If it's good or the goose ...

[Uncensored2008]

We were talking about state sponsored assassinations, not the welfare state.

We've already established that you support state sponsored assassination. just as long as it's conducted by Obama.

You miserable, lying piece of shit. I've said nothing like that. Fuck off.

Not comfortable being called out for your hypocrisy? You said you were fine with killing OBL (as was I)

You just draw the line if a Republican does it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wrong, Soleimani was proud of his attacks on Americans. Soleimani killed more Americans than Osama did. To support taking out Osama while condemning taking out a man far worse is utter hypocrisy based on who gave the order.

Period.

I never said I supported taking out Osama - I said it wasn't assassination.

If we claim the right to enter other countries and dispose of people we consider criminals, that entitles other nations to do likewise. Would you be ok with that?

Your hypocrisy has you spinning at an absurd rate.

"If we claim the right to enter other countries and dispose of people we consider criminals"

You grasp that we entered Pakistan without permission to assassinate OBL, right? We did NOT enter Iraq to take out democrat hero Soliemani. We were already there.

Taking out OBL was a good call, so was taking out Soliemani.

The Buddha was asked if a man attacks with a stick, should one fight or run away? The Buddha said there is a third way, take the stick away.

That is what we have done, we took Iran's terrorist stick away.

I don't think we took all the sticks away, but I do think we might shortly take out all of the weapons systems.

Their primary "weapons systems" are suicide bombers. I think we just radically increased supply.

Those ballistic missiles used tonight came from Iran This was the first attack that wasn't using a whipping boy for delivery. It was directly from them. Ballistic missiles don't look anything like a bomb strapped to an idiot. I a little bit of a difference.

They were however, ineffective.

Is Rachel Madcow on MSLSD weeping that no Americans were killed?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yeah. Whatever. These token attacks are merely a face-saving exercise. The wave of terrorism comes later. Blowback. But go on pretending it won't happen.

You once were a rational and reasoning person.

That TDS is a hell of an affliction.

 

[Olde Europe]

These token attacks are merely a face-saving exercise. The wave of terrorism comes later. Blowback. But go on pretending it won't happen.

I found, you were doing well throughout this thread. Futile though the exercise was, because if rightards didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

But then, it's incumbent upon you to check your own assumptions, like the ones underlying your assertion the "wave of terrorism comes later." Why would that be?

For to me it appears, Iran, during the last decade, quite rationally pursued their interests, namely, securing their rule, their homeland, and their position in the region, playing the cards they were being dealt, cooperating with the U.S., Iraq, Syrian authorities, concluding a deal with President Obama when the chance appeared, and opposing Trump's recklessness while and wherever they can. Last night's reaction was just the bare minimum so as to leave Trump an off ramp from that escalatory ladder.

That is to say, seeing Iran virtually encircled with U.S. military bases, and trying to maintain that Shia connection from Iran to Lebanon so as to pose a counter-weight to the Sunni majority in the wider region, I would assume they would be doing whatever is needed to pursue their national interest. A "wave of terrorism" would re-enter an escalation of ever stronger counter-measures, and therefore would not serve Iran's interests. Your pretending to know that's about to happen is seemingly based on nothing other than the underlying assumption Iranians are going to follow no directions other than blind rage. There is, as far as I can see, no plausible rationale for that.

 

[jc456]

Not surprising. They have continually fucked with the US and other countries through terrorist proxies. Should we continue to let them kill innocent people? He was a fucking terrorist actively killing innocent people

Yeah, he helped Shiites in Iraq to fight against jack-booted thugs criminally invading and occupying their country, and against the monstrosity that is Daesh, criminally invading and occupying their country. That's what you mean by "innocent people", eh?

ahhh still hugging a terrorist huh? good for you you anti american prick.

 

[jc456]

Yeah. Whatever. These token attacks are merely a face-saving exercise. The wave of terrorism comes later. Blowback. But go on pretending it won't happen.

You once were a rational and reasoning person.

That TDS is a hell of an affliction.

Right? not sure why he dipped to the dark side, but he fell hard. wow. time for him to go 'hug a terrorist.' Thanks Mark Meadow's.

 

[Ken Mac]

I never said I supported taking out Osama - I said it wasn't assassination.

If we claim the right to enter other countries and dispose of people we consider criminals, that entitles other nations to do likewise. Would you be ok with that?

Your hypocrisy has you spinning at an absurd rate.

"If we claim the right to enter other countries and dispose of people we consider criminals"

You grasp that we entered Pakistan without permission to assassinate OBL, right? We did NOT enter Iraq to take out democrat hero Soliemani. We were already there.

Taking out OBL was a good call, so was taking out Soliemani.

The Buddha was asked if a man attacks with a stick, should one fight or run away? The Buddha said there is a third way, take the stick away.

That is what we have done, we took Iran's terrorist stick away.

I don't think we took all the sticks away, but I do think we might shortly take out all of the weapons systems.

Their primary "weapons systems" are suicide bombers. I think we just radically increased supply.

Those ballistic missiles used tonight came from Iran This was the first attack that wasn't using a whipping boy for delivery. It was directly from them. Ballistic missiles don't look anything like a bomb strapped to an idiot. I a little bit of a difference.

Yeah. Whatever. These token attacks are merely a face-saving exercise. The wave of terrorism comes later. Blowback. But go on pretending it won't happen.

This is a significant change in direction for the relationship with Iran. If you can't see that, you are blind. Iran wants no part of us until we get another Dem in the whitehouse. Then it will change once again.

 

[Uncensored2008]

These token attacks are merely a face-saving exercise. The wave of terrorism comes later. Blowback. But go on pretending it won't happen.

I found, you were doing well throughout this thread. Futile though the exercise was, because if rightards didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

But then, it's incumbent upon you to check your own assumptions, like the ones underlying your assertion the "wave of terrorism comes later." Why would that be?

For to me it appears, Iran, during the last decade, quite rationally pursued their interests, namely, securing their rule, their homeland, and their position in the region, playing the cards they were being dealt, cooperating with the U.S., Iraq, Syrian authorities, concluding a deal with President Obama when the chance appeared, and opposing Trump's recklessness while and wherever they can. Last night's reaction was just the bare minimum so as to leave Trump an off ramp from that escalatory ladder.

That is to say, seeing Iran virtually encircled with U.S. military bases, and trying to maintain that Shia connection from Iran to Lebanon so as to pose a counter-weight to the Sunni majority in the wider region, I would assume they would be doing whatever is needed to pursue their national interest. A "wave of terrorism" would re-enter an escalation of ever stronger counter-measures, and therefore would not serve Iran's interests. Your pretending to know that's about to happen is seemingly based on nothing other than the underlying assumption Iranians are going to follow no directions other than blind rage. There is, as far as I can see, no plausible rationale for that.

Iran is a police state, a brutal dictatorship that denies any semblance of liberty or civil rights to the victims living under them.

Obviously they are what you envision for America.