped them with suffocating financial sanctions and has now provoked them with military action.
I think the definition of terrorist fits quite well to this President. He's now threatening military strikes on cultural and civilian targets, 52 to be precise. Who's the real danger to innocent life here?
nayenezgani
Jimmy Neighbour
"Soleimani was a supremely powerful leader of a state apparatus, with his own cult of personality, but he was not a terror kingpin. His death doesn’t decapitate anything.
He had the blood of tens of thousands of people—overwhelmingly fellow Muslims—on his hands, but he was only the agent of a government policy that preceded him and will continue without him. His deeds are beside the point; so is the display of American resolve. The only reason to kill Soleimani is to enter a new war that the United States can win."
He had the blood of tens of thousands of people—overwhelmingly fellow Muslims—on his hands, but he was only the agent of a government policy that preceded him and will continue without him. His deeds are beside the point; so is the display of American resolve. The only reason to kill Soleimani is to enter a new war that the United States can win."
I'm not in the habit of asking questions I know the answer to - there are plenty of better ways I can spend my time.
I'm asking a genuine question. Someone here must have spent time in Iran and be able to answer it genuinely - it's ok to just say if you can't.
Nice virtue signalling. I hope you win the people who really care a lot about stuff contest.
Everything is sport when you don't give a fudge.
Last edited:
I don't think there are any US troops in Iran.
The BBC are hugely anti-Trump and anti-war and that's what they're reporting. It doesn't serve their case at all so that's enough for me.
It's impossible to tell if they were abiding by those rules due to the lengthy dispute process baked into the agreement. It was impossible to inspect military areas at short notice. We're able to tell that they were abiding by the constraints within the private sector, but military sites remain a mystery.
However, agrresion against merchant vessels is absolutely not behaving,neither is attacking a US embassy.
You won't find me defending Trump, he's a clam too.
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
Just seen all the Iranian politicians chanting death to america
Wow this is some big time brick going to go off
Iraq has said all foreign troops can go and now
Wow this is some big time brick going to go off
Iraq has said all foreign troops can go and now
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
And now Iran has said its basically going to stick 2 fingers up at the 2015 Nuclear agreement
Rorschach
Sonny Walters
I beg to differ on this point. It is one constant stream of crazy as far as I can see.
tbh I think they have done this all before in the 80's when Khomeini was in power, the potentially biggest slap in the Yanks faces being the hostages that were taken in 80 (I think it was.)
I don't think we'll see much more than the flag waving etc that is being seen now, but wouldn't like to travel on US planes for a while..
Would be interesting to know how much their nuclear set-up was affected by Stuxnet and how effective they actually are though.
It already did. It has consistently broken the quotas since the US dropped out.
I think you're confusing them for a proper government. Nutjob theocracies don't follow the same rules.
His death to Iran is a setback, or a blow to the theocracy to be more precise really.
They will not stand up against America despite them being so-called "nutjob" - tbh I think the middle class upwards have given up on the idea of theocracy and the political processes. This leaves the working class, whom you see so fervently denouncing the death, as the remaining "hard-liners" that we'd have called them back in the day.
Trump's only one good aspect, in some regards, is that he is a totally unpredictable taco and for that reason Iran will not do anything more that the shouting and hollering. He will use force first and foremost more than anyone previous in his position imo, and Iran will not want that and ofc back down.
Hootnow
Jermaine Jenas
Some absolutely vintage gg posts on here so far.
What reasons would Iran stick to the nuclear agreement now? Trump already pulled out of it unilaterally and imposed the highest level of sanctions possible on a country. He's also made it illegal for firms to operate in Iran, hence making it basically impossible for the Europeans to continue the deal (or at least they've not bothered to try hard enough).
America has just committed an extra judicial assassination of one of their top generals in Iraq and threatened to flatten cultural sites if they retaliate (when Muslims do that, its called terrorism).
There is literally no agreement left at all.
Also now threatening Iraq with sanctions if they go through with the democratic vote to expel foreign forces from the country.
Because democracy.
This stupid puppet show continues to be eerily accurate.
Hootnow
Jermaine Jenas
Think of them as rabid brexiteers, who insist a country with the 5th largest economy in the world and which has invaded half the world at some point or another is 'getting its independence back'.
Or like westerners in general, who have taken a decade or two of deteriorating living standards while still enjoying the highest living standards in the world and responded by voting in a bunch of extremist nutjobs across the board (or at least massively increasing their vote share).
Except rather than still enjoying the highest living standards, you don't. And instead of good relations with the USA, the USA (and UK) backed a coup in the 50s to overthrow your democratically elected president and installed a dictator. And have had severe sanctions placed on your country. And find your country being linked with the groups that arguably hate you more as Shia than they do anyone else (isis, alqaeda). And you find the USA constantly invading countries in your own area. And you agree on a nuclear deal, which one of these extremist nutjobs then unilaterally withdraws from and prevents the rest of the west from engaging with either.
Iran is genuinely beautiful country, with a bunch of asses as its leaders. The people are some of the kindest and most hospitable I've ever met. But I'm not eve slightly surprised when they're upset with the USA espcially.