The "Bomb Iran" contingent's newfound concern for The Iranian People

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: spidey07
The threats made the people realize their leaders were heading in the wrong direction as can you can see coming to light right this very moment. Only by McCain's wisdom and our steadfast resolve could Iran's own people see the error of their ways and try to get less insane people in positions of power.

:laugh: this assessment is about as stupid as your assessment on TWC's initiative to cap bandwidth.

How so? Maybe Iranian people saw what happened to Iraq and didn't want to become the next one, but yet their leaders were sending them down that path That's a pretty powerful motivator right there.

Considering Obama's the president now, the invasion of Iran is unlikely, that plus Obama has extended an olive branch to the muslim world in his speech to Cairo. That had a greater effect than any threats from the wingnuts.

Besides that, the Bush appointee nicholas burns has pretty much backed Obama for not taking the retarded hardline rightwing stance that McCain wants Obama to take because it just strengthens the current regime, just like the 'bomb iran' rhetoric http://andrewsullivan.theatlan...ushie-backs-obama.html

Any reasonable Iranian would know that actually having a nuclear weapon would provide great security and prevent actual invasion and give a ton of leverage (see north korea)

Do you need me to draw pictures for you?

Here is a clue, invading Iran was never an option for Bush or McCain either. Seymour Hersh might be interested in hearing your story though.

You should probably tell mccain that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

I dont have sound, but bombing is a far cry from invading.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: spidey07
The threats made the people realize their leaders were heading in the wrong direction as can you can see coming to light right this very moment. Only by McCain's wisdom and our steadfast resolve could Iran's own people see the error of their ways and try to get less insane people in positions of power.

:laugh: this assessment is about as stupid as your assessment on TWC's initiative to cap bandwidth.

How so? Maybe Iranian people saw what happened to Iraq and didn't want to become the next one, but yet their leaders were sending them down that path That's a pretty powerful motivator right there.

Considering Obama's the president now, the invasion of Iran is unlikely, that plus Obama has extended an olive branch to the muslim world in his speech to Cairo. That had a greater effect than any threats from the wingnuts.

Besides that, the Bush appointee nicholas burns has pretty much backed Obama for not taking the retarded hardline rightwing stance that McCain wants Obama to take because it just strengthens the current regime, just like the 'bomb iran' rhetoric http://andrewsullivan.theatlan...ushie-backs-obama.html

Any reasonable Iranian would know that actually having a nuclear weapon would provide great security and prevent actual invasion and give a ton of leverage (see north korea)

Do you need me to draw pictures for you?

Here is a clue, invading Iran was never an option for Bush or McCain either. Seymour Hersh might be interested in hearing your story though.

fyi here's a link to McCain singing bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

Remember: Mccain is the 'moderate' republican, according to these wingnuts too!

That is too funny, both you trolls link to the same video.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: spidey07
The threats made the people realize their leaders were heading in the wrong direction as can you can see coming to light right this very moment. Only by McCain's wisdom and our steadfast resolve could Iran's own people see the error of their ways and try to get less insane people in positions of power.

:laugh: this assessment is about as stupid as your assessment on TWC's initiative to cap bandwidth.

How so? Maybe Iranian people saw what happened to Iraq and didn't want to become the next one, but yet their leaders were sending them down that path That's a pretty powerful motivator right there.

Considering Obama's the president now, the invasion of Iran is unlikely, that plus Obama has extended an olive branch to the muslim world in his speech to Cairo. That had a greater effect than any threats from the wingnuts.

Besides that, the Bush appointee nicholas burns has pretty much backed Obama for not taking the retarded hardline rightwing stance that McCain wants Obama to take because it just strengthens the current regime, just like the 'bomb iran' rhetoric http://andrewsullivan.theatlan...ushie-backs-obama.html

Any reasonable Iranian would know that actually having a nuclear weapon would provide great security and prevent actual invasion and give a ton of leverage (see north korea)

Do you need me to draw pictures for you?

Here is a clue, invading Iran was never an option for Bush or McCain either. Seymour Hersh might be interested in hearing your story though.

fyi here's a link to McCain singing bomb, bomb, bomb Iran.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

Remember: Mccain is the 'moderate' republican, according to these wingnuts too!

That is too funny, both you trolls link to the same video.

Yeah, it's funny that reality has a liberal bias.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: Phokus


Yeah, it's funny that reality has a liberal bias.

That's clever, did you write it?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: Phokus


Yeah, it's funny that reality has a liberal bias.

That's clever, did you write it?

Of course not.

 

[JKing106]

No need to write it down when it's obviously the truth. You two dating? Or the same person? Five minute posts...

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: JKing106
No need to write it down when it's obviously the truth. You two dating? Or the same person? Five minute posts...

That is what happens when you participate in an ongoing thread. Perhaps this can catch you upto speed.

We still didnt beat techs and jokus posting the same youtube video 1 min apart

 

[nageov3t]

you seriously based this entire thread around one of McCain's many bad jokes?

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: loki8481
you seriously based this entire thread around one of McCain's many bad jokes?

jokus.txt

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: loki8481
you seriously based this entire thread around one of McCain's many bad jokes?

jokus.txt

:laugh:

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: loki8481
you seriously based this entire thread around one of McCain's many bad jokes?

If Ahmacrzyguy had sang bomb, bomb, bomb America you would apoplectic.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: loki8481
you seriously based this entire thread around one of McCain's many bad jokes?

If Ahmacrzyguy had sang bomb, bomb, bomb America you would apoplectic.

+reps for teaching me a new word.

but not really... I mean, context matters. it was a throw-away joke at a McCain rally, it's not like he gave a policy speech advocating carpet bombing Iran.

 

[Chaotic42]

The concept of a first strike against Iran was and is insanity. I can think of very, very few situations in which I would approve of a first strike against anyone, but bombing Iran would ensure that we have an entire region which hates us more than we think possible.

No, we should only attack Iran if they attack us our one of our allies. Same for any country.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
The concept of a first strike against Iran was and is insanity. I can think of very, very few situations in which I would approve of a first strike against anyone, but bombing Iran would ensure that we have an entire region which hates us more than we think possible.

No, we should only attack Iran if they attack us our one of our allies. Same for any country.

The man speaks the truth, same goes for North Korea and Iraq (if we could go back in time).

 

[Starbuck1975]

Also, pretty much every expert on the Iran situation says there's no good military options in dealing with Iran, so what is bombing them supposed to accomplish besides committing iranian genocide? The conservative estimate was 1500 bombs being dropped with the realistic numbers being much higher. Now you guys are advocating regime change from within. Riiiiiiiiigght.

Funny...there were numerous pro-Iran demonstrations around SoCal yesterday...in the demonstrations I passed, saw more than one Obama t-shirt. In fact, some on the left are incorrectly correlating Moussavi to Obama.

What I found most interesting were pockets of feminists in the mix with a few signs calling for regime change, UN troop and even American troop deployments to protect the brave women on the front lines of the Iranian revolution for democracy

Hypocrisy comes in many forms. I guess regime change through threats, embargoes or military action is only acceptable when you believe in the root cause for it. I have read quite a few interesting articles that the current situation in Iran has nothing to do with democracy or free elections, and that it is essentially a power struggle within two camps of essentially the same ideology. Moussavi's record is hardly that of an enlightened moderate.

 

[KMFJD]

Originally posted by: OCguy
We dont have to do anything. Israel is going to do it. And if Iran strikes us or closes the Straight of Hormuz, then we will have every right to defend outselves.

Chickenhawk is that you?

 

[Phokus]

Pulse: What will this mean to President Obama's proposed dialogue with Iran?

Menashri: Since Mr. Obama made his offer of dialogue when Ahmadinejad was president, the fact that he has been re-elected per-se should not necessarily cause second thoughts. However, the basis of legitimacy that Ahmadinejad had until one week ago is definitely not the same as he has today. Washington is now facing a President whose election is called into question by the children of the revolution themselves. It should be also remembered, that these are people who were indirectly encouraged by the emergence to the presidency of Barack H. Obama last November and adopted his call: "Yes We Can." This spirit of "Obamaism" made the radical regime scared and concerned and gave the reformist elements heart and encouragement. Given the developments of the last few days, the proposed Washington dialogue with Iran is more problematic than it was a week ago and Mr. Obama will have to carefully calculate his policy vis-à-vis Iran.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlan...pirit-of-obamaism.html

Hmm, but yes spidey07, lets give credit to bush instead of Obama.

Republicans.txt