esmith
Veteran Member
see post #80 point #1 of my response.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A Question For Forum Members
- Thread starter esmith
- Start date
esmith
Veteran Member
I say "good riddance to bad rubbish."
exchemist
Veteran Member
However, your opening post asked what differences there were between Soleimani and the others, not what they all have in common.
Yes, I am... aware... of your... criteria.
And I give them the proper consideration. It is easy, far too easy.
esmith
Veteran Member
potatoes pototoes
I will rephrase it for you.
Why was there not as much discord over those killed (will not list the name just to shorten this answer) during the previous administration as there is over what just happened.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
I have done so....
I stand ground and look my attacker in the eye
even as my first injured eye swells shut
but I grant you the notion....
turning the other cheek is a …..dare
and a dangerous one
exchemist
Veteran Member
You asked what the difference was. And you have been told, at some length, by several respondents.
These explanations of the difference also explain why there is, not so much discord, as concern and scepticism that it was a wise thing to do.
Last edited:
Heyo
Veteran Member
Because people are stupid, emotional and unable to learn from history.
An unequal response leads to a spiral of retaliation and often ends in a war that wasn't intended.
They did with Obama. The result was a treaty that Trump canceled unilaterally with the only reason that it was done by Obama. Iran didn't retaliate then but tried to uphold the treaty with the European signatories. Then Trump doubled down with sanctions.
There are no "good guys" in politics but the initiator of the current trouble is Trump.
Obama is a war criminal because of his habit of extra-judicial assasination by drone strike of people - likely criminals, but not tried by any court - he decided should be executed without trial.
In a similar way, Trump is now a war criminal, too.
That being said, Obama usually had the sense to think through the consequences of his assassinations. In that regard, Trump is worse because not only is he a war criminal, he's an ignorant fool. In a president, that's probably an even worse crime.
esmith
Veteran Member
And just how did you reach the conclusion that Obama considered the consequences of his decisions in this matter?
Heyo
Veteran Member
Because the assassinations Obama ordered didn't lead to the same fuzz the current one caused. Wasn't that your question?
shmogie
Well-Known Member
The result WAS NOT a treaty. A treaty requires the approval of congress, which Obama knew he could never get. So he unilaterally manufactured an agreement, that was not legally binding. Trump had as much right to cancel it as Obama had to make it up.
You seem to forget Irans piracy of oil tankers, and planting bombs on them, and shooting down a US drone over international waters, and attacking Saudi Arabia's oil refineries, and killing three Americans a few weeks ago, and attacking our embassy, that earned them a dead terrorist general.
This iranian regime started it's existence by storming our embassy and taking Americans hostage in 1979. They have been at war with us since then. They have regularly chanted death to America since then. Under Obama they with their little attack boats would run at our ships in international waters, that stopped when Trump said he would sink their little boats. They boarded an American vessel in international waters, captured the crew, because they had been told they could not defend their craft. Remember the pictures of these Americans on their knees and handcuffed, contrary to the Geneva Convention. Obama did nothing.
Your arguments are the same used by Chamberlain regarding the nazi's.
The reason obama's agreement was cancelled is the same reason it would not pass in congress, it guaranteed iran a nuclear weapon in 12 years.
My fathers generation didn't quake when the axis powers acted up, they confronted them.
Some today, after years of provocation, seem literally afraid of iran. " they are continually attacking us, but don't do anything in response, they might attack us"
It is time for iran to be held accountable for it's actions, action by action, response by response.
They are a regime of terrorists, that is why the sunni and kurd people of iraq celebrated wildly when this guy got smoked, they knew who was the architect of the shia oppression and torture of them.
I have been ashamed for 40 years about how we have just let iran strike us with impunity. Over and over again.
Iran was born in violence and that is the currency they use in their relations with other nations. Violence or threats of violence. They need to be repaid in their own currency with interest. This is the only thing that will make them act civilized.
There is no current trouble, there is 40 years of trouble initiated by Iran.
Shad
Veteran Member
Nope. You made a claim which you didn't know the facts behind. Nothing more. Did Obama withdrawal troops due to an illegal war? Nope. Try again.
You made a mistake in use of terms. Your problem.
Shad
Veteran Member
Iraq isn't some bastion of security and secrecy. Someone would have leaked of the information given the pro-Iranian forces in the government.
You are assuming that you need to be told of such a plan.
Altfish
Veteran Member
Who said anything about letting Iraq know?
You are assuming that he had a plan?
shmogie
Well-Known Member
I see. Lets look at history. WW1- Wilson, Democrat. WW2- Roosevelt, Democrat. Korea- Democrat, Truman. Viet Nam- Kennedy, Democrat. Then there are small wars Like Panama, or Iraq, or Afghanistan which came under Republican presidents. BUT, your first sentence is demonstrably false.
And why would anyone NEED a war ? Your explanation on this doesn't exist, so please, why is war needed ?
tytlyf
Not Religious
War is needed by republicans because they're lobbied heavily by the MIC. Same goes for Big Oil crooked corporations.
A perpetual war means a perpetual production line of supplies/equipment/vehicles. You don't understand politics in America.
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Oh, I don't understand politics in America, right.
So, in your mythical construct of war being a tool that can be used for profit by the Republican party (of which I have been a member for 51 years), I assume in this fantasy no democrats ever profit from warfare.
Lets have some reality here. Military supplies/equipment/vehicles are in constant production whether there is a war, or not. This is because none of these things remain static, technological R/D drives improvement or new approaches so that military hardware becomes regularly obsolete and needs replacing.
Tell me, how does big oil profit from war ? By selling fuel to the military ? They make a little, but disruption of markets probably costs a lot.
Oil production is based in the civilian market, which expands in countries that are not in war, and are adopting western uses for oil on an ever expanding manner.
You appear to be a parrot. You repeat what you have been taught. No critical thinking or research involved. You no doubt exercise your personal prejudices as some people walk their dogs, very regularly and over the same old route.
Are you one of those that has a beef about how your life has turned out, so you blame it on those "crooked corporations" ?
Heyo
Veteran Member
If nobody profits from the wars, then why do you have so many?
shmogie
Well-Known Member
Since Europe destroyed itself in two world wars in a little over twenty years, the US wound up as the defender of democracy against it's greatest enemy, the soviet union.
We had proxy wars with them all over the world in this conflict, till Reagan finally knocked them off their perch.
We were left as the sole superpower, both militarily and economically, and we became, for better or worse, the worlds policeman. In that capacity, because no one else could or would, we would up trying to support democracy while we fought these little wars.
The middle east is a quagmire, and contrary to logical and reasonable thought, they have little interest in democracy but a lot of interest in fighting each other, the US intervened. It was expected that the self evident advantages of democratic government would take hold, it didn't.
In addition, the middle eastern muslim countries had the oil. The late, great, Israeli general, Moshe Dyan, explained this by saying that Moses made a wrong turn in the desert, if he had turned where he was supposed to, Israel wold have the oil.
So, the lifeblood of the western world, oil, had to be kept flowing at all costs. Without it, very, very serious harm would come to Europe, other allies, and some to us. There was no one else to protect it, so we did.
We are energy self sufficient, we don't need middle eastern oil, we produce more than enough for ourselves. however, there are allies that do need it, but can't defend their supply, so we are left holding that bag.