Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I agree with another poster that the Chamberlain thing should become a part of Godwin's Law. I mean, it doesn't offend me at all, but it's a dumb argument. The United States isn't in the same position as Britain was in Munich 1938. Sorry.
Iran is no threat to the United States. Point blank, period.
Whether or not you can have a rational conversation with me blah, blah, blah, makes me no nevermind. That's my opinion, and i'm sticking to it.
well.... while i have articulated that we have no basis for an intelegent conversation on the subject, that does not mean
1. I believe your intelect to be lacking.
2. I do not respect your right to believe as you do....
I suspect that sans the historical context Chamberlain did not consider Britans position to be what it turned out to be at the moment he gushed so historically...
Iran is and will continue to be an existential threat to the west until the political dynamic there changes. I see no hope for change at any time in the near future. And you would hand them nuclear weapons.
well.... while i have articulated that we have no basis for an intelegent conversation on the subject, that does not mean
1. I believe your intelect to be lacking.
2. I do not respect your right to believe as you do....
I suspect that sans the historical context Chamberlain did not consider Britans position to be what it turned out to be at the moment he gushed so historically...
Iran is and will continue to be an existential threat to the west until the political dynamic there changes. I see no hope for change at any time in the near future. And you would hand them nuclear weapons.
In '38, if Chamberlain didn't know that Hitler was a maniac, then shame on him. British intelligence, one of the best in the world at the time, knew EXACTLY how strong Hitler was. It wasn't as if a hell of a lot of Brits weren't living and working in Germany at the time.
But that's then...this is now.
To say that i would hand Iran a nuke is hyperbolic....and silly.
I would do no such thing. I wouldn't stop them from getting one either. However, should there be some nations that might actually be threatened by Iran's acquisition of such a weapon.... they should do whatever they can to prevent such an occurrence if they feel so threatened.
But i don't live in those nations, and i'm indifferent to their plight.
So Iran gets a nuke...what are they gonna do with it? Fire it at the United States?
LMAO...even you Iran haters don't believe that.
Your antipathy towards Iran has more to do with this strange need many right wingers have of needing an enemy to point your fingers at. It justifies all of this ridiculous defense spending and gallivanting all over the world meddling in everyone's problems.
"Good men."
Has it dawned on you that a good portion of this country doesn't see us as "good?"
I mean, how much evil do you want the United States to stop? There's evil in every corner of the world, and always will be.
It's our job to correct it?
Free Tibet!
Save Darfur!
That's what I thought. Just liberal bumper sticker crap.
I'm sitting at my desk thinking about how all hell seems to be breaking loose in a bunch of trouble spots, and outside of Afghanistan, we're seemingly the odd man out.
I gotta admit...i like the feeling.
Conservatives might be right when they say that our allies don't feel as if they can rely on us anymore (since Obama came to office).
GOOD!! They shouldn't be relying on us anyway. There is nothing reciprocal about this reliance. What do we rely on them for other than the fact that you can rely on them to take money out of our pockets somehow, or get us in some intractable war (we do a good enough job of that ourselves without allies).
The United States is a self reliant nation for the most part. We can trade with whom we want to, and we can be friends with any nation in the world without being an "ally."
Russians or Ukranians shoot down a Malaysian airliner? That's between those 3 nations to sort out.
Iraq is going to hell in a handbasket because we left the country without adequate troops to defend their fledgling 'democracy' ()...not my problem.
I mean, how long do some of you expect us to stay in Iraq? 10 more years? 30 years? 50?
Iran is developing a nuke? So what. That's no threat to us. The nations that feel threatened should do something about it WITHOUT our involvement.
And please, don't tell me about how "The U.S. shouldn't lead from behind" (Cheney's nonsense) or how the world "depends on the United States to take the lead." They won't depend on us to do it if they know they can't rely on us to do it.
I don't wanna be dragged into anymore middle eastern conflicts. I just wanna keep buying the oil, and i'm willing to buy the oil from whomever is selling it. If it's a democrat, great. If it's a despot, makes me no difference as long as the gas burns in my engine.
This is not to say that the United States can't band together with other nations to stop an Adolf Hitler type. We can and should do things like that if the situation gets bad enough....and we can do it without having mutual defense agreements and constantly meddling in the business of other nations.
Do not know hich conservative are you talking about but me and a bunch of other conservatives are happy with the current situation. In fact, this is only one thing that I totally agree with Obama. We need to get the hell out of the bad business of policing the world.
WE ARE TIRED OF BEING THE WORLD POLICE. WE DO NOT HAVE THE MONEY neither the WILL to keep throwing money.
In '38, if Chamberlain didn't know that Hitler was a maniac, then shame on him. British intelligence, one of the best in the world at the time, knew EXACTLY how strong Hitler was. It wasn't as if a hell of a lot of Brits weren't living and working in Germany at the time.
But that's then...this is now.
To say that i would hand Iran a nuke is hyperbolic....and silly.
I would do no such thing. I wouldn't stop them from getting one either. However, should there be some nations that might actually be threatened by Iran's acquisition of such a weapon.... they should do whatever they can to prevent such an occurrence if they feel so threatened.
But i don't live in those nations, and i'm indifferent to their plight.
i am not going to get into the mindset that Chamberlain had, nor what he knew or didnt know. However, JUST like Chamberlain, we too know some very clear things about Iran.... They include a clearly articulated State position that America should, at all costs be distroyed.
again, until we can agree that they really do want to end America (actually western civilization in general) there really is little we can accomplish.
I'm sitting at my desk thinking about how all hell seems to be breaking loose in a bunch of trouble spots, and outside of Afghanistan, we're seemingly the odd man out.
I gotta admit...i like the feeling.
Conservatives might be right when they say that our allies don't feel as if they can rely on us anymore (since Obama came to office).
GOOD!! They shouldn't be relying on us anyway. There is nothing reciprocal about this reliance. What do we rely on them for other than the fact that you can rely on them to take money out of our pockets somehow, or get us in some intractable war (we do a good enough job of that ourselves without allies).
The United States is a self reliant nation for the most part. We can trade with whom we want to, and we can be friends with any nation in the world without being an "ally."
Russians or Ukranians shoot down a Malaysian airliner? That's between those 3 nations to sort out.
Iraq is going to hell in a handbasket because we left the country without adequate troops to defend their fledgling 'democracy' ()...not my problem.
I mean, how long do some of you expect us to stay in Iraq? 10 more years? 30 years? 50?
Iran is developing a nuke? So what. That's no threat to us. The nations that feel threatened should do something about it WITHOUT our involvement.
And please, don't tell me about how "The U.S. shouldn't lead from behind" (Cheney's nonsense) or how the world "depends on the United States to take the lead." They won't depend on us to do it if they know they can't rely on us to do it.
I don't wanna be dragged into anymore middle eastern conflicts. I just wanna keep buying the oil, and i'm willing to buy the oil from whomever is selling it. If it's a democrat, great. If it's a despot, makes me no difference as long as the gas burns in my engine.
This is not to say that the United States can't band together with other nations to stop an Adolf Hitler type. We can and should do things like that if the situation gets bad enough....and we can do it without having mutual defense agreements and constantly meddling in the business of other nations.
Only problem with your thought is that if the Republicans had their way were would be in more conflicts not less, think Syria, Iran and the Ukraine. While I agree it is time for us to step back do not think for a moment it was what the Repubs would have had us do.
Well, DD, given your disinterest in world events, no wonder Obama is your man. He isn't either. Guess what Obama is doing the next three days? Fundraising and campaigning of course!
Obama leaves today for a West Coast swing that will include five fund-raisers in three cities: Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles. The president will have one other event during the trip, a speech at a Los Angeles technical college on Thursday, before returning to the White House late that day.
Last edited by texan2yankee; 07-22-2014 at 12:38 PM..
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
i am not going to get into the mindset that Chamberlain had, nor what he knew or didnt know. However, JUST like Chamberlain, we too know some very clear things about Iran.... They include a clearly articulated State position that America should, at all costs be distroyed.
again, until we can agree that they really do want to end America (actually western civilization in general) there really is little we can accomplish.
In Iran, there are the mullahs, and then there's reality.
Exactly how would Iran destroy us? They can't...and THAT'S what matters. I don't care about what they WISH they could do.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
Martin Niemöller
Godwin again. SMH..
Niemoeller wasn't the most powerful nation on Earth. Sorry, but the analogy doesn't fit. No nation is coming for the United States. And when one does, we'll handle it like we've always done.
Japan and Germany came for us, and we kicked their ass.
When Thomas Jefferson said that we don't need permanent alliances, you think he didn't know about the potential wickedness of men? He lived in a far more brutal and violent era of human history than any of us can imagine.
The United States needs to mind it's own business. We don't need allies.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
).
