Va Primary: Gingrich, Perry fail to get on ballot.

[Toro]

All you've done is repeat the problem. The US is a party to the NPT, but we possess nuclear weapons. Israel is a party to the NPT, but they possess nuclear weapons. What makes Iran different?

The NPT does not say that a nation cannot possess nuclear weapons. It exists to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Iran does not have nuclear weapons. If it attempts to get nuclear weapons - as it is now, and has been sanctioned for doing so - it is in violation of the treaty.

Israel is not a party to the treaty.

So if you don't sign the treaty you can have them, but if you do, you can't, even if your enemies do.

So why can't Iran decide it is no longer party to the Treaty?

They can.

And we can decide to respond.

 

[JimBowie1958]

It's perfectly rational for Iran to want nuclear weapons. You just have to look at a map to understand why. To the north, Russia has nuclear weapons. To the west, Israel has nuclear weapons. And to the east, China, India and Pakistan all have nuclear weapons. So it's perfectly logical for Iran in their national security interest to want nuclear weapons too.

But it is also perfectly rational for the United States and the West in our national security interest to stop them.

And, yup, you'll send those working class kids off to war to prevent that from happening, won't you?

It wasn't like you were going to sign up yourself.

Frankly, I don't see how it is America's interest one way or the other. True, the Iranians have some greivences against us, like that psychopath we put into power and backed for 30 years. But Iran has never attacked its neighbors, so these silly comparisons to Nazi Germany are just a lot of propaganda.

In short-

Not really our problem, no matter what the Zionist puppetmasters try to claim.

While I wouldnt go so far as to say Zionist pupetmasters are calling the shots here (there are plenty of wannabe puppet masters here and they have the US on time share) Iran has not yet done anything more than sell weapons to parties opposed to us and Isreal. Iran has obvious interests in developing nuclear power, since it does not refine enough fuel for its own consumption, and if they siphon some of that off to make bombs like Pakistan and Isreal and Russia and China have done why should we start a war over it?

Send in SF teams to sabotage their facilities I am OK with. An open bombing campaign that kills tens of thousands of innocent civilians needs a lot more provocation to justify than what we have, IMO.

 

[JoeB131]

It's perfectly rational for Iran to want nuclear weapons. You just have to look at a map to understand why. To the north, Russia has nuclear weapons. To the west, Israel has nuclear weapons. And to the east, China, India and Pakistan all have nuclear weapons. So it's perfectly logical for Iran in their national security interest to want nuclear weapons too.

But it is also perfectly rational for the United States and the West in our national security interest to stop them.

And, yup, you'll send those working class kids off to war to prevent that from happening, won't you?

It wasn't like you were going to sign up yourself.

You're projecting, über-RINO. I can do the same.

"Why do you support the enemies of America? If you think Iran is so great, maybe you should move there."

Never said Iran was great.

I said it's not our problem. I don't think we should take Iran's side, i don't think we should take Israel's side. If they want to bash each other's brains in over whose sky pixie has a bigger dick, they can knock themselves out. It's just ain't our problem.

If anything, we ought to sell Israel down the river and just keep the oil flowing. Although it would be a lot more sensible to get off our dependence on oil produced by madmen.

Frankly, I don't see how it is America's interest one way or the other. True, the Iranians have some greivences against us, like that psychopath we put into power and backed for 30 years. But Iran has never attacked its neighbors, so these silly comparisons to Nazi Germany are just a lot of propaganda.

In short-

Not really our problem, no matter what the Zionist puppetmasters try to claim.

When someone actually analogizes Iran to Nazi Germany, I'll agree with you. Otherwise, it's just a silly deflection on your part.

Maybe the better Nazi analogy is to those who say the Zionists control the US government.

Go back and check with your boy FakeSnarkey... He's the one who used a Nazi Reference.

But even though we just squandered a trillion dollars borrowed from China trying to make Iraqis love Democracy, we are now going to try to bully Iran into what, not getting weapons everyone else has? Really?

I've said this elsewhere. If we had a draft and put all the sons of the Wall Street types and politicians into an elite unit that was the first sent into a war zone, we'd actually think it out before we decided we needed to go to war with someone.

In WWII, the sons of the wealthy fought along side the sons of the working class. The Kennedies and The Bush's sent their kids.

Today. Meh, send some poor kids to do it.

 

[JoeB131]

While I wouldnt go so far as to say Zionist pupetmasters are calling the shots here (there are plenty of wannabe puppet masters here and they have the US on time share) Iran has not yet done anything more than sell weapons to parties opposed to us and Isreal. Iran has obvious interests in developing nuclear power, since it does not refine enough fuel for its own consumption, and if they siphon some of that off to make bombs like Pakistan and Isreal and Russia and China have done why should we start a war over it?

Send in SF teams to sabotage their facilities I am OK with. An open bombing campaign that kills tens of thousands of innocent civilians needs a lot more provocation to justify than what we have, IMO.

And that works fine until one of those SF teams gets caught and the Iranians put them on trial and there are demands to go in and rescue them.

I would agree that there are a lot of people who have outsized influence in this country.

The amusing thing about the Zionists is that their ability to adapt. Initially, their base was the 3% of the country that happens to be Jewish, but today, most American Jews don't consider Israel to even be a nice place to visit, and are a little embarrassed over their behavior towards Palestine (as any sensible person would be.) Not to mention they vote 78% democratic, and aren't a swing constituency.

So the Zionists got clever. They've corraled the right by appealing to their religious stupidity. We have to have Israel so at the end of days, Jesus can come back and settle all the scores against the atheists and the ACLU and the squishy protestants and whoever else you don't like if you're a funditard.

So you have Mitt Romney, who most Funditards don't consider a Christian, anyway, trying to curry favor with them by beating the war drum with Iran.

 

[JoeB131]

They can.

And we can decide to respond.

sure we can. And any president who does so should be impeached.

I'm not sure why you are so anxious for another war when we haven't recovered from the last one yet.

 

[Toro]

They can.

And we can decide to respond.

sure we can. And any president who does so should be impeached.

I'm not sure why you are so anxious for another war when we haven't recovered from the last one yet.

I'm not sure why you support the terrorists so much.

 

[JoeB131]

They can.

And we can decide to respond.

sure we can. And any president who does so should be impeached.

I'm not sure why you are so anxious for another war when we haven't recovered from the last one yet.

I'm not sure why you support the terrorists so much.

If you have real proof Iran is responsible for terrorism against the US, then present it to Congress.

The ironic thing, is one Man's Terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. WHen Osama Bin Laden was killing Russians in Afghanistan because the might teach Afghani women to read or something, he was a "Freedom Fighter". Ronald Reagan even called him that. When he turned around and started killing Americans because we support Israel and had troops in Saudi Arabia, he was a "Terrorist".

The reality. The middle East is a Hornet's nest, and if we insist on sticking our hands in, we should expect to get stung. And stop trying to pretend that some of the hornets are good hornets or better than the other hornets.

Again, until you sign up for the military and go out and die for Zionism, I'll take your Chickenhawk squakings as just that.

 

[tenthertoo]

Getting on the VA ballot should have been a piece of cake for Gingrich. That he didn't SHOUTS a lot about his lack of organizational skills.

 

[JoeB131]

Getting on the VA ballot should have been a piece of cake for Gingrich. That he didn't SHOUTS a lot about his lack of organizational skills.

6 out of 8 candidates were unable to get on.

Oreo explained it much better, but the real problem was that they had strict rules that weren't really enforced until this year.

 

[Toro]

sure we can. And any president who does so should be impeached.

I'm not sure why you are so anxious for another war when we haven't recovered from the last one yet.

I'm not sure why you support the terrorists so much.

If you have real proof Iran is responsible for terrorism against the US, then present it to Congress.

The ironic thing, is one Man's Terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. WHen Osama Bin Laden was killing Russians in Afghanistan because the might teach Afghani women to read or something, he was a "Freedom Fighter". Ronald Reagan even called him that. When he turned around and started killing Americans because we support Israel and had troops in Saudi Arabia, he was a "Terrorist".

The reality. The middle East is a Hornet's nest, and if we insist on sticking our hands in, we should expect to get stung. And stop trying to pretend that some of the hornets are good hornets or better than the other hornets.

Again, until you sign up for the military and go out and die for Zionism, I'll take your Chickenhawk squakings as just that.

I noticed that you still haven't answered whether or not the Jews control the media and the global financial system.

 

[JoeB131]

I noticed that you still haven't answered whether or not the Jews control the media and the global financial system.

And you haven't answered my question about whether you still beat your wife. What is your point?

 

[Toro]

I noticed that you still haven't answered whether or not the Jews control the media and the global financial system.

And you haven't answered my question about whether you still beat your wife. What is your point?

I've never hit a woman. I can't remember the last time I yelled at my wife.

Now do the Jews control the media and global financial system?

 

[JoeB131]

I noticed that you still haven't answered whether or not the Jews control the media and the global financial system.

And you haven't answered my question about whether you still beat your wife. What is your point?

I've never hit a woman. I can't remember the last time I yelled at my wife.

Now do the Jews control the media and global financial system?

never talked about the "jews". You are the one who has the fascination with "The Jews". Most Jews I know are about as disgusted with Israel's behavior as I am.

I was talking about Zionists.

But carry on with your attempts at distraction.

 

[Toro]

And you haven't answered my question about whether you still beat your wife. What is your point?

I've never hit a woman. I can't remember the last time I yelled at my wife.

Now do the Jews control the media and global financial system?

never talked about the "jews". You are the one who has the fascination with "The Jews". Most Jews I know are about as disgusted with Israel's behavior as I am.

I was talking about Zionists.

But carry on with your attempts at distraction.

Then it should be a simple answer, shouldn't it? Yet you keep evading the question. Do Jews control the media and financial system?

Or, do Zionists?

 

[JoeB131]

I'm not dignifying the question by answering.

Zionists dictate our foreign policy, and have for some time. Everyone knows this and I've put forth a bunch of examples of how they do so.

Now, if you want to try to conflate that into some kind of anti-semetic thing because, gosh, you can't really refute it, that's your problem.

 

[Toro]

I'm not dignifying the question by answering.

Zionists dictate our foreign policy, and have for some time. Everyone knows this and I've put forth a bunch of examples of how they do so.

Now, if you want to try to conflate that into some kind of anti-semetic thing because, gosh, you can't really refute it, that's your problem.

Well, you do have a track record in hatred of a group, don't you? So it's not unreasonable to assume that you would hate another group, especially when you evoke Zionism like anti-Semite bigots do.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm not dignifying the question by answering.

Zionists dictate our foreign policy, and have for some time. Everyone knows this and I've put forth a bunch of examples of how they do so.

Now, if you want to try to conflate that into some kind of anti-semetic thing because, gosh, you can't really refute it, that's your problem.

Well, you do have a track record in hatred of a group, don't you? So it's not unreasonable to assume that you would hate another group, especially when you evoke Zionism like anti-Semite bigots do.

Would depend on the group, wouldn't it.

Vast majority of the world's Jews don't live in Israel, and a lot of the support for Zionism are funditard idiots who want Jesus to come back and get even for them.

So it's a criticism of a philosophy, not a religion or a group.

If I criticize a religion, I criticize a religion by taking down the stupidity of the theology. Which is really, really easy with a certain group that shall go nameless.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I agree that JoeB is far, far to the right of me, and, yes, I look like Ronald Reagan compared to him, but that is only in comparison and contrast. Our Joe is a RINO indeed, a poser who is a libertarian fo the dullest sort.

Iran has no legal right to pursue weapons for which it has no legitimate security need. Hitler was also barred by international treaty from militarizing the Rhineland. People like JoeB defended Hitler's right back then to do so.

Let the butthurt flow, JoeB, embrace the pain, because you are looking more stupid with each post on this thread.

Germany had lost a war, and not remilitarizing the Rhineland was a stipulation of the armistice tht ended the war.

And when Hitler remilitirized the Rhineland, no one really said boo about it because it was their country. Kind of ridiculous for Germany not have troops on their own border when the French were building this monstrosity called the Maginot line.

There was never a war with Iran where Iran agreed not to have nuclear weapons. They did sign the NPT, but they can walk away from that any time they want. And you look at a map, where Israel, India and Pakistan all have nukes and aren't signatories to the NPT, it looks to me like they have a legitimate need.

Frankly, I could care less what happens between Israel and Iran. That's NOT MY PROBLEM. And I'm frankly sick of sending kids off on these fools errands for Israel and the Oil Companies. So are most Americans.

And when you get your boy Mitt Romney, who had better things to do when John McCain was in a bamboo cage at the Hanoi Hilton, and says his sons working on his campaign is as much 'serving their country' as the young men fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, it kind of sickens me when he tries to drum up votes by beating the war drum against Iraq, a country that isn't really our enemy.

Final point. It seems to me that we need to get the vindictiveness the **** out of our foreign policy. We are still punishing Iran for stuff that happened 30 years ago. We need to get over it. We need to get over what our grudge with Cuba is, too. We tried to bully smaller countries, and they punched us in the nose. That's an occupational hazard for a bully.

You have been the bully for several months, but that seems to be knocked out of you. Good. So to your points.

Versailles and the international monetary policy making after that led to the rise of Hitler. That is not the point.

The point is that France did not crush Hitler in the Rhineland. Germany had no legitimate need to militarize the frontier between the two countries.

Iran has no legitmate security need for nukes.

Romney will create a foreign policy with which you will most agree, JoeB.

 

[JoeB131]

You have been the bully for several months, but that seems to be knocked out of you. Good. So to your points.

WTF are you talking about? Never mind, I don't want to know what you are talking about, you might start stalking again... (Poor Fake, I don't think he has any friends.)

Versailles and the international monetary policy making after that led to the rise of Hitler. That is not the point.

The point is that France did not crush Hitler in the Rhineland. Germany had no legitimate need to militarize the frontier between the two countries.

You mean other than it was their country? The thing was that by 1935 or so, the whole world had realized Versailles was an unfair treaty that did more harm than good. Also, most of the world was fine with Hitler in the 30's because they were more scared of Communism.

Now better cases could be made about the Anchluss with Austria or the annexation of the Sudetenland, since these things actually involved other countries. But remilitizing a part of your own country, or building battleships, or an air force, or all the other things in Versailles Germany wasn't allowed was allowed because no one thought those things were worth a war.

Iran has no legitmate security need for nukes.

That happens to be your opinion. They obviously have a different one. Actually, I can think of the best reason in the world to get nukes.

Nobody messes with you after you have them. Look at Khadafy vs. Kim Jong Il. Guess which one of those guys was shot like a dog after giving up nukes, and which one died peacefully in his palace with the whole world kissing his backside?

Romney will create a foreign policy with which you will most agree, JoeB.

Once again, ROmney will lose, he'll lose badly. It will be so ugly I even I will almost feel sorry for him. So I'm not worried about his foreign policy, he'll never have one.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Romney will win, your opinions are normally very silly, and a passive foreign policy is stupid. That merely encourages the Hitlers, the Stalins, the Bushes, et al.

Sometimes punks have to be crushed. Hitler had to be crushed, Saddam did not.

This is where you lack the ability to discern the difference.