Relativism and War in the Middle East

[Lord Long Rod]

As long as he steers clear of his fantasizing about his exploits with women, and the derogatory remarks against women that arise from that.

I don't have the patience to proof read everything he writes that is invented in his own head.

To the topic: Iran has never before been able to act against America through a proxy, and been so secure and safe in doing so.

Americans blame the president but they sure the hell know that it's a lot deeper than that.

Unfortunately the topic has to remain tabboo.

Strike an Iran proxy and all of them have a good whack at the Zionists.

Strike Iran directly and risk Iran taking down an aircraft carrier, acting as a Russia proxy.

(with a handful of Kinzhals in the mix with the 100 or two expected stovepipes?)

^ Canadian

 

[Lord Long Rod]

Desert Storm wasn't fought for oil. The objective was to chase Iraqi troops out of Kuwait.

That was the stated, and actual objective. But it was not the only objective. No industrialized country wanted to see energy costs rise. Japan, for example, spent a lot of money contributing to the coalition effort. And fighting to protect oil and energy prices is a legitimate reason.

You are being a contrarian. Plus, you were probably not even alive for Desert Storm. It was a magnificent operation!

 

[Lord Long Rod]

Hamas and the Houthi's are moral absolutists

Yes, I agree.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

The Nazi's are also moral absolutists

Communists are absolutists too, to their ideology.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

Zionism has always intended to kill or expell the Palestinians.

John Pilger on the Dagan Plan and Gaza under fire

Every war Israel has waged since 1948 has had the same objective: expulsion of the native people.

www.newstatesman.com

Which is another way of saying that Israel has always been about protecting Jews, their historical homeland, and their security.

 

[surada]

That was the stated, and actual objective. But it was not the only objective. No industrialized country wanted to see energy costs rise. Japan, for example, spent a lot of money contributing to the coalition effort. And fighting to protect oil and energy prices is a legitimate reason.

You are being a contrarian. Plus, you were probably not even alive for Desert Storm. It was a magnificent operation!

Don't be absurd. I've flown TAPLINE many times. I lived in Kuwait.

Kuwait was in the wrong . The Saudis forgave Saddam Hussein's OPEC debt .. Kuwait refused and kept taking Iraqi oil.

 

[Augustine_]

Communists are absolutists too, to their ideology.

Sure add them into the group you fit into

 

[Donald H]

Don't be absurd. I've flown TAPLINE many times. I lived in Kuwait.

Kuwait was in the wrong . The Saudis forgave Saddam Hussein's OPEC debt .. Kuwait refused and kept taking Iraqi oil.

And Saddam's refusal to cooperate with the US, and the US needing to destroy Iraq's popular government, and that's all before Glaspie gave Saddam the greenlight.

And not to forget the Iraqi buildup of troops and armour along the Saudi border, that didn't exist.

In any case it's coming full circle now with the Saudis and the Arab states, along with the rest of the world telling the US that enough is enough.

Too bad the Zionists take it up the hoop again! Such kind and generous people!

 

[Lord Long Rod]

And Saddam's refusal to cooperate with the US, and the US needing to destroy Iraq's popular government, and that's all before Glaspie gave Saddam the greenlight.

And not to forget the Iraqi buildup of troops and armour along the Saudi border, that didn't exist.

In any case it's coming full circle now with the Saudis and the Arab states, along with the rest of the world telling the US that enough is enough.

Too bad the Zionists take it up the hoop again! Such kind and generous people!

Don't be absurd. I've flown TAPLINE many times. I lived in Kuwait.

Kuwait was in the wrong . The Saudis forgave Saddam Hussein's OPEC debt .. Kuwait refused and kept taking Iraqi oil.

Nothing Kuwait did justified an invasion.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

And Saddam's refusal to cooperate with the US, and the US needing to destroy Iraq's popular government, and that's all before Glaspie gave Saddam the greenlight.

And not to forget the Iraqi buildup of troops and armour along the Saudi border, that didn't exist.

In any case it's coming full circle now with the Saudis and the Arab states, along with the rest of the world telling the US that enough is enough.

Too bad the Zionists take it up the hoop again! Such kind and generous people!

Hussein knew better notwithstanding what Glaspie told them.

 

[Lord Long Rod]

Sure add them into the group you fit into

Right, I am a communist.

 

[surada]

And Saddam's refusal to cooperate with the US, and the US needing to destroy Iraq's popular government, and that's all before Glaspie gave Saddam the greenlight.

And not to forget the Iraqi buildup of troops and armour along the Saudi border, that didn't exist.

In any case it's coming full circle now with the Saudis and the Arab states, along with the rest of the world telling the US that enough is enough.

Too bad the Zionists take it up the hoop again! Such kind and generous people!

The Israelis wanted the US to take out Saddam Hussein. See Clean Break Strategy. Operation Mass Appeal started in Britain in late 1997. Sir Derek Plumbly was in charge. I've never figured that one out. He was the one who orchestrated the phoney Booze Bombings in Arabia, killed a few Brits and got caught.

 

[surada]

That was the stated, and actual objective. But it was not the only objective. No industrialized country wanted to see energy costs rise. Japan, for example, spent a lot of money contributing to the coalition effort. And fighting to protect oil and energy prices is a legitimate reason.

You are being a contrarian. Plus, you were probably not even alive for Desert Storm. It was a magnificent operation!

Lol.. I spent hours flying tapline. I know Ghawar well. I grew up there and camped all over Al Hasa .

The only reason they lied to the Saudi king was because it was more efficient to stage Desert Storm from Arabia. Saddam Hussein was never a threat to Arabia.

 

[surada]

Nothing Kuwait did justified an invasion.

Kuwait was stealing Iraqi oil And demanding money for covering Iraq's OPEC quota during their war with Iran. Saudi Arabia forgave the debt . Kuwait refused.

 

[surada]

And Saddam's refusal to cooperate with the US, and the US needing to destroy Iraq's popular government, and that's all before Glaspie gave Saddam the greenlight.

And not to forget the Iraqi buildup of troops and armour along the Saudi border, that didn't exist.

In any case it's coming full circle now with the Saudis and the Arab states, along with the rest of the world telling the US that enough is enough.

Too bad the Zionists take it up the hoop again! Such kind and generous people!

Right. No troop build up on the Saudi border. They simply lied.

 

[surada]

Lord Long Rod

Do you know Dammam, Al-Hasa, Al-Jubail, Ras Tanura, Dhahran, Al-Khobar and Al-Qatif. I do since the early 1950s.

 

[surada]

That was the stated, and actual objective. But it was not the only objective. No industrialized country wanted to see energy costs rise. Japan, for example, spent a lot of money contributing to the coalition effort. And fighting to protect oil and energy prices is a legitimate reason.

You are being a contrarian. Plus, you were probably not even alive for Desert Storm. It was a magnificent operation!

Iraqi oil operations were crippled by 2 decades of war and sanctions. It was 13 years before they got up to speed. There had been NO reserve management.

Have you ever been to Iraq?

War is God's way of teaching Americans geography.

https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/ambrose-bierce-quotes

 

[surada]

War is bad, people die, yada yada ... I get it. I would not want to live in a war zone either. However, there are times when decisively determining the outcome of conflict is necessary. Many are now saying we are at war in the Red Sea. Well, we aren't, so do not fret over that. What follows is my analysis of relativism applied to conflict.

First of all, the relativist, especially as personified as a college professor, is going to attempt to break down the aggressor. For example, there was the 1991 Operation Desert Storm. The relativist would say, "Oh, that is just American greed for oil! American greed is going to get all those poor innocent Iraqi children killed. WAHHHHHH!!!! America has blood on its hands!! No blood for oil!!! War criminals!!!!

It is true that our policies, and sometimes morality, are formed by our self-interest. What looks right to me may not look right to someone living on the other side of the world in a hut made with dried ox poop and straw. I get that, and I agree with that. Nobody should ever have to die, and yada yada. But one problem is that the relativists are usually partisan, regardless of their declaration of being objective. Just look at how many in the academic field have gone absolutely bat shit crazy hateful against Israel when they retaliated against Hamas following the 10/7 attack. Every nation has the right to self-defense. Just because a lot of civilians get killed during a military action does not make it "genocide" or a "war crime". These are disingenuous claims founded upon anti-Semitic hatred.

Relativism is weaponized by the left to lead young heads full of mush away from the American nation and make them anti-American actors; pawns in the nefarious neo-Marxist revolution now occuring around the world (with America being the grand prize).

We bombed the Hootie rebels in Yemen a few hours ago after weeks of putting up with them attacking our military ships, attacking merchant ships, attacking other military vessels, taking hostages, and thereby creating negative ripple effects throughout the economies of the world. The Who-Dees' actions clearly violate international law. But we did nothing about it for a long time. Finally, Joey Biden had to do something, so he ordered a military strike against the Whoopties in retaliation. It will probably accomplish nothing stategically, as it was only intended to signal "Hey, can you guys knock it off already?!? This is an election year. If I don't win again, then you guys are going to be SOL, cuz the next guy may light you up like you have never seen!"

I am not calling this a war, nor do I expect it to become a war. I have been disappointed too many times at this point in my life to get my hopes up now. The HoopTEES are an Iranian proxy that deserves to be destroyed. For that matter, the Iranian theocratic government structure deserves to be destroyed too, and the people should be free to run their own country. But we do not go to war just to free their people. We are not nation-builders. We are supposed to go to war only when our national interests are threatened, or when obligated to under treaty.

At this point, America's national interests and security are being threatened by the WhOudie actions in the Red Sea. We have every right to send them to their creator with great haste. If a few eggs have to get broken in the process, then so be it. Why not?!?

We are Americans. We have every right to want to blast them to bits when they threaten our security and other national interests. By threatening us on any level and to any degree, they threaten our way of life, ability to earn a living, and ability to enjoy our God given freedoms and liberties. Nobody wants "innocent" civilians to die. But when it comes between one of those little sand people dying or me having to not buy something I want because I have to shell out more for gasoline, I am going to want the bombs to fall. Is that selfish? Nope. It is what I have a right to do. Moreover, screw those people! We cannot let them disrupt maritime traffic and kill/injure sailors. If we do, then we are only encouraging more violence and disruption. Most importantly, all of those jihadists want Americans and other westerners dead. They have not earned out concern for their welfare on any level whatsoever.

The real enemy here is Iran. We need to hurt Iran. We do not necessarily need to wage a full blown "war" against Iran. It will suffice to engage in a multi-day/week military act of self-defense in an amount sufficient to deter them from continuing to engage in illegal and animalistic behavior. THEY WANT TO CAUSE CHAOS. This is not like fighting the British, or Hitler, or Hirohito. Plus, Iran cannot put up any real defense to us. We are 1,000-times the power they ever hope to be, even with nuclear weapons. Further, violence is all people in that part of the world understand.

In a week, we could blast the crap out of Tehran and other targets in Iran to make their leaders have to reconsider their current policies. And if we cannot do it in a week, we will do it in 2, or even 3 weeks.

Now, when you really get into this, then you see that my position is actually the relativist one, while the leftists are espousing and absolutist view (death bad). But is that the complete truth? Of course not. The left only promotes absolutism when they believe it benefits them in some way. And on a much deeper level, my position is more of an absolutist one; to wit: We define our policy based upon national interest and security concerns, and we will absolutely destroy you if your threaten said concerns. Essentially, the left is guilty of applying situational ethics. This means they will change the rules whenever doing so will benefit them. Therefore, leftists cannot be trusted, ever.

Not wanting people to die is not a valid defense to war because war IS about killing people to achieve a desired end. Those people in the Middle East live, breath, and eat war, 24/7, for Millenia, and they have absolutely no problem with murdering Americans in mass numbers. The fact that we have war "Crimes" means that we can have war in a "non-criminal" way, thus making it A-OK in certain instances.

Some are legitimately pacifists and abhor all violence. These people are goofballs. But they are out there and are sincere in their beliefs. Muslims are no pacifists. They are warmongers. The poor innocents, even those that die by OUR munitions, are the victims of their culture. I mean, if some guy pulls a knife on you while out on a stroll and says, "Gimme all ya money or you die!", then you pull your concealed carry pistol and literally blow his cranial contents onto the asphalt, where the produce a satisfyingly wet splatter sound, are you in the wrong? No! You acted in self-defense. The perp's death was caused by his stupid decision to rob someone. The same is true with the HooTEES in Yemen. If you shoot drones at military ships and they finally shoot back, are the people on the ships to blame for a civilian getting whacked in the retaliatory strike? Of course not!! It would be childish to think otherwise. But that is exactly what the leftists and Muslims are trying to get you to believe.

You do not have to explain self-defense to someone in his or her right mind. The people now decrying bombing the Jute-Tays, as well as the pro-Palestinian rube, are not serious people. They are not credible. They are trash people.

Have you ever been to the Middle East?

 

[surada]

War is bad, people die, yada yada ... I get it. I would not want to live in a war zone either. However, there are times when decisively determining the outcome of conflict is necessary. Many are now saying we are at war in the Red Sea. Well, we aren't, so do not fret over that. What follows is my analysis of relativism applied to conflict.

First of all, the relativist, especially as personified as a college professor, is going to attempt to break down the aggressor. For example, there was the 1991 Operation Desert Storm. The relativist would say, "Oh, that is just American greed for oil! American greed is going to get all those poor innocent Iraqi children killed. WAHHHHHH!!!! America has blood on its hands!! No blood for oil!!! War criminals!!!!

It is true that our policies, and sometimes morality, are formed by our self-interest. What looks right to me may not look right to someone living on the other side of the world in a hut made with dried ox poop and straw. I get that, and I agree with that. Nobody should ever have to die, and yada yada. But one problem is that the relativists are usually partisan, regardless of their declaration of being objective. Just look at how many in the academic field have gone absolutely bat shit crazy hateful against Israel when they retaliated against Hamas following the 10/7 attack. Every nation has the right to self-defense. Just because a lot of civilians get killed during a military action does not make it "genocide" or a "war crime". These are disingenuous claims founded upon anti-Semitic hatred.

Relativism is weaponized by the left to lead young heads full of mush away from the American nation and make them anti-American actors; pawns in the nefarious neo-Marxist revolution now occuring around the world (with America being the grand prize).

We bombed the Hootie rebels in Yemen a few hours ago after weeks of putting up with them attacking our military ships, attacking merchant ships, attacking other military vessels, taking hostages, and thereby creating negative ripple effects throughout the economies of the world. The Who-Dees' actions clearly violate international law. But we did nothing about it for a long time. Finally, Joey Biden had to do something, so he ordered a military strike against the Whoopties in retaliation. It will probably accomplish nothing stategically, as it was only intended to signal "Hey, can you guys knock it off already?!? This is an election year. If I don't win again, then you guys are going to be SOL, cuz the next guy may light you up like you have never seen!"

I am not calling this a war, nor do I expect it to become a war. I have been disappointed too many times at this point in my life to get my hopes up now. The HoopTEES are an Iranian proxy that deserves to be destroyed. For that matter, the Iranian theocratic government structure deserves to be destroyed too, and the people should be free to run their own country. But we do not go to war just to free their people. We are not nation-builders. We are supposed to go to war only when our national interests are threatened, or when obligated to under treaty.

At this point, America's national interests and security are being threatened by the WhOudie actions in the Red Sea. We have every right to send them to their creator with great haste. If a few eggs have to get broken in the process, then so be it. Why not?!?

We are Americans. We have every right to want to blast them to bits when they threaten our security and other national interests. By threatening us on any level and to any degree, they threaten our way of life, ability to earn a living, and ability to enjoy our God given freedoms and liberties. Nobody wants "innocent" civilians to die. But when it comes between one of those little sand people dying or me having to not buy something I want because I have to shell out more for gasoline, I am going to want the bombs to fall. Is that selfish? Nope. It is what I have a right to do. Moreover, screw those people! We cannot let them disrupt maritime traffic and kill/injure sailors. If we do, then we are only encouraging more violence and disruption. Most importantly, all of those jihadists want Americans and other westerners dead. They have not earned out concern for their welfare on any level whatsoever.

The real enemy here is Iran. We need to hurt Iran. We do not necessarily need to wage a full blown "war" against Iran. It will suffice to engage in a multi-day/week military act of self-defense in an amount sufficient to deter them from continuing to engage in illegal and animalistic behavior. THEY WANT TO CAUSE CHAOS. This is not like fighting the British, or Hitler, or Hirohito. Plus, Iran cannot put up any real defense to us. We are 1,000-times the power they ever hope to be, even with nuclear weapons. Further, violence is all people in that part of the world understand.

In a week, we could blast the crap out of Tehran and other targets in Iran to make their leaders have to reconsider their current policies. And if we cannot do it in a week, we will do it in 2, or even 3 weeks.

Now, when you really get into this, then you see that my position is actually the relativist one, while the leftists are espousing and absolutist view (death bad). But is that the complete truth? Of course not. The left only promotes absolutism when they believe it benefits them in some way. And on a much deeper level, my position is more of an absolutist one; to wit: We define our policy based upon national interest and security concerns, and we will absolutely destroy you if your threaten said concerns. Essentially, the left is guilty of applying situational ethics. This means they will change the rules whenever doing so will benefit them. Therefore, leftists cannot be trusted, ever.

Not wanting people to die is not a valid defense to war because war IS about killing people to achieve a desired end. Those people in the Middle East live, breath, and eat war, 24/7, for Millenia, and they have absolutely no problem with murdering Americans in mass numbers. The fact that we have war "Crimes" means that we can have war in a "non-criminal" way, thus making it A-OK in certain instances.

Some are legitimately pacifists and abhor all violence. These people are goofballs. But they are out there and are sincere in their beliefs. Muslims are no pacifists. They are warmongers. The poor innocents, even those that die by OUR munitions, are the victims of their culture. I mean, if some guy pulls a knife on you while out on a stroll and says, "Gimme all ya money or you die!", then you pull your concealed carry pistol and literally blow his cranial contents onto the asphalt, where the produce a satisfyingly wet splatter sound, are you in the wrong? No! You acted in self-defense. The perp's death was caused by his stupid decision to rob someone. The same is true with the HooTEES in Yemen. If you shoot drones at military ships and they finally shoot back, are the people on the ships to blame for a civilian getting whacked in the retaliatory strike? Of course not!! It would be childish to think otherwise. But that is exactly what the leftists and Muslims are trying to get you to believe.

You do not have to explain self-defense to someone in his or her right mind. The people now decrying bombing the Jute-Tays, as well as the pro-Palestinian rube, are not serious people. They are not credible. They are trash people.

Don't measure the middle east by Iran and Israel.
Where have you been in the middle-east?

 

[surada]

Nothing Kuwait did justified an invasion.

It's like Palestine was a province of Syria . Kuwait was a province of Iraq. You've never been to Kuwait either, have you?
.