The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now? | Page 9 | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
oklahogjr
Arizona State Fan
Gold Membership
Member since Jan 2010
22155 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

They openly support terrorist who mean us harm.

well since they started it... oh wait no they didn't.

quote:


Now I'm not telling you that we need to invade Iran, but Iran's track record has demonstrated to me that they can not be trusted and our security could be or would be threatened if they had nukes.


based on our track record would we allow ourselves nukes if we applied the same level of scrutiny to our foreign policy as we do Irans?






Back to top
trackfan
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18195 posts
 Online 

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

Consider Iran's track record. They openly support terrorist who mean us harm.

Who are you talking about? The U.S. supports terrorists that are the enemies of Iran, but what terrorists does Iran support that are the enemies of the U.S.?

quote:

Now I'm not telling you that we need to invade Iran, but Iran's track record has demonstrated to me that they can not be trusted and our security could be or would be threatened if they had nukes.

Considering the fact that they haven't invaded another country in over 300 years, they have one of the best track records of any country in the region, not to mention the U.S.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
goatmilker
LSU Fan
2014 drunkin Bobby award winner!
Member since Feb 2009
17521 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


Please explain in your own words how going to war and bombing Iran and inflaming the ME in a war will make Israels borders more secure and actually decrease deaths from terrorist attacks?
How will this increase economic output and trade with the world increasing GDP?






Back to top
Porky
Arkansas Fan
Member since Aug 2008
13007 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


All any American politician has to do to get the American people to believe a lie is to make it come from Netanyahu's mouth.


This post was edited on 9/19 at 9:17 am


Back to top
goatmilker
LSU Fan
2014 drunkin Bobby award winner!
Member since Feb 2009
17521 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


Politicians lie.
Water is wet.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
JEAUXBLEAUX
LSU Fan
Bayonne, NJ
Member since May 2006
45631 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


because Netanyahu looks out for his people? Thats what a real leader does





Back to top
doubleb
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
6814 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

well since they started it... oh wait no they didn't.


Who took over our embassy in Tehran in the 70s? The Canadians?
quote:



based on our track record would we allow ourselves nukes if we applied the same level of scrutiny to our foreign policy as we do Irans


We developed the nuke and used it on a nation that attacked us without warning. We haven't used nukes since even though we have been in several wars.

If Iran demonstrates that they can behave, and not be exporters of terrorism then I would not care if they had nukes. However that is not the case.






Back to top
CarrolltonTiger
LSU Fan
New Orleans
Member since Aug 2005
46305 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

because Netanyahu looks out for his people? Thats what a real leader does


At least you aren't claiming anything Netanyahu does is for our people.


But you Israel firsters and Evangelicals don't care about our people, just your bigoted, racist agendas.







Back to top
TigerSinceBirth4Life
LSU Fan
BR
Member since Sep 2007
1563 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?



Netanyahu is a bitch just like the rest of Israel's government. We should never, ever, support them in anything. I would support anything that severed our ties with them. Without them the Muslims go on killing each other and we can live in peace.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
trackfan
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18195 posts
 Online 

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


Truman's decision to give birth to Israel, may have been the greatest strategic blunder any President has ever made with regard to American interest, on an issue that didn't involve the military.

quote:

In the period between the end of World War Two and Marshall’s meeting with Truman [May 12, 1948], the Joint Chiefs of Staff had issued no less than sixteen (by my count) papers on the Palestine issue. The most important of these was issued on March 31, 1948 and entitled "Force Requirements for Palestine." In that paper, the JCS predicted that "the Zionist strategy will seek to involve [the United States] in a continuously widening and deepening series of operations intended to secure maximum Jewish objectives." The JCS speculated that these objectives included: initial Jewish sovereignty over a portion of Palestine, acceptance by the great powers of the right to unlimited immigration, the extension of Jewish sovereignty over all of Palestine and the expansion of "Eretz Israel" into Transjordan and into portions of Lebanon and Syria. This was not the only time the JCS expressed this worry. In late 1947, the JCS had written that "A decision to partition Palestine, if the decision were supported by the United States, would prejudice United States strategic interests in the Near and Middle East" to the point that "United States influence in the area would be curtailed to that which could be maintained by military force." That is to say, the concern of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was not with [watch out, here comes a shocking statement] the security of Israel- but with the security of American lives.

LINK

quote:

In the celebrations next week surrounding Israel's 60th anniversary, it should not be forgotten that there was an epic struggle in Washington over how to respond to Israel's declaration of independence on May 14, 1948. It led to the most serious disagreement President Harry Truman ever had with his revered secretary of state, George C. Marshall -- and with most of the foreign policy establishment. Twenty years ago, when I was helping Clark Clifford write his memoirs, I reviewed the historical record and interviewed all the living participants in that drama. The battle lines drawn then resonate still.

The British planned to leave Palestine at midnight on May 14. At that moment, the Jewish Agency, led by David Ben-Gurion, would proclaim the new (and still unnamed) Jewish state. The neighboring Arab states warned that fighting, which had already begun, would erupt into full-scale war at that moment.

The Jewish Agency proposed partitioning Palestine into two parts -- one Jewish, one Arab. But the State and Defense departments backed the British plan to turn Palestine over to the United Nations. In March, Truman privately promised Chaim Weizmann, the future president of Israel, that he would support partition -- only to learn the next day that the American ambassador to the United Nations had voted for U.N. trusteeship. Enraged, Truman wrote a private note on his calendar: "The State Dept. pulled the rug from under me today. The first I know about it is what I read in the newspapers! Isn't that hell? I'm now in the position of a liar and double-crosser. I've never felt so low in my life. . . ."

Truman blamed "third and fourth level" State Department officials -- especially the director of U.N. affairs, Dean Rusk, and the agency's counselor, Charles Bohlen. But opposition really came from an even more formidable group: the "wise men" who were simultaneously creating the great Truman foreign policy of the late 1940s -- among them Marshall, James V. Forrestal, George F. Kennan, Robert Lovett, John J. McCloy, Paul Nitze and Dean Acheson. To overrule State would mean Truman taking on Marshall, whom he regarded as "the greatest living American," a daunting task for a very unpopular president.

Beneath the surface lay unspoken but real anti-Semitism on the part of some (but not all) policymakers. The position of those opposing recognition was simple -- oil, numbers and history. "There are thirty million Arabs on one side and about 600,000 Jews on the other," Defense Secretary Forrestal told Clifford. "Why don't you face up to the realities?"

On May 12, Truman held a meeting in the Oval Office to decide the issue. Marshall and his universally respected deputy, Robert Lovett, made the case for delaying recognition -- and "delay" really meant "deny." Truman asked his young aide, Clark Clifford, to present the case for immediate recognition. When Clifford finished, Marshall, uncharacteristically, exploded. "I don't even know why Clifford is here. He is a domestic adviser, and this is a foreign policy matter. The only reason Clifford is here is that he is pressing a political consideration."
Marshall then uttered what Clifford would later call "the most remarkable threat I ever heard anyone make directly to a President." In an unusual top-secret memorandum Marshall wrote for the historical files after the meeting, the great general recorded his own words: "I said bluntly that if the President were to follow Mr. Clifford's advice and if in the elections I were to vote, I would vote against the President."

LINK








Back to top
  Replies (0)
oklahogjr
Arizona State Fan
Gold Membership
Member since Jan 2010
22155 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:


Who took over our embassy in Tehran in the 70s? The Canadians?

and who overthrew their government in the 50s?

quote:

We developed the nuke and used it on a nation that attacked us without warning.

Yes we did.

quote:

We haven't used nukes since even though we have been in several wars.


No one has used nukes since we used one.
quote:


If Iran demonstrates that they can behave, and not be exporters of terrorism then I would not care if they had nukes. However that is not the case.


why do they have to prove to us that they can develop their own weapons? I didn't realize we were responsible for babysitting every dictator who might want a bigger bomb.







Back to top
doubleb
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
6814 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

why do they have to prove to us that they can develop their own weapons? I didn't realize we were responsible for babysitting every dictator who might want a bigger bomb


We are responsible for our own national security and like I said, Iran has said and done things to make most objective people unsure of their actions and policies.

The US isn't perfect, but it is my country, and if I had a choice to just sit here and ignore foreign threats or go out and aggressively take care of ourselves; I'd vote to take care of ourselves.

Every time we ignore trouble it seems to find us.

I do agree we get involved in wars where we shouldn't be involved and that when we get involved in wars we don't have a smart end game; however, sitting on our side of the ocean and not caring about the rest of the world is a recipe for disaster.






Back to top
Blue Velvet
Colorado State Fan
Apple butter toast is nice
Member since Nov 2009
16928 posts
 Online 

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

Every time we ignore trouble it seems to find us.
Such as?






Back to top
doubleb
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
6814 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

Every time we ignore trouble it seems to find us. Such as?


9/11






Back to top
trackfan
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18195 posts
 Online 

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

9/11

I guess you're one of those folks who think that Osama bin Laden was sitting in a cave one day, and then someone showed him the Bill of Rights which caused him to flip out.






Back to top
doubleb
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
6814 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

I guess you're one of those folks who think that Osama bin Laden was sitting in a cave one day, and then someone showed him the Bill of Rights which caused him to flip out.


What does that mean?

OBL orchestrated an attack by a couple of handfuls of men and killed over 3,000 in the US.

He had no legitimate reason to do that did he or are you are some kind of US hater that think he did?

No, let me guess it was the Jews' fault. Yea, that's it. The Jews did it with Bush's help.






Back to top
Porky
Arkansas Fan
Member since Aug 2008
13007 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

because Netanyahu looks out for his people? Thats what a real leader does

No. I'm more concerned with what the American people believe to be in their best interest than I am with what Bibi says or believes to be in the best interest of his people.



This post was edited on 9/19 at 11:23 am


Back to top
  Replies (0)
oklahogjr
Arizona State Fan
Gold Membership
Member since Jan 2010
22155 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

We are responsible for our own national security and like I said, Iran has said and done things to make most objective people unsure of their actions and policies.

ah so if they aren't our allies we should tell them what they can and can't do in their own country.

quote:

The US isn't perfect, but it is my country, and if I had a choice to just sit here and ignore foreign threats or go out and aggressively take care of ourselves; I'd vote to take care of ourselves.

why are they threats? Does Iran just hate us because we are america and have too much freedom?

quote:


Every time we ignore trouble it seems to find us.


ah yes and when we go out looking for trouble we find it so basically your theory is that we'll always be at war whether we look for trouble or it finds us?

quote:

I do agree we get involved in wars where we shouldn't be involved and that when we get involved in wars we don't have a smart end game; however, sitting on our side of the ocean and not caring about the rest of the world is a recipe for disaster.


So your worried if we do nothing it would have the same results as if we did something?






Back to top
  Replies (0)
trackfan
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2010
18195 posts
 Online 

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

What does that mean?

OBL orchestrated an attack by a couple of handfuls of men and killed over 3,000 in the US.

He had no legitimate reason to do that did he or are you are some kind of US hater that think he did?

No, let me guess it was the Jews' fault. Yea, that's it. The Jews did it with Bush's help.

Obviously, you don't believe in blowback?

EDIT: Contrary to what you've been led to believe, they don't hate us for our freedom.



This post was edited on 9/19 at 11:38 am


Back to top
  Replies (0)
CarrolltonTiger
LSU Fan
New Orleans
Member since Aug 2005
46305 posts

re: The Iranian Election Has Left Israel Without A Bogeyman; What'll They Do Now?


quote:

He had no legitimate reason to do that did he or are you are some kind of US hater that think he did?


Obviously terrorism is criminal whether done by Moslem, Communist, Western or Zionists, it just doesn't matter.

But he saw his actions as legitimate, they were necessary to get the west out of Islam lands, OBL's complaint goes back to the end of the first WW when Britain established western rule in the area and we succeeded to their leadership when they withdrew we began supporting nationalist states and we became the patron of Zionism.

I suspect there is a lot of terror that you support.






Back to top


Back to top