Jump to content

The Original Greaser Bob

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    2960
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Original Greaser Bob

  1. I'm being pulled into arguments about civilian casualties when my initial point is that Iran has always stressed wanting to destroy Israel. Hence, Israel is justified in wanting to destroy their capability to wage nuclear war. I'm not interested in justifying their behavior beyond this very justifiable behavior.
  2. Iran and Hamas are blameless in the killing of unarmed civilians in Gaza? Can they be blamed at all for the killing of unarmed civilians in Israel? Just curious about your answer to this question: Should the Japanese be blamed at all for the deaths of civilians at Nagasaki and Hiroshima?
  3. What a lame ass approach to discussion. Ask me some questions, and then follow up with this bullshit.
  4. 1) It depends on the reasons and the method for the killing. (Whatever the culpability of its citizenry, is a western democracy or a theocracy more ethical?) 2) Sure, there is a big ethical difference in how you kill civilians. Nazi's lining up civilians is "worse" because Nazi collaborators are worse than regular civilians. 3) I'm assuming Israel considers many of the scientists and leaders it has intentionally targeted as civilians, so I am thinking Israel. I'd say Iran has an equal or greater culpability for civilian deaths in the region because of its strategy and aid to terrorist groups like Hamas who attack civilians and encourage civilian deaths through their tactics.
  5. No, but some folks here do. The definition of propaganda is "misleading or biased". You're also free to tell me what part of my post was misleading or biased. I acknowledge the stream of propaganda from every government for all time. prop·a·gan·da /ˌpräpəˈɡandə/ noun 1. information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
  6. 1) We're unilaterally helping 2)an ally 3) dismantle the defenses of a 4) truly vile perpetrator of violence 5) that has sworn to pursue the destruction of at least two Western democracies. 1) Apologies if I'm leaving El Salvador out. 2) Israel is an ally 3) Israel has effectively destroyed Iran's defenses. 4) Iran supports Hamas, Hezbollah and its weapons kill Ukrainians and Americans. 5) Iran clearly supports the destruction if Israel. Should have left it at that and added "and clearly promotes killing civilians and soldiers of western democracies through terrorism and direct aid."
  7. Yeah, how is it propaganda? As in "biased or misleading"?
  8. We're unilaterally helping an ally dismantle the defenses of a truly vile perpetrator of violence that has sworn to pursue the destruction of at least two Western democracies. A nation that is driven by religious fanaticism that everyone should abhor. As in twice as much as we abhor the present trend toward authoritarianism driven by religious fanaticism in our country. The unilateral way that the dotard did this should be condemned, but beyond that - at best the argument is that there is a good chance it will backfire in some way that no one has anticipated. But the gamble looks decent to me for now. I would have given the Israelis the bunker busters, loaned them the B2 and let them go at it "alone".
  9. I'm whispering that this is a dumb fucking statement.
  10. Constitution Smonstitution...
  11. Look, intelligent beings know you didn't defend a genocidal regime. The 77 million beings who voted for Trump, once they get in line, aren't going to see it that way. Nor are most of the fuckheads who didn't vote. Iran, bad, bombing them good. All prior presidents since Carter missed their fucking chance.
  12. All true, yet he's going to profit from it big time. I think with this move, people may start to consider Andrew Johnson or James Buchanan as worse Presidents than the Dotard.
  13. Whenever the subject of puppets come up, I look stern and say. "They're marionettes is what they are."
  14. I guess in the Bourbon context: But he [Porter Rockwell] was that most terrible instrument that can be handled by fanaticism; a powerful physical nature welded to a mind of very narrow perceptions, intense convictions, and changeless tenacity. In his build, he was a gladiator; in his humor, a Yankee lumberman; in his memory, a Bourbon; in his vengeance, an Indian. A strange mixture, only to be found on the American Continent.[16] - Fitzhugh Ludlow
  15. Really great point. (My take on the LDSers: The work LDSers have been terrific. Super kind, funny, etc. Porter Rockwell was a bad ass. )
  16. Guatemala. It's kinda like Mexico.
  17. You know, I don't remember much about it, but I thought David Chase's Not Fade Away (2012) (another fake biopic) was pretty good. I always thought this garage/basement scene captured four guys trying to play a song pretty precisely. Especially the bass. Rotten Tomatoes, a review aggregator, reports that 69% of 89 surveyed critics gave the film a positive review; the average rating is 6.50/10. The site's consensus reads, "Exuberant and bittersweet, Not Fade Away is a coming-of-age story set to a British Invasion beat that occasionally meanders but mostly charms."[3] Keith Uhlich of Time Out New York named Not Fade Away the second-best film of 2012, citing it as proof that Chase's work on The Sopranos was "no fluke".[4] In 2020, Uhlich named it the eighth-best film of the 2010s.[5]
  18. You'll see lots of misspellings from me. I was never a great speller. And to be honest, I probalby pronounce it "Isry-al" more often than not. I've also got a condition called central serous retinopathy. Retina gets some fluid in it and blurs the center of one's vision. Thankfully it's in one eye. Unfortunately, it's in my dominate eye. Kind of had vision issues from childhood. Most times the condition is acute and goes away but mine's chronic. You end up looking slightly to one side of the letter you are looking at and see the letter through just a bit of periphery. It tires your eyes out. If I'm looking at the word "Israel" on the page, it looks like "Isr l" or "Is el". You can figure out most words by recognizing 60% oi the letters anyway. I'm spending so much time just making sure my work emails are correct that by the time I get on these boards I'm tuckered out. I can barely see the little red squiggles that indicate I have a spelling issue. Anyway, that's one reason I misspell Isreal and other words. Hey - no red squiggles on Isreal!
  19. Beyond the fact that it doesn't help matters, it gives Isreal carte blanche to treat Iran as the existential threat it is. It's not Isreal's agreement. And I would respect an agreement between Isreal and Iran more than I would anything we were involved with. On June 12, 2025, IAEA found Iran non-compliant with its nuclear obligations for the first time in 20 years.[165] The IAEA stated that Iran's repeated failure to fully address questions about undeclared nuclear material and activities amounts to non-compliance.[166] It also raised concerns over Iran's enriched uranium stockpile, which could be used for both reactor fuel and nuclear weapons.[166] Iran dismissed the resolution as politically motivated,[166] and declared plans to build a new enrichment site and install advanced centrifuges.[167]
  20. Imagine how Iran's call for the destruction of Isreal might affect this issue?
  21. And so that changes our approach to Iran, a country that is a threat to Isreal, how? (I'm not arguing that the US should encourage war. I'm only arguing that if Isreal ends the threat, there might be some advantages for the region.)
  22. I may be an outlier but I don't want Iran developing nuclear weapons. Lots of people are going to die because this isn't being done the right way, but in the end Iran might not have nukes and their repressive government might be replaced. Iran has the potential to be a successful and increasingly secular society. Demasculating them wouldn't be all bad. Almost demasculating them could be really bad.
  23. 24 Hour Party People feels like the correct answer. Almost Famous better than any biopic about a real band. Regular biopics just seem doomed to failure - just too hard to capture the music, which is only famous because it reached far outside of the human who created it.
×
×
  • Create New...