Total posts: 3,383
Posted in:
Let's assume there is a God like the general Christian definition.
I often hear of all the things we must do in the here and now and what we might do in the afterlife etc.
But what does God do? Just observe? What is written?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
so you aren't denying the rich run the government, correct?
I ask this because many of the rich in government say the other rich in government and or business are described negatively. Which I don't think isn't deserved in a lot of cases. But that is all the more reason to remove the authority and power from the government only leaving which is actually NEEDED for things like protecting the country etc
Under the guise of "U.S. interest" people have been killed, foreign and domestic. Got into conflicts the U.S. has no business being in. If you agree with that then it would seem at odds to advocate more power for the very people who start and authorized these events.
Do you think one party is immune from starting or being involved in these drone strikes and wars?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
She certainly isn't rich.
Given the average member of Congress has a median net worth of around $511,000 in 2019, Congress members are roughly five times wealthier than the median net worth of an American household of $97,300, according to the Federal Reserve.
If Ocasio-Cortez can remain in Congress for nine years and maintain her spending habits, she will likely have over a $1,000,000 net worth by the time she is 38 years old
wow you might have pointed out ONE exception bravo, clearly the rich doesn't control the government, thanks I feel better now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
hey let's make a list of all the poor and middle class people in the senate, congress etc.....um, ok, how about we list the NON millionaires, um wait no, oh forget it.
Funny when people think the rich don't run the government.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
any weapon that is designed to kill people should be heavily restricted if not banned. A hunting rifle is fine. But no one needs a magazine of more than 5 or 10 rounds to go hunting. No one needs to own a hand gun.
which guns are specifically designed "to kill people"? how were these designs developed and studied?
A baseball bat isn't designed to kill people, but it is used to do so.
explain the difference and give an example of design vs misuse/illegal use.
do you know much about hunting?
Did you know states, counties etc can put limits as to how many rounds your gun can hold when you go hunting?
Did you know in certain places you can NOT hunt with a rifle? but instead must use a shotgun with a slug barrel?
Did you know it is illegal to hunt deer with certain calibers?
2a is not a needs test, limiting magazines is stupid at best.
You clearly didn't read what I wrote. I said that either way, your AR-15 is useless. whether the military sides with the government or against it, your gun doesn't mean squat.
it means more than angry words and a stick.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff are you familiar with the civil war per chance? it is said that brother fought brother, neighbor fought neighbor. If you believe the government has such tight control over the military that they would do those things you should be terrified. If you believe no group in the military would rise up against bombing their fellow citizens then you should be terrified.find this argument hilarious.
But this is the same government you'd give more power to.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Are you against handgun bans and why?
that would be the abolishment of the 2a
an accurate question would be are you in favor of abolishing the 2a
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Because the laws aren't strict enough to prevent people from buying devices designed to kill people on a mass scale?
which is defined how?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
a bit of a tangent on my part, but this and many other reasons is why I'm extremely skeptical of government and why it just boggles my mind so many want to give them even more control over our lives, healthcare and neutering the 2a are just some prime examples, then when you think back to the speech limitations they would also force on us we are going in a dangerous direction but too many still wear the blinders the government has put on them and they were so ready and willing to put on, and keep on, sad state of society :(
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
don't you love the shouts of tolerance from the intolerant?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
they accidentally shot down a civilian plane and they want nuclear bombs? hmmm....
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
here's some irony for ya, the left screams about "precedence" and how Trump ignores or breaks it. Now, what "precedence" has been set with regards to foreign affairs? hmmm I wonder why we are in this position now. Setting a tone, precedence etc is not whatabout, as you have explained, but not sure they have understood, yet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
great points, makes sense, I would see a president who doesn't have full support of the whole government (half at most) that would be a perceived weak position. If those who oppose him didn't do it in the manner as they are, but instead portrayed a unified country, even if they had to fake it, that would be a huge benefit for the country and it's citizens. But that would assume they cared more about the country and it's citizens than themselves and their party.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Username
and you would do what when they kill citizens, people from other countries, all the things he was accused of doing? A good scolding? Time out? Pay them to stop? Or just bend over?
The but-for test
but for the killing of a U.S. citizen we would not be having this discussion.
Created:
-->
@Alec
Opening the borders would allow more people into the country.
why would that be a good thing? there are only so many jobs right? unless you plan on letting people starve, live on the streets etc that's not a viable option. As it is the schools are overrun because of illegals. search up the school in Buffalo which has a huge issue because of so many different languages they have to deal with.
then also consider the crime which would come along with the huge influx of poor people.
let's take your 55K a year example, obviously 55k in Kommyfornia isn't the same as North Carolina. Now, how many children can you support on 55K per year? You see these border jumpers MIGHT be working but are they self sufficient or an accounting ledger economic drain when you examine the bottom numbers?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Alec
hmm, not sure what you are referring to exactly, some states, not all have unemployment insurance which is actually taken out of everyone's paychecks, if you are eligible and collect it you get a small fraction of what you made for like 6 months, then it runs out.
entitlement like welfare etc keep people dependant on the government, they are designed to. Low unemployment and low taxes help people be independent.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
that would explain the strong push for legalization because the taxes they actually get from what they thought they would ended up be very low just ask Kommyfornia.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
oh I know, it's funny how people believe the fake news they agree with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
we must have more patience for those afflicted with T.D.S. please show more compassion and thoughtfulness for these sufferers, T.D.S. is for realz.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
You think it is a coincidence that trump chose the moment he is impeached to launch an act of war against Iran?
Do you think it was a coincidence that they killed a U.S. citizen and he did what he said he would if that happened?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Infernoo
This is a distraction from the impeachment. Nothing more.
what impeachment? lol
that sank quicker than a lead balloon, sure they are trying to keep it alive by not sending it to the senate, but they are about to pull the life support plug on it, R.I.P.
if you think it's something other than what it is I'd lean more towards a campaign promise kept kind of thing. I like a good conspiracy but I don't think this is one of them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
I heard they gave a 2 hour advanced notice of their attack, but that could just be fake news.
Given that Trump said there would be consequences if U.S. lives were lost and there were with the death of the general and others, probably not the wisest idea to push any more boundaries or try and call a bluff.
This seems a fairly logical set of events when you look back. Red lines drawn in the sand, hollow and meaningless threats, appeasements etc. A lot of long term good could come from all of this, we can hope anyway.
Threats, obviously are meaningless, toothless unless you follow through. Once it's clear you will follow through and people know where you stand and that you will do what you say, it does make things easier in many ways. Consistency and predictability has it's advantages far more than drawing red lines in the sand.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
from what I read this was in the works for a while but took the death of the contractor to trigger it, sounded far from impulsive or knee jerk.
Created:
-->
@Alec
here's the thing you can't do it without cutting spending, that has been the problem all along, where would you like to cut spending?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
which people is that specifically? Some random officials or clarics? How does that have anything to do with the murder of Solemani?
it was in response to your accusations
I for one don't think the President should have the power to declare war unilaterally and not even bother to justify it afterwards. But maybe republicans don't care if the president becomes a king.
they did justify it, it's not a declaration of war. Obama went there similar things so maybe look some of that up to see how it works.
the powers of the president are the same regardless of party, Obama did similar things as did presidents before him. It's nice to see you have some distrust in government as you should. It's too bad you are blinded by t.d.s. Someday you may have an awakening and see how similar (in bad ways) both parties are.
you don't trust government in foreign affairs but willing to dive in 100% for your healthcare, seems contrary.
if you believe the U.S. government has and does kill innocent people then you should also understand and think it reasonable that people want to keep their guns.
"In 2016, US special operators could be found in 70% of the world’s nations, 138 countries – a staggering jump of 130% since the days of the Bush administration."
so let's not be selective in the criticism of innocent causalities.
think long and hard about trusting any administration and giving them even more power over you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
last I read it was up to 56, boggles the mind.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Where is the evidence? Why should we carry out acts of war with no proof Iran was planning or had done anything?
that's one of the problems with stuff being classified etc right?
I believe a few sources indicated he was coordinating and aiding in those attacks which would explain why he was there. He was involved with the attacks directly.
it's unfortunate the people of the world are the way they are but this is nothing new.
here is what I believe, there are 2 sides to every story, somewhere in the middle is the truth.
I would love to live in a world without the fear of violence, domestic and foreign, but that is not human nature.
Iran could turn a corner towards peace but I don't believe the leaders want that nor do they care about their citizens. I hope I'm wrong. It could be the start of a new era.
vilify Iran
correction, I vilify subhumans who burn people in cages, behead them, kill gays etc, don't you think people who do those things should be vilified?
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
seems a bit inconsistent doesn't it, hehehe, ah well kids, he'll learn as he gets older.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
The government has proven on many occasions that it likes to lie about stuff, especially to justify the use of violence.There is no reason to take their word for it.
right, there is no reason to take their word for it unless it's something you want, you know like free stuff, entitlements, HEALTHCARE lol you are funny.
Oh yes, I can definitely see that you care deeply about these atrocities
leftist love to judge others, I get that, but don't pretend that you know me or what I feel, it's irrelevant and frankly none of your business.
Created:
Posted in:
“General Suleimani was actively developing plans to attack American diplomats and service members in Iraq and throughout the region,” the Pentagon said in a statement.
The highly classified mission was set in motion after the American contractor’s death on Dec. 27 during a rocket attack by an Iranian-backed militia, a senior American official said.
In killing General Suleimani, Mr. Trump took an action that Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama had rejected,
As rocket attacks against U.S. bases in Iraq intensified over the last two months, the president had granted the Pentagon extraordinary latitude: The U.S. military had his permission to kill Soleimani the next time it had an opportunity to do so, according to a senior defense official who was not authorized to speak on the record.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
What exactly was being defended against?
I don't have access to classified information but the claim I thought was they were planning an imminent attack on U.S. citizens and or the embassy.
How is that anything other than you don't give a shit.
hope this helps
sad
/sad/
adjective
- 1.feeling or showing sorrow; unhappy.
- causing or associated with grief or unhappiness
also see harsh reality.
Created:
-->
@Alec
Bill Weld, as much as I despise his abortion position,
so for you national debt > abortion
that surprises me on your posts I've read.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
oh yeah I forgot they use that special math
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Which is why I think it was incredibly stupid for Trump to force Iran's hand.
I'm not sure that is how it happened or what why he did it. Are you certain this wasn't in defense of U.S. citizens?
drone strikes that hit civilian targets. But it is Iran that is evil?
context and intent is key which I've already explained and you are still trying to defend.
They just keep on murdering and murdering and murdering and they just do not care.
you mean what they do to the gays, Christians etc? yeah I agree
They carried out an airstrike on a wedding and your reaction is basically that you don't give a shit.
if you think that is my reaction you should stop trying to judge people with your assumptions because you really suck at it.
Created:
-->
@Alec
lol you think the debt is bad under Trump watch out if one of the dems win.
While I would like a financially conservative libertarian to come out of the woodwork and win, it just won't happen :(
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
When trump carries out an attack that will escalate violence you defend it.
did I? you seem to interject a lot of what you assume and think into what I write, you really should stop doing that.
Oh i understand, so when the US massacres women and children that is just the way of the world, but if Iran does that they are evil sub-humans that deserve to die. Glad to see I am talking to a reasonable human being.
you defend or justify burning people in cages, killing gays and I'm the one not reasonable? LOL why do you hate gays, they are people just like the rest of us.
Trump wasn't president in 2009, do you know who was?
from that very short link it sounds like these were not women and children and they were, infact targeting the militants in that funeral.
your link
The Sunday night operation in Musa Qala district targeted a house near the wedding party used by the Taliban to train suicide bombers, including foreigners, Afghan defense officials said.The accident comes a week after a US drone strike on suspected "Islamic State" militants killed 30 civilians and injured 40 others as they were collecting pine nuts in a forest.
I've previously brought up collateral damage. It's a sad reality.
guess the people accidentally walk into the burning cages and the gays accidently walk off rooftops by your logic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
Iran getting a nuclear weapon is not necessarily 'end-of-game' as you stated.
I don't think I said that, when Iran does get the bomb it doesn't necessarily mean it will be the end of the world (but we can hope)
Let's pretend they have one or more. They start to invade a nearby country like Syria or pick one. Should they be stopped or would the fear they would use these bombs prevent intervention and allow them to take over small countries they want?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
They bomb weddings, funerals, markets etc all the time.
in what context? collateral damage is a reality of war/violence, burning people in cages etc is not, it's rather disturbing you'd try to justify and equate those 2 thing, you should re-evaluate your line of thinking.
You discriminating against an entire group of people for actions done by a subset of that group.
I'm discriminating against people who kill gays etc either by action or inaction, if that makes me a bigot so be it.
I would hope we both agree that going to war with Iran would be a bad thing.
we most definitely agree.
They have no choices left but to attack.
lol wow, there is always a choice, just because it's one you don't like doesn't mean it's not available to you, seriously, come on, geez.
So is drone striking a wedding or a funeral.
can you give an example where a random wedding or funeral was purposefully targeted by the U.S.?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
It is a vicious circle of every country has a right to their hydrogen bomb for the security and the resultant is going to be, some day humanity is going to die off from nuclear annihilation and that is the end-of-game, and not necessarily what you call end-of-game just because Iran joins the nuclear club of players.
hopefully that day is tomorrow, let's just get it over with.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
the problem is lack of commitment by previous administrations, if you are going to take out the government of a country you'd better make sure what takes over is something you can deal with, but instead vacuums are left and there's no real long term benefit for the U.S. Not to warrant the loss of life etc (imo)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
yeah? quote where I said the whole government, they are complicent for certain because they either condone, ignore or encourage these atrocities.You are then using that to paint the government and this specific general as sub-human.
That is bigotry.
I didn't know government bigotry was a thing, but if it is, I'll accept that moniker and wear it proudly. Gays are people too.
America talks a big game about how they will throw their weight around, then they get stuck in a brutal war.
that's true
Anyone who knows anything about the region or diplomatic relations at all knows that Iran has no choice but to counter attack.
so they really don't want diplomacy or peace then, but rather they will escalate the situation. They could cut their losses and restart/reboot but you rightfully believe they won't and instead will further violence and escalate the situation. Does that sound rational to you, like someone you could reach with diplomacy?
As long as america continues to call them evil
I think burning people in cages (all the stuff I've already said) is pretty evil, don't you?
let me rephrase, imagine you ruled Iran, what would you do to the U.S. in this situation based on what you know?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
copied and pasted from post #166
what I said was
burning people alive, throwing gays off of roofs etc, you are correct I don't see them as human
you may have some sort of warped compassion for people who burn other alive and do the things I've listed, but I don't, they are subhuman imo who don't deserve the treatment a slaughter house animal gets, they deserve worse.
Because that is where we are headed.
any idea how many times that's been said, even before the cold war?
so let's look at this.
A general was killed by a (the) super power.
Is that worth starting a war you have NO chance to win or survive? Over a dead terrorist general?
A rational thinker would say no.
An irrational thinker would say yes, so how could you have any real diplomacy with someone like that?
Let's be real here. The U.S. could level that country and they must know this given what happened in Iraq etc.
They can bitch and moan all they like about his death, but to actually do something would seem counterproductive for them and counterintuitive to a logical, rational perspective.
Let's pretend you control Iran, you seem fairly level headed, what would you do?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I find it perplexing that diplomacy would be needed to stop terrorism, burning people in cages etc People of that mind set can be rationalized with? As I see it we can turn a blind eye to it or not. If not the options are rather limited.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
Some people have done those things, so all of Iran must be evil.
is that what I said? how about some honesty on your part?
has the regime stopped those atrocities? arrested or punished those who have and continue to commit them?
how should they be sanctioned for supporting terrorism and human rights abuses?
Your question is backwards. America has been trying to use the stick for literally decades and all it has done is continue the problem. it isn't working. More murders and drone strikes won't change that. Diplomacy is what is needed, not more murders.
ahhh ok, so how about we use diplomacy with murderers in the U.S. and we can house them next door to you? How about that?
oh let's ask, pretty please stop burning people, killing gays, raping women etc, maybe that would work, or we'll pay you not to do those horrible things, or punish those who do these things, think that would work?
diplomacy with barbaric criminals, that's awesome.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ebuc
so you don't think they would use this technology and bombs for terrorism?
Why are the other countries not wanting Iran to have these bombs/technology?
I generally dislike most of those in the U.S. government past and present.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
I'm sure he went to certain ones, sure, someone must have told him that the general was at the airport etc and I'm sure someone(s) said now is the chance to take him out. Trump is not the only one who has acted in this manner. I believe Obama killed some terrorist in similar ways and circumstances.
But Obama could do no wrong and Trump can do no right.
Given what we have witnessed, only a fool would have told the democrats before hand.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
burning people alive, throwing gays off of roofs etc, you are correct I don't see them as human
again you think you can reach a diplomatic solution with religious zealots bent on ruling the world and killing or enslaving non believers.
he killed people who killed people, he's not getting anyone killed, they would/will kill no matter what he did or didn't do. terrorist will be terrorist.
so you think Iran just wants to live in peace and be left alone?
how should they be sanctioned for supporting terrorism and human rights abuses?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
it sounds like you are under the assumption that these people, some who blow themselves up, burn people in cages, throw gays from roofs etc are rational and can be dealt with and treated as such.
how long has Iran been chanting "death to America"? and you think they can be reasoned with? they are religious zealots, that's all that matters to them. take over the world and death to all others.
if you believe they want to live in peace you are woefully wrong.
they will only comply when forced to or if it furthers their cause. They have a long term goal. They will get a nuclear weapon eventually, they know this, they will pretend to go along with whatever plan eases sanctions so they can get what they want. Once they have it, game over.
this really is just like many strategy games, except with real people.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@HistoryBuff
so you don't believe this general is responsible for 1000's of murders? or if he was no one could do anything about him because of fear from retaliation? Maybe he was retired and done murdering people? terrorist will be terrorist? do these murderers get free reign for fear of retaliation?
have they stopped their support for terrorism/terrorist, human rights abuses etc that sanctions should be eased?
what if everything that is being claimed is true, would you still oppose the actions taken?
these "deals" can only be enforced with sanctions and violence.
Created: