Geeze whiz, Stats. You're nicer than me, really!
My panacea would have been to flatten the sobs.
I think I'll stick to sewing.
The U.S. would do much better if it aligned with Iran and ditch Israel as an ally.
Iran is an up and coming player in the Middle East.
Whereas, Israel's days are numbered and will someday cease to exist as a viable state. ...
The U.S. would do much better if it aligned with Iran and ditch Israel as an ally.
Iran is an up and coming player in the Middle East.
Whereas, Israel's days are numbered and will someday cease to exist as a viable state. ...
America's backing of Israel has done nothing but cause the U.S. massive problems in the Middle East and other parts of the world.
So it's time we cut the strings with that rogue state and find a strong partner we can deal with in the ME.
Iran is developing into a regional power player and is already starting align its self with Russia and China.
The U.S. would be smart to befriend Iran and bring that country into our sphere of influence. ...
.
That's a sarcastic criticism of Obama bowing to the Mullahs.
No offense but we all know the history. The question is whats the way forward? Syria is a client state of Iran and is still killing tens of thousands of people, if that's success in your mind well..What an i say to that. Iran is not required to dismantle it's nuke program. the sanctions were working but Obama all of the sudden decided to lift a lot of them. He's sees them as a stabilizing force in the region, Sunni man is partially right. Iran funds terrorist around the globe. they fund Hazballah ,Hamas, They are responsible for many of the explosives that are killing our troops right now in Afghanistan. They are developing long range missiles, they continue to work on their nuke program and they are run by muslim fundamentalist nutjobs..... Nukes in their handsOk, [MENTION=25505]Jroc[/MENTION], I have been researching, and though I am far from done, lots of things to add. It's not gonna completely please Cons or Libs, but.... and btw, thanks for the personal invite to this thread.
We really fucked up in Persia in the 1950s. We propped up a King who was mostly hated by his own people. He was also a brutal King, hardly an icon of what we claim to stand for. But it was probably our best of all bad options. We were just 10 years past the most destructive war in our world's history, combatting the rise of Communism and our CIA was still pretty much in it's infancy. Persia (Iran) borders on the former Soviet Union. I bet that if the Dulles brothers could have peeked into a crystal ball, they would never have done some of the things they did. However, that mistake led to lots of things:
-the 1979 uprising, which occurred when former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, after unsuccessfully trying to get then Pres. Jimmy Carter to allow the ailing King of Iran to be flown to the USA for heart treatment, succeeded on the 6th try. The King was flown in, a revolution happened in Iran and our people there were kept hostage for 444 days. This is all part of the historical record. It is also part of the historical record that the hostages were released BEFORE Reagan was inaugurated.
-In neighboring Afghanistan, the Reagan administration trained the Mujahadeen to fight against the Russkis. Those Mujahadeen would later become the core of El Quaida. I am quite sure that, like the Dulles brothers, had Reagan been able to gaze into a crystal ball and see where this was all going to lead, he would never had instructed that the Mujahadeen be trained by our CIA.
-In the Iraq-Iran war of 1988, which killed more than 1 million people, we armed BOTH sides. We made money off of BOTH sides. Bad, bad, bad...
There is ample reason for Iranians to dislike us, no matter how good our intentions are.
However, this in no way excuses the horrible anti-semitism that is at the core of Iranian politics, nor does it excuse the terrible Iranian laws that literally make the life of a Jew (there are ca 30,000 Jews living within Iran, without passports, they cannot get out) 1/17th the life of a non-jew in Iran.
-Iran wants to make the bomb. Of this, I have no doubt.
So far, so good.
So, what does Obama (D) do:
-more sanctions than any other president in history vis-a-vis Iran. Crippling sanctions. Obama has gone farther than Bush ever went. And that is historically provable. I can't fault him for that.
In Syria, a smaller ally to Iran, and one which borders Eretz Israel, the Obama policy was probably the best of all bad options once again, for indeed, among the rebels were some elements of El Quaida, and yet, on both the military and the PR front, Obama won. He we not supported the rebels, Assad would have massacred many more. I despise Assad and think he should be hung. The hatred that had been under the surface for years in Syria came boiling to the top after the so-called Arab-Spring began. It is much more intense than most US-Americans know, but I know two of the leaders of the Syrian rebellion - leaders who were in exile in Germany for about 13 years, personally. I translated a number of their documents, pleas for help at the UN, from German into English. The small bands or factions that have put themselves together is about the most unlikely group of people that you could imagine.
But the fact is that Syria is quiet right now, and therefore no help to Iran.
And the other fact is that Iran wants to negotiate. It cannot hurt. It can only help. And if it doesn't work, be can still clobber Iran, if needed. Had we taken the same position with Nixon in 1972 as some are taking with Obama now, then he may never have gone to China, and maybe we would have more than just confrontation right now. Most thought of China as the mortal enemy back then, just as most see Iran as a mortal enemy now. If Nixon could talk with Mao and the world did not fall apart, then Obama can talk with the upper ups in Iran and again, the world will not fall apart. And there is also no "Neville Chamberlain" comparison possible here. Iran is in no position to fight a conventional war that it can win.
Israel: more joint training missions between the USA and Eretz Yisrael under the Obama administration than under any other administration, ever. The fact that Obama is willing to spend less time on Israel tells me personally that he trusts Israel to be able to stand more on it's own. I personally think that we Jews should be taking this as a compliment. Not to mention that fact that US aircraft carriers are in the area, should any stupidity happen on the part of Iran or Syria, for instance.
Next front: China.
China, with 1.4 billion, is without a doubt the force to reckon with in the future, and even now. China's GDP, depending on how you measure it, is either on par with or surpasses ours. No, wonder: their population is 4.5 times the size of ours. Only complete idiots would not be able to have their economy edge out ours with that kind of population advantage. If Obama is freed up to spend more time and energy on reigning in China, that is actually, when we are honest with ourselves, a neo-con policy. And maybe not such a bad one.
Most people don't know, but the word "China" itself means "Kingdom in the middle". The chinese have always had a very snobby few of themselves in the world, and maybe for good reason: every time China has been invaded and occupied, the occupiers themselves eventually became, well, Chinese. China has shown no territorial ambitions worth noting. Their view has been "why go to them, they come to us and then they become us". In the 1400s, the Chinese, who created the first navy, with ships far surpassing the ships of Europeans, literally mothballed it's fleet and stopped sailing for 400+ years for this very reason.
But today, China is polluting the world more than any other power, because it is currently building 40 mega-cities on the level of New York City, it is busy pirating all sorts of stuff, and it fields the largest army in the world.
It is only logical that a responsible President take more time and look to see what is going on in China. Which is exactly what President Obama is doing. I bet good money that, had Gov. Romney won the election 2012, his policy toward China would not be all that different.
I cannot fault Obama for any of these policies - many stem from having to pick the worst of all bad possible solutions. I especially cannot fault him for giving Iran a chance, for that alone keeps Saudi Arabia (hardly an ally, only on paper) and Iraq in check, keeps Syria caged up until it learns to be a Democracy, and it gives Israel breathing room. And notice that Turkey, which officially makes some loud noises about Israel, but is actually one of Israel's best trading partners and also a place where Israelis can go on vacation without fear for their safety, is not complaining about any of this.
Obama is in no way trying to realign the ME with Iran as a nuclear player. He is not going to let that happen. No American president is going to let that happen.
You asked for my two cents, I now started to give them.
[MENTION=25505]Jroc[/MENTION] [MENTION=29697]freedombecki[/MENTION] - among others.
No offense but we all know the history. The question is whats the way forward? Syria is a client state of Iran and is still killing tens of thousands of people, if that's success in your mind well..What an i say to that. Iran is not required to dismantle it's nuke program. the sanctions were working but Obama all of the sudden decided to lift a lot of them. He's sees them as a stabilizing force in the region, Sunni man is partially right. Iran funds terrorist around the globe. they fund Hazballah ,Hamas, They are responsible for many of the explosives that are killing our troops right now in Afghanistan. They are developing long range missiles, they continue to work on their nuke program and they are run by muslim fundamentalist nutjobs..... Nukes in their handsOk, [MENTION=25505]Jroc[/MENTION], I have been researching, and though I am far from done, lots of things to add. It's not gonna completely please Cons or Libs, but.... and btw, thanks for the personal invite to this thread.
We really fucked up in Persia in the 1950s. We propped up a King who was mostly hated by his own people. He was also a brutal King, hardly an icon of what we claim to stand for. But it was probably our best of all bad options. We were just 10 years past the most destructive war in our world's history, combatting the rise of Communism and our CIA was still pretty much in it's infancy. Persia (Iran) borders on the former Soviet Union. I bet that if the Dulles brothers could have peeked into a crystal ball, they would never have done some of the things they did. However, that mistake led to lots of things:
-the 1979 uprising, which occurred when former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, after unsuccessfully trying to get then Pres. Jimmy Carter to allow the ailing King of Iran to be flown to the USA for heart treatment, succeeded on the 6th try. The King was flown in, a revolution happened in Iran and our people there were kept hostage for 444 days. This is all part of the historical record. It is also part of the historical record that the hostages were released BEFORE Reagan was inaugurated.
-In neighboring Afghanistan, the Reagan administration trained the Mujahadeen to fight against the Russkis. Those Mujahadeen would later become the core of El Quaida. I am quite sure that, like the Dulles brothers, had Reagan been able to gaze into a crystal ball and see where this was all going to lead, he would never had instructed that the Mujahadeen be trained by our CIA.
-In the Iraq-Iran war of 1988, which killed more than 1 million people, we armed BOTH sides. We made money off of BOTH sides. Bad, bad, bad...
There is ample reason for Iranians to dislike us, no matter how good our intentions are.
However, this in no way excuses the horrible anti-semitism that is at the core of Iranian politics, nor does it excuse the terrible Iranian laws that literally make the life of a Jew (there are ca 30,000 Jews living within Iran, without passports, they cannot get out) 1/17th the life of a non-jew in Iran.
-Iran wants to make the bomb. Of this, I have no doubt.
So far, so good.
So, what does Obama (D) do:
-more sanctions than any other president in history vis-a-vis Iran. Crippling sanctions. Obama has gone farther than Bush ever went. And that is historically provable. I can't fault him for that.
In Syria, a smaller ally to Iran, and one which borders Eretz Israel, the Obama policy was probably the best of all bad options once again, for indeed, among the rebels were some elements of El Quaida, and yet, on both the military and the PR front, Obama won. He we not supported the rebels, Assad would have massacred many more. I despise Assad and think he should be hung. The hatred that had been under the surface for years in Syria came boiling to the top after the so-called Arab-Spring began. It is much more intense than most US-Americans know, but I know two of the leaders of the Syrian rebellion - leaders who were in exile in Germany for about 13 years, personally. I translated a number of their documents, pleas for help at the UN, from German into English. The small bands or factions that have put themselves together is about the most unlikely group of people that you could imagine.
But the fact is that Syria is quiet right now, and therefore no help to Iran.
And the other fact is that Iran wants to negotiate. It cannot hurt. It can only help. And if it doesn't work, be can still clobber Iran, if needed. Had we taken the same position with Nixon in 1972 as some are taking with Obama now, then he may never have gone to China, and maybe we would have more than just confrontation right now. Most thought of China as the mortal enemy back then, just as most see Iran as a mortal enemy now. If Nixon could talk with Mao and the world did not fall apart, then Obama can talk with the upper ups in Iran and again, the world will not fall apart. And there is also no "Neville Chamberlain" comparison possible here. Iran is in no position to fight a conventional war that it can win.
Israel: more joint training missions between the USA and Eretz Yisrael under the Obama administration than under any other administration, ever. The fact that Obama is willing to spend less time on Israel tells me personally that he trusts Israel to be able to stand more on it's own. I personally think that we Jews should be taking this as a compliment. Not to mention that fact that US aircraft carriers are in the area, should any stupidity happen on the part of Iran or Syria, for instance.
Next front: China.
China, with 1.4 billion, is without a doubt the force to reckon with in the future, and even now. China's GDP, depending on how you measure it, is either on par with or surpasses ours. No, wonder: their population is 4.5 times the size of ours. Only complete idiots would not be able to have their economy edge out ours with that kind of population advantage. If Obama is freed up to spend more time and energy on reigning in China, that is actually, when we are honest with ourselves, a neo-con policy. And maybe not such a bad one.
Most people don't know, but the word "China" itself means "Kingdom in the middle". The chinese have always had a very snobby few of themselves in the world, and maybe for good reason: every time China has been invaded and occupied, the occupiers themselves eventually became, well, Chinese. China has shown no territorial ambitions worth noting. Their view has been "why go to them, they come to us and then they become us". In the 1400s, the Chinese, who created the first navy, with ships far surpassing the ships of Europeans, literally mothballed it's fleet and stopped sailing for 400+ years for this very reason.
But today, China is polluting the world more than any other power, because it is currently building 40 mega-cities on the level of New York City, it is busy pirating all sorts of stuff, and it fields the largest army in the world.
It is only logical that a responsible President take more time and look to see what is going on in China. Which is exactly what President Obama is doing. I bet good money that, had Gov. Romney won the election 2012, his policy toward China would not be all that different.
I cannot fault Obama for any of these policies - many stem from having to pick the worst of all bad possible solutions. I especially cannot fault him for giving Iran a chance, for that alone keeps Saudi Arabia (hardly an ally, only on paper) and Iraq in check, keeps Syria caged up until it learns to be a Democracy, and it gives Israel breathing room. And notice that Turkey, which officially makes some loud noises about Israel, but is actually one of Israel's best trading partners and also a place where Israelis can go on vacation without fear for their safety, is not complaining about any of this.
Obama is in no way trying to realign the ME with Iran as a nuclear player. He is not going to let that happen. No American president is going to let that happen.
You asked for my two cents, I now started to give them.
[MENTION=25505]Jroc[/MENTION] [MENTION=29697]freedombecki[/MENTION] - among others.
The Iranian Threat & Obama?s Deception | FrontPage Magazine
The U.S. would do much better if it aligned with Iran and ditch Israel as an ally.
Iran is an up and coming player in the Middle East.
Whereas, Israel's days are numbered and will someday cease to exist as a viable state. ...
No offense but we all know the history. The question is whats the way forward? Syria is a client state of Iran and is still killing tens of thousands of people, if that's success in your mind well..What an i say to that. Iran is not required to dismantle it's nuke program. the sanctions were working but Obama all of the sudden decided to lift a lot of them. He's sees them as a stabilizing force in the region, Sunni man is partially right. Iran funds terrorist around the globe. they fund Hazballah ,Hamas, They are responsible for many of the explosives that are killing our troops right now in Afghanistan. They are developing long range missiles, they continue to work on their nuke program and they are run by muslim fundamentalist nutjobs..... Nukes in their handsOk, [MENTION=25505]Jroc[/MENTION], I have been researching, and though I am far from done, lots of things to add. It's not gonna completely please Cons or Libs, but.... and btw, thanks for the personal invite to this thread.
We really fucked up in Persia in the 1950s. We propped up a King who was mostly hated by his own people. He was also a brutal King, hardly an icon of what we claim to stand for. But it was probably our best of all bad options. We were just 10 years past the most destructive war in our world's history, combatting the rise of Communism and our CIA was still pretty much in it's infancy. Persia (Iran) borders on the former Soviet Union. I bet that if the Dulles brothers could have peeked into a crystal ball, they would never have done some of the things they did. However, that mistake led to lots of things:
-the 1979 uprising, which occurred when former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, after unsuccessfully trying to get then Pres. Jimmy Carter to allow the ailing King of Iran to be flown to the USA for heart treatment, succeeded on the 6th try. The King was flown in, a revolution happened in Iran and our people there were kept hostage for 444 days. This is all part of the historical record. It is also part of the historical record that the hostages were released BEFORE Reagan was inaugurated.
-In neighboring Afghanistan, the Reagan administration trained the Mujahadeen to fight against the Russkis. Those Mujahadeen would later become the core of El Quaida. I am quite sure that, like the Dulles brothers, had Reagan been able to gaze into a crystal ball and see where this was all going to lead, he would never had instructed that the Mujahadeen be trained by our CIA.
-In the Iraq-Iran war of 1988, which killed more than 1 million people, we armed BOTH sides. We made money off of BOTH sides. Bad, bad, bad...
There is ample reason for Iranians to dislike us, no matter how good our intentions are.
However, this in no way excuses the horrible anti-semitism that is at the core of Iranian politics, nor does it excuse the terrible Iranian laws that literally make the life of a Jew (there are ca 30,000 Jews living within Iran, without passports, they cannot get out) 1/17th the life of a non-jew in Iran.
-Iran wants to make the bomb. Of this, I have no doubt.
So far, so good.
So, what does Obama (D) do:
-more sanctions than any other president in history vis-a-vis Iran. Crippling sanctions. Obama has gone farther than Bush ever went. And that is historically provable. I can't fault him for that.
In Syria, a smaller ally to Iran, and one which borders Eretz Israel, the Obama policy was probably the best of all bad options once again, for indeed, among the rebels were some elements of El Quaida, and yet, on both the military and the PR front, Obama won. He we not supported the rebels, Assad would have massacred many more. I despise Assad and think he should be hung. The hatred that had been under the surface for years in Syria came boiling to the top after the so-called Arab-Spring began. It is much more intense than most US-Americans know, but I know two of the leaders of the Syrian rebellion - leaders who were in exile in Germany for about 13 years, personally. I translated a number of their documents, pleas for help at the UN, from German into English. The small bands or factions that have put themselves together is about the most unlikely group of people that you could imagine.
But the fact is that Syria is quiet right now, and therefore no help to Iran.
And the other fact is that Iran wants to negotiate. It cannot hurt. It can only help. And if it doesn't work, be can still clobber Iran, if needed. Had we taken the same position with Nixon in 1972 as some are taking with Obama now, then he may never have gone to China, and maybe we would have more than just confrontation right now. Most thought of China as the mortal enemy back then, just as most see Iran as a mortal enemy now. If Nixon could talk with Mao and the world did not fall apart, then Obama can talk with the upper ups in Iran and again, the world will not fall apart. And there is also no "Neville Chamberlain" comparison possible here. Iran is in no position to fight a conventional war that it can win.
Israel: more joint training missions between the USA and Eretz Yisrael under the Obama administration than under any other administration, ever. The fact that Obama is willing to spend less time on Israel tells me personally that he trusts Israel to be able to stand more on it's own. I personally think that we Jews should be taking this as a compliment. Not to mention that fact that US aircraft carriers are in the area, should any stupidity happen on the part of Iran or Syria, for instance.
Next front: China.
China, with 1.4 billion, is without a doubt the force to reckon with in the future, and even now. China's GDP, depending on how you measure it, is either on par with or surpasses ours. No, wonder: their population is 4.5 times the size of ours. Only complete idiots would not be able to have their economy edge out ours with that kind of population advantage. If Obama is freed up to spend more time and energy on reigning in China, that is actually, when we are honest with ourselves, a neo-con policy. And maybe not such a bad one.
Most people don't know, but the word "China" itself means "Kingdom in the middle". The chinese have always had a very snobby few of themselves in the world, and maybe for good reason: every time China has been invaded and occupied, the occupiers themselves eventually became, well, Chinese. China has shown no territorial ambitions worth noting. Their view has been "why go to them, they come to us and then they become us". In the 1400s, the Chinese, who created the first navy, with ships far surpassing the ships of Europeans, literally mothballed it's fleet and stopped sailing for 400+ years for this very reason.
But today, China is polluting the world more than any other power, because it is currently building 40 mega-cities on the level of New York City, it is busy pirating all sorts of stuff, and it fields the largest army in the world.
It is only logical that a responsible President take more time and look to see what is going on in China. Which is exactly what President Obama is doing. I bet good money that, had Gov. Romney won the election 2012, his policy toward China would not be all that different.
I cannot fault Obama for any of these policies - many stem from having to pick the worst of all bad possible solutions. I especially cannot fault him for giving Iran a chance, for that alone keeps Saudi Arabia (hardly an ally, only on paper) and Iraq in check, keeps Syria caged up until it learns to be a Democracy, and it gives Israel breathing room. And notice that Turkey, which officially makes some loud noises about Israel, but is actually one of Israel's best trading partners and also a place where Israelis can go on vacation without fear for their safety, is not complaining about any of this.
Obama is in no way trying to realign the ME with Iran as a nuclear player. He is not going to let that happen. No American president is going to let that happen.
You asked for my two cents, I now started to give them.
[MENTION=25505]Jroc[/MENTION] [MENTION=29697]freedombecki[/MENTION] - among others.
The Iranian Threat & Obama?s Deception | FrontPage Magazine
Syria was killing tens of thousands during the Bush years as well.
No, the sanctions are just as hard and in place as they were before.
And knowing the history indeed helps to see which path for the future is better.
Obama is not trying to be in league with Iran. Those are just RW wet-dreams. Obama is giving Iran a chance to give up it's program peacefully, without having to fire a single shot.
Once again, thanks for inviting me to the thread. Glad I could join in.
Ummm,, that would actually be the last thing we "right wingers" would want. it's actually liberals who play the "be nice maybe they'll change crap"The U.S. would do much better if it aligned with Iran and ditch Israel as an ally.
Iran is an up and coming player in the Middle East.
Whereas, Israel's days are numbered and will someday cease to exist as a viable state. ...
Under the terms of the UN charter it cant cease to exist, and if the ragheads try they will have 6 nuclear armed nations breathing down their necks. In reality iran is a failing country that will go down faster than a date pie after sundown during Ramadan. At the moment the M.E is reliant on its oil reserves but these are dwindling fast, and the Israelis are working on fuels that don't rely on fossilised hydrocarbons. We already have fully synthetic lubricants to replace those made from crude oil, so the use of M.E oil is fast declining and they are a one trick pony so have no other viable industries.
Incorrect Toastman.
No offense but we all know the history. The question is whats the way forward? Syria is a client state of Iran and is still killing tens of thousands of people, if that's success in your mind well..What an i say to that. Iran is not required to dismantle it's nuke program. the sanctions were working but Obama all of the sudden decided to lift a lot of them. He's sees them as a stabilizing force in the region, Sunni man is partially right. Iran funds terrorist around the globe. they fund Hazballah ,Hamas, They are responsible for many of the explosives that are killing our troops right now in Afghanistan. They are developing long range missiles, they continue to work on their nuke program and they are run by muslim fundamentalist nutjobs..... Nukes in their hands
The Iranian Threat & Obama?s Deception | FrontPage Magazine
Syria was killing tens of thousands during the Bush years as well.
No, the sanctions are just as hard and in place as they were before.
And knowing the history indeed helps to see which path for the future is better.
Obama is not trying to be in league with Iran. Those are just RW wet-dreams. Obama is giving Iran a chance to give up it's program peacefully, without having to fire a single shot.
Once again, thanks for inviting me to the thread. Glad I could join in.
Incorrect Toastman.
I don't hate jews.
I'm only opposed to zionism and those who support Israel.
And yes, I do have a problem with the "official" holocaust story.
But that doesn't make me anti-semitic. ...
