Remember the time President Trump got the US into a nuclear war?

[Mac1958]

You post nothing but lies.

It's what they're told. So, they believe it.

 

[MisterBeale]

Neville Chamberlain couldn’t have said it any better.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

So it is better if we don't have inspectors there or the cooperation of our allies?

We never had any inspectors allowed to look. Stupid ass obie had it right in his agreement they couldn’t do that. As if it was going to change anything anyway. You fucking people seem to think a nation is going to change its course because you sent a fucking mall cop to check on them?

What part of Iran doesn’t fucking care do you not get.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

It’s not a false dichotomy at all. Your view point is simply retarded. And what may make me think that? Oh yes, history. Specifically the history of appeasement you are currently engaged in that has proven disastrous every time. So at this point comparing you to Chamberlain shouldn’t upset you. We know how your ideas end. It’s happened before. You aren’t some grand fucking genius that has come up with this new plan you moron. It’s been tried. It fails. Every fucking time.

 

[alang1216]

We never had any inspectors allowed to look. Stupid ass obie had it right in his agreement they couldn’t do that. As if it was going to change anything anyway. You fucking people seem to think a nation is going to change its course because you sent a fucking mall cop to check on them?

I believe you have that exactly wrong.

Iran will not allow inspections beyond what is in a 2015 nuclear deal, the country's nuclear chief said on Wednesday, as the United States prepares to respond to a proposal to revive Tehran's nuclear deal with world powers.​

​

"We are committed to inspections in the framework of the nuclear deal that are linked to nuclear restrictions which we have accepted in the past... Not one word more, not one word less," said Mohammad Eslami, head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, according to a video carried by state media.​

Of course life is much simpler when you make up your facts to match your beliefs.

 

[Kondor3]

Ah, now I get it. You don't have any rational arguments, just hyperbole, name calling, character assassination, and jingoism.

Not really... I just choose not to burn-up precious time counter-spamming a Russian sympathizer-troll...

 

[MisterBeale]

Not really... I just choose not to burn-up precious time counter-spamming a Russian sympathizer-troll...

 

[MisterBeale]

It’s not a false dichotomy at all. Your view point is simply retarded. And what may make me think that? Oh yes, history. Specifically the history of appeasement you are currently engaged in that has proven disastrous every time. So at this point comparing you to Chamberlain shouldn’t upset you. We know how your ideas end. It’s happened before. You aren’t some grand fucking genius that has come up with this new plan you moron. It’s been tried. It fails. Every fucking time.

And? From the Russian's POV, when we told Gorbachev that would would not expand NATO, and constantly did, now? Ukraine is the last straw. It is Putin who was acting like Chamberlain, year after year, with each expansion of NATO, right?

. . . so? I guess what you said about appeasement was true, nothing was good enough for NATO, they just did not quit.

I guess he has had enough of western aggression and lies, eh? Looks like war pigs like you are ready to oblige him.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

I believe you have that exactly wrong.

Iran will not allow inspections beyond what is in a 2015 nuclear deal, the country's nuclear chief said on Wednesday, as the United States prepares to respond to a proposal to revive Tehran's nuclear deal with world powers.​

​

"We are committed to inspections in the framework of the nuclear deal that are linked to nuclear restrictions which we have accepted in the past... Not one word more, not one word less," said Mohammad Eslami, head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, according to a video carried by state media.​

Of course life is much simpler when you make up your facts to match your beliefs.

And if you actually read up on it you would soon realize they want those deals because there were basically no restrictions at all.

They aren’t wanting to go back to stronger restrictions you moron. So maybe you should ask why they would prefer to stick with the 2015 plan? Because it wasn’t restricting them at all is why. You have to be amazingly dumb to not follow this. The deal in 2015 was fucking garbage for us and a free for all for them. That’s why they want it back.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

And? From the Russian's POV, when we told Gorbachev that would would not expand NATO, and constantly did, now? Ukraine is the last straw. It is Putin who was acting like Chamberlain, year after year, with each expansion of NATO, right?

. . . so? I guess what you said about appeasement was true, nothing was good enough for NATO, they just did not quit.

I guess he has had enough of western aggression and lies, eh? Looks like war pigs like you are ready to oblige him.

Why would you be in favor of not letting countries join NATO? I don’t get your point here. If we only sacrificed a few countries to Russian rule we would have peace? The only country attacking others is Russia.

WTF are you talking about here?

 

[Concerned American]

Nahhhhh... your Orange Baboon-God would never have undertaken nuclear war with Putin.

That is true. He defused any tensions in that direction with both Putin and the rocket man. Did you notice how the rocket man started shooting missiles and threatening as soon as the vegetable took over the WH? Russia started attacking its neighbors (like Obama allowed him to do when Putin annexed Crimea) and China started rattling its sabers demanding that Biden do what they paid him to do? Yeah, we are so much more secure under the democrats--you're a moron.

 

[MisterBeale]

Why would you be in favor of not letting countries join NATO? I don’t get your point here. If we only sacrificed a few countries to Russian rule we would have peace? The only country attacking others is Russia.

WTF are you talking about here?

I"m a study of history, all history.

I really don't have a problem, with any nation joining NATO, that we told Russia would be allowed to join NATO after the Soviet Union ended, and promised them would not enter NATO, after it did.

A few nations? What right is it of ours, to infiltrate governments, bribe leaders, and subvert populations, anymore than it is of them? Do I need to dig up that Joe Biden/CFR video?

Now, any nation where hundreds of thousands of Russians died to liberate them from Nazis? In some cases millions? And if we told the Russians, no, they would not join NATO?
Yeah, that is where it gets prickly for me. I have a problem with the US establishment breaking its promises. I don't understand why you don't. When nations break their diplomatic agreements? THAT, is what leads to war. The nation that breaks the diplomatic agreement, IMO, is the guilty nation. When Hitler broke his agreement with Stalin? HE was the bad guy. When WE broke our agreement to Gorbachev? That makes US the bad guy. See how that works?


If we first had asked for the Russian leadership's consent, I still would have no problem. But we didn't. We never asked them, we just expanded our influence and the expansion of NATO, like a bunch of craven fascists, no different than Hitler.

I have already posted the receipts to this fact and this truth, in this very thread. I have no idea why you are in denial of this history and this truth. Nor do I have any idea why you support the Anglo-American desire to break up Russia and conquer them. This is really just a repeat of the Crimean war.

It is not our zone of control. You, IMO, are being a useful idiot of the military industrial complex, and the oligarchs who engineer war for their power and profit.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

I"m a study of history, all history.

I really don't have a problem, with any nation joining NATO, that we told Russia would be allowed to join NATO after the Soviet Union ended, and promised them would not enter NATO, after it did.

A few nations? What right is it of ours, to infiltrate governments, bribe leaders, and subvert populations, anymore than it is of them? Do I need to dig up that Joe Biden/CFR video?

Now, any nation where hundreds of thousands of Russians died to liberate them from Nazis? In some cases millions? And if we told the Russians, no, they would not join NATO?
Yeah, that is where it gets prickly for me. I have a problem with the US establishment breaking its promises. I don't understand why you don't. When nations break their diplomatic agreements? THAT, is what leads to war. The nation that breaks the diplomatic agreement, IMO, is the guilty nation. When Hitler broke his agreement with Stalin? HE was the bad guy. When WE broke our agreement to Gorbachev? That makes US the bad guy. See how that works?


If we first had asked for the Russian leadership's consent, I still would have no problem. But we didn't. We never asked them, we just expanded our influence and the expansion of NATO, like a bunch of craven fascists, no different than Hitler.

I have already posted the receipts to this fact and this truth, in this very thread. I have no idea why you are in denial of this history and this truth. Nor do I have any idea why you support the Anglo-American desire to break up Russia and conquer them. This is really just a repeat of the Crimean war.

It is not our zone of control. You, IMO, are being a useful idiot of the military industrial complex, and the oligarchs who engineer war for their power and profit.

You’re a fucking moron. Every world war has happened because of idiots like you. You claim to be a historian yet persue the same mistakes every dumb ass in history has done. You don’t fucking learn.

 

[JGalt]

So it is better if we don't have inspectors there or the cooperation of our allies?

Even while the Iran nuclear deal was ongoing, there were sites the Iranians wouldn't let the inspectors in to. And Obama's own officials acquiesced to the Iranian's demands.

Obama says inspectors get access to "any" site in Iran. Is it true?

On top of that, Iran wouldn't let the inspectors interview their country's nuclear scientists.

Iran wouldn't let inspectors interview the country's nuclear scientists under a nuclear deal

 

[MisterBeale]

You’re a fucking moron. Every world war has happened because of idiots like you. You claim to be a historian yet persue the same mistakes every dumb ass in history has done. You don’t fucking learn.

 

[MisterBeale]

 

[MisterBeale]

You’re a fucking moron. Every world war has happened because of idiots like you. You claim to be a historian yet persue the same mistakes every dumb ass in history has done. You don’t fucking learn.

B/C that's exactly what happened when we lost in Vietnam, right? Too bad we didn't start nuking the place up.

Obviously the commies won, and we're all commie now. It caused us to lose the cold war!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Moonglow]

Neither do I.

Isn't it strange how nobody was worried about nuclear war from 2016 to 2020? That is, except the Democrats who were convinced Trump was going to start a nuclear war. And now with Biden in the White House and the world inching closer to the possibility of a nuclear exchange, the left seems to be suffering from a collective case of laryngitis.

KYIV, Sept 25 (Reuters) - The United States warned on Sunday of "catastrophic consequences" if Moscow were to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, after Russia's foreign minister said regions holding widely-criticized referendums would get full protection if annexed by Moscow...

U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said on Sunday the United States would respond to any Russian use of nuclear weapons against Ukraine and that it had spelled out to Moscow the "catastrophic consequences" it would face...

"If Russia crosses this line, there will be catastrophic consequences for Russia. The United States will respond decisively," Sullivan told NBC's "Meet the Press" television program...."

U.S. warns of catastrophic consequences if Russia uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine

Need a safety blanket?

 

[alang1216]

And if you actually read up on it you would soon realize they want those deals because there were basically no restrictions at all.

They aren’t wanting to go back to stronger restrictions you moron. So maybe you should ask why they would prefer to stick with the 2015 plan? Because it wasn’t restricting them at all is why. You have to be amazingly dumb to not follow this. The deal in 2015 was fucking garbage for us and a free for all for them. That’s why they want it back.

Gee, I'm really torn should I trust the judgement of an anonymous internet poster or the governments of China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, and the European Union? What to do??

 

[alang1216]

Even while the Iran nuclear deal was ongoing, there were sites the Iranians wouldn't let the inspectors in to. And Obama's own officials acquiesced to the Iranian's demands.

Obama says inspectors get access to "any" site in Iran. Is it true?

On top of that, Iran wouldn't let the inspectors interview their country's nuclear scientists.

Iran wouldn't let inspectors interview the country's nuclear scientists under a nuclear deal

So you're saying that an imperfect agreement is worse than no agreement? I'm not sure I'd agree.