If you are a veteran, how can you support Obama's Iran deal?

[paddymurphy]

This is what Iran's involvement has done to U.S. soldiers...

"At least 500 U.S. military deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan were directly linked to Iran and its support for anti-American militants — a newly disclosed statistic that offers grim context for the Obama administration's diplomatic deal with the Iranian regime aimed at curtailing the rogue nation's nuclear ambitions..."

Iran linked to deaths of 500 U.S. troops in Iraq Afghanistan

So, your solution is to send many more to die. Brilliant.

 

[paddymurphy]

Nuhuh

So your position is that Iran should have a free pass to kill our people???

The treaty has nothing to do with the militias Iran supported in Iraq. Those same militias are not killing more Isis fighters than anyone. We went over there and invaded that nation; some of their people fought us. That war is over. Why do we not avoid the next one because of what happened in the last one?

 

[paddymurphy]

4,486 U.S. military deaths in Iraq are directly linked to the incompetence of the GOP and their flock of morons who supported them during the 2000's. If you're a veteran, how can you support the GOP?

Over 50,000 American deaths in Vietnam attributable to a war-mongering Democrat?

Over a million enemy and civilian deaths. Started by a Democrat, ended by a Republican.

Bullshit. When Richard Nixon could have had peace he sabotaged the Paris Peace talks and the war continued with 20,000 deaths that did not have to happen.

Wow. You just managed to placate the blood of over 30,000 Americans in order to make your party appear innocuous.

Stop while you're ahead. The facts are what they are and they are indisputable. I left my blood on the ground of that country so don't even try to create facts out of your ass.

Your "facts" might be indisputable taken out of context with the whole. Every time there was a major peace protest in America the NV stopped negotiating or made unrealistic demands, the NV were constantly being urged by China not to accept American proposals. The NV used the peace talks more often to stall for time than to actually reach an accord.
The blame can be spread around but the NV generally wasn't interested in cooperating.
I missed it by 2 weeks but my dad and many of my friends bled there, Thank you for your sacrifice but your single focus of blame is not in line with all the facts.

"Every time there was a major peace protest in America the NV stopped negotiating or made unrealistic demands", that, quite simply, was pulled out of your ass.

 

[Ringel05]

Over 50,000 American deaths in Vietnam attributable to a war-mongering Democrat?

Over a million enemy and civilian deaths. Started by a Democrat, ended by a Republican.

Bullshit. When Richard Nixon could have had peace he sabotaged the Paris Peace talks and the war continued with 20,000 deaths that did not have to happen.

Wow. You just managed to placate the blood of over 30,000 Americans in order to make your party appear innocuous.

Stop while you're ahead. The facts are what they are and they are indisputable. I left my blood on the ground of that country so don't even try to create facts out of your ass.

Your "facts" might be indisputable taken out of context with the whole. Every time there was a major peace protest in America the NV stopped negotiating or made unrealistic demands, the NV were constantly being urged by China not to accept American proposals. The NV used the peace talks more often to stall for time than to actually reach an accord.
The blame can be spread around but the NV generally wasn't interested in cooperating.
I missed it by 2 weeks but my dad and many of my friends bled there, Thank you for your sacrifice but your single focus of blame is not in line with all the facts.

"Every time there was a major peace protest in America the NV stopped negotiating or made unrealistic demands", that, quite simply, was pulled out of your ass.

Funny, if you'd read the links I provided later in the thread........ Have a nice day Sputz.

 

[paddymurphy]

1. Because they are tired of war
2. US attacked Afghanistan and Iraq so US politicians got US soldiers killed not Iran.

Iran will never tired of war.
They have their chess pieces strategically placed around the region.
They will do everything they can to usher in their 12th Imam.

Give em another generation or two.
There are a lot of young Iranians that sneak online and satellite television/radio enough to know how full of shit the regime is. They envy America, not hate it.

Meanwhile.....

"There are a lot of young Iranians that sneak online and satellite television/radio enough to know how full of shit the regime is. They envy America, not hate it." And how do you think these young Iranians will react; will view the US if we do what the right wing wants and start a war. There is a whole generation of Iranians who grew up after the Iran -Iraq war, which he helped to start and after the hostage crisis. We attack, and we create a whole new generation of American hating radicals.

 

[2aguy]

I'm a veteran who wholeheartedly supports this treaty. Of course, I don't want more war...

If you don't want more war why on earth would you support this treaty......it is the beginning of the next war.......

 

[paddymurphy]

Bullshit. When Richard Nixon could have had peace he sabotaged the Paris Peace talks and the war continued with 20,000 deaths that did not have to happen.

Wow. You just managed to placate the blood of over 30,000 Americans in order to make your party appear innocuous.

Stop while you're ahead. The facts are what they are and they are indisputable. I left my blood on the ground of that country so don't even try to create facts out of your ass.

Your "facts" might be indisputable taken out of context with the whole. Every time there was a major peace protest in America the NV stopped negotiating or made unrealistic demands, the NV were constantly being urged by China not to accept American proposals. The NV used the peace talks more often to stall for time than to actually reach an accord.
The blame can be spread around but the NV generally wasn't interested in cooperating.
I missed it by 2 weeks but my dad and many of my friends bled there, Thank you for your sacrifice but your single focus of blame is not in line with all the facts.

"Every time there was a major peace protest in America the NV stopped negotiating or made unrealistic demands", that, quite simply, was pulled out of your ass.

Funny, if you'd read the links I provided later in the thread........ Have a nice day Sputz.

I did read your links. From one I saw this: "A week before the 1972 presidential election, Kissinger stated that "peace is at hand," but again the talks stalled and Nixon turned to "jugular diplomacy." Nixon decided that no treaty would be signed until after the November 1972 election, when his position would be strengthened by what most observers expected to be an overwhelming election victory over Democratic challenger and antiwar leader George McGovern. Reelected by just such a landslide, Nixon moved swiftly against North Vietnam."

Read more: Nixon s peace with honor - The Vietnam War and Its Impact

So, Nixon held up peace talks because he expected to crush the antiwar candidate. Seems the opposite your claim. Your other links

And this: "As the war expanded, the North Vietnamese were increasingly caught in the middle of the widening Sino-Soviet dispute. The Soviets were beginning to encourage the North Vietnamese to initiate contact with the Americans to try to reach a negotiated settlement, while the Chinese pushed the North Vietnamese to reject negotiations and instead pursue a policy of fighting a protracted guerrilla-style war that would tie the Americans down in Indochina, erode the U.S.’s military strength and damage its international reputation and political influence in the international arena.[2]" In fact, the only support for your claims was a sentence or two in a speech by a North Vietnamese official Le Duan, given in 1965, at the very beginning of our escalation, a time before the large scale protests against the war had begun and when public opinion was still supportive of our efforts. To quote a speech from 1965 to explain events that happened five years later is idiotic.

 

[Ringel05]

Wow. You just managed to placate the blood of over 30,000 Americans in order to make your party appear innocuous.

Stop while you're ahead. The facts are what they are and they are indisputable. I left my blood on the ground of that country so don't even try to create facts out of your ass.

Your "facts" might be indisputable taken out of context with the whole. Every time there was a major peace protest in America the NV stopped negotiating or made unrealistic demands, the NV were constantly being urged by China not to accept American proposals. The NV used the peace talks more often to stall for time than to actually reach an accord.
The blame can be spread around but the NV generally wasn't interested in cooperating.
I missed it by 2 weeks but my dad and many of my friends bled there, Thank you for your sacrifice but your single focus of blame is not in line with all the facts.

"Every time there was a major peace protest in America the NV stopped negotiating or made unrealistic demands", that, quite simply, was pulled out of your ass.

Funny, if you'd read the links I provided later in the thread........ Have a nice day Sputz.

I did read your links. From one I saw this: "A week before the 1972 presidential election, Kissinger stated that "peace is at hand," but again the talks stalled and Nixon turned to "jugular diplomacy." Nixon decided that no treaty would be signed until after the November 1972 election, when his position would be strengthened by what most observers expected to be an overwhelming election victory over Democratic challenger and antiwar leader George McGovern. Reelected by just such a landslide, Nixon moved swiftly against North Vietnam."

Read more: Nixon s peace with honor - The Vietnam War and Its Impact

So, Nixon held up peace talks because he expected to crush the antiwar candidate. Seems the opposite your claim. Your other links

And this: "As the war expanded, the North Vietnamese were increasingly caught in the middle of the widening Sino-Soviet dispute. The Soviets were beginning to encourage the North Vietnamese to initiate contact with the Americans to try to reach a negotiated settlement, while the Chinese pushed the North Vietnamese to reject negotiations and instead pursue a policy of fighting a protracted guerrilla-style war that would tie the Americans down in Indochina, erode the U.S.’s military strength and damage its international reputation and political influence in the international arena.[2]" In fact, the only support for your claims was a sentence or two in a speech by a North Vietnamese official Le Duan, given in 1965, at the very beginning of our escalation, a time before the large scale protests against the war had begun and when public opinion was still supportive of our efforts. To quote a speech from 1965 to explain events that happened five years later is idiotic.[/QUOTE]

It is? Guess the NV didn't know how to make long term plans and follow through with ideas that had been developed before. nope, no one does that.......
Granted I overstated with "all" but they did use a few of the major (violent) protests as a bargaining chip, that much I remember being reported that the NV had walked away from the discussions after at least 4 of the major protests.