Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran.

[washparkhorn 9967]

2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

As long as Iran is run by religious Ealots who'd like nothing g better than for the entire world  revert to the 12th c. There will be no bri ngong them into fold of the modern world.

irans nuclear program Ian first and foremost a movement to create power for them at the table with the US.  I don t blame them for doing it, but saying theoot

[Parliament 14556]

Yeah the Iranian people are a vibrant, diverse group. The nation is rich in natural resources and I believe they'd be a valuable member of the global community. Unfortunately their government is full of idiots. Kinda like America.

[Ten Bears 2499]

2 hours ago, Lobo said:

This is why I love Mossad.  All eyes and ears perked up looking for a 2-man team trying to bring professional sniper rifles or rocket launchers into the country.  But what nobody is looking for is 20 guys, over 8 months, bringing tiny parts for a 2,000 pound weapons system to be fully assembled later on, inside Iran.  Like the full cavity check I once received, they are very thorough.  

Dude, South Austin's mom doesn't count.  She is very thorough though. 

[atomheartbevo 90543]

4 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

 Are they undertaking a nuclear project for peaceful means? Yes I believe they are, BUT it is because having a nuclear weapon acts as a deterrent to ever being the possible target of bombs from a foreign adversary. They were not undertaking their program for energy purposes. I think we all know that. 

I can't blame them.  Eventually the Saudis/Sunnis are going to do something really drastic to take them out of the game.  It's just a matter of when, not if.

We chose the wrong fucking horse/Muslim sect to back.

[washparkhorn 9967]

13 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Eventually the Saudis/Sunnis are going to do something really drastic to take them out of the game.  It's just a matter of when, not if.

We chose the wrong fucking horse/Muslim sect to back.

Yemen may have been a bridge too far for the House of Saud. They went trump-ape in yemen, which hurts their quest to become the hegemon of the Sunni cause. Yemen was largely downplayed in this country, but they used US weapons. We have stopped aid now for Saudi warfare in Yemen (thanks President Biden - it was needed), but that genocidal gore was medieval in Yemen. The houthis were no saints, but the brutality was wrong.

This part of the world will never learn. Time is a flat circle.

 

 

[Chad Fuck 18088]

Yeah the Iranian people are a vibrant, diverse group. The nation is rich in natural resources and I believe they'd be a valuable member of the global community. Unfortunately their government is full of idiots. Kinda like America.

Qfmft.

I’d love to visit Iran and see with my own eyes some of the greatest sites of ancient history, etc. But I can’t because I don’t carry the right passport or hold certain fairy tales to be fact.

Maybe one day.

Until then, glad the Mossad is on our side...sorta.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

34 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Qfmft.

I’d love to visit Iran and see with my own eyes some of the greatest sites of ancient history, etc. But I can’t because I don’t carry the right passport or hold certain fairy tales to be fact.

Maybe one day.

Until then, glad the Mossad is on our side...sorta.

An amazing geographical, and historical location.. plus hot as fuck chicks...Too bad it's ruled by 12th c. theocrats bent on destroying peoples free will, and lives and happiness, and prosperity, and.......

[Chad Fuck 18088]

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

An amazing geographical, and historical location.. plus hot as fuck chicks...Too bad it's ruled by 12th c. theocrats bent on destroying peoples free will, and lives and happiness, and prosperity, and.......

The "no fun" crowd take themselves very seriously, both at home and abroad.   While Iran's version is unique to them, it's not by any means unique.  It's a human thing.  

[wildcat09 29556]

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

An amazing geographical, and historical location.. plus hot as fuck chicks...Too bad it's ruled by 12th c. theocrats bent on destroying peoples free will, and lives and happiness, and prosperity, and.......

You vote for the white versions of those people.

Edited February 11, 2021 by wildcat09

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

You vote for the white versions of those people.

Uhh huh, yeah sure....  Fuck off.

[Fudge Nuggets 19407]

2 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

You vote for the white versions of those people.

^

[washparkhorn 9967]

2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Uhh huh, yeah sure....  Fuck off.

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

28 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

 

Nothing I've said about the Iranian gov't is incorrect. Some random video you post has nothing to do with the reality of the absolute, repressive, 12th c.  theocratic gov't in Iran. But hey thanks for playing......

[Bama Chick 28596]

You vote for the white versions of those people.

[washparkhorn 9967]

19 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Nothing I've said about the Iranian gov't is incorrect. Some random video you post has nothing to do with the reality of the absolute, repressive, 12th c.  theocratic gov't in Iran. But hey thanks for playing......

I know this is difficult, but try to keep up.

By the way - what happened in the 12th Century (1101-1200) that makes you repeatedly refer to that time period? What history are you reading?

• The short-lived Almohad Caliphate and the rise of Abdallah ibn Tumart (as the Mahdi) to defeat the fundamentalist Almohad Caliphate?
• Knight Templars decision to guard the road to Jerusalem for Crusaders?
• Roman Catholics deciding Christians must not kill Christians with crossbows, but using a crossbow on Muslims was in keeping with the Church?
• Portugal rejecting Moorish rule?
• Kurdish Imad al-Din Zangi extending his power against other Muslims?
• The failed Christian attempt to seize control over Damascus?
• Saladin retakes Palestine, including Jerusalem, for Islam. There is no pillaging or slaughter of non-combatants – as there had been when the Crusaders took Jerusalem in 1099. There are now about 1,000 Jewish families in all of Palestine. Before the Christian crusaders and their killings the Jews numbered about 300,000. Saladin is to acquire a reputation in Europe as a chivalrous knight.
• The beginning of the Third Crusade?
• Richard the Lionhearted reconquers Jerusalem and slaughters 4000 Muslim prisoners of war?

Again - why did you pick the 12th Century out of all the centuries before and after the 12th Century?  It is not the century most would look at when choosing the low point of Islam (and many believe that was a horrible century for Christian ethics, morals and adherence to the message of Christ (love)). 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

17 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

I know this is difficult, but try to keep up.

By the way - what happened in the 12th Century (1101-1200) that makes you repeatedly refer to that time period? What history are you reading?

• The short-lived Almohad Caliphate and the rise of Abdallah ibn Tumart (as the Mahdi) to defeat the fundamentalist Almohad Caliphate?
• Knight Templars decision to guard the road to Jerusalem for Crusaders?
• Roman Catholics deciding Christians must not kill Christians with crossbows, but using a crossbow on Muslims was in keeping with the Church?
• Portugal rejecting Moorish rule?
• Kurdish Imad al-Din Zangi extending his power against other Muslims?
• The failed Christian attempt to seize control over Damascus?
• Saladin retakes Palestine, including Jerusalem, for Islam. There is no pillaging or slaughter of non-combatants – as there had been when the Crusaders took Jerusalem in 1099. There are now about 1,000 Jewish families in all of Palestine. Before the Christian crusaders and their killings the Jews numbered about 300,000. Saladin is to acquire a reputation in Europe as a chivalrous knight.
• The beginning of the Third Crusade?
• Richard the Lionhearted reconquers Jerusalem and slaughters 4000 Muslim prisoners of war?

Again - why did you pick the 12th Century out of all the centuries before and after the 12th Century?  It is not the century most would look at when choosing the low point of Islam (and many believe that was a horrible century for Christian ethics, morals and adherence to the message of Christ (love)). 

 

It's just a bit of sarcasm to illustrate that they want the country to remain in the past when it comes to morality, freedom of expression, speech, sex, life in general,  those things the west has as part of its social fabric.

[Captainant 28381]

8 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It's just a bit of sarcasm to illustrate that they want the country to remain in the past when it comes to morality, freedom of expression, speech, sex, life in general,  those things the west has as part of its social fabric.

It sounds like they just want to make iran great again

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Captainant said:

It sounds like they just want to make iran great again

Gosh.. subtle, and non related like a Mack truck in a steeplechase.

[SydneyCarton 49323]

15 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It's just a bit of sarcasm to illustrate that they want the country to remain in the past when it comes to morality, freedom of expression, speech, sex, life in general,  those things the west has as part of its social fabric.

You laugh, but there is a fair amount of truth to that statement. Sure, what you said is fair if you add the caveat "For Straight White People."

Ask gays about being refused service or adopt children or, for decades, get marred about how they feel the "morality" of others has had an effect on their lives and freedoms
Ask women who've deigned to get an abortion in various states how the morality of others has shaped their lives and life in general. 
Freedom of expression? As long as that doesn't include folks who identify with a gender they weren't born with, right?

There are huge numbers of people and quite honestly political/judicial momentum to move those things BACKWARDS in the coming years, honestly. So for you to talk about a country trying to "remain in the past" rings quite a bit hollow. In fact, in the not so distant past, Iran was a rocking place with women who could wear bikinis and everything. America may be getting more progressive, but that fact has sparked outrage by about 40% of the population who can't handle any kind of change that doesn't confirm into their own strict ideas of what America and society should be...so yeah, the point they're hammering you with isn't without merit. 
 

[washparkhorn 9967]

33 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

It's just a bit of sarcasm to illustrate that they want the country to remain in the past when it comes to morality, freedom of expression, speech, sex, life in general,  those things the west has as part of its social fabric.

Thanks. The 7th Century is probably more appropriate when making that argument. 

But remember Western Civilization at that time was rather uncivil to the virtues you cite in the early middle ages (what was known as the "Dark Ages" for Western Civilization). Non-literate barbarians replaced the Western Roman Empire and, needless to say, the barbarians could not read Greek Eastern Orthodox writings. 

 

Edited February 11, 2021 by washparkhorn

[washparkhorn 9967]

3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Iran was a rocking place with women who could wear bikinis

Love the Persians; hate the theocracy that limits progress. 

We created that mess with the Shah and SAVAK (CIA created oppression tool).

General Schwarzkopf's father trained most of the first generation SAVAK operatives - and they were brutal in repressing Shia and left wing opponents of the Shah. The people of Iran are always the ones caught in the middle. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

You laugh, but there is a fair amount of truth to that statement. Sure, what you said is fair if you add the caveat "For Straight White People."

Ask gays about being refused service or adopt children or, for decades, get marred about how they feel the "morality" of others has had an effect on their lives and freedoms
Ask women who've deigned to get an abortion in various states how the morality of others has shaped their lives and life in general. 
Freedom of expression? As long as that doesn't include folks who identify with a gender they weren't born with, right?

There are huge numbers of people and quite honestly political/judicial momentum to move those things BACKWARDS in the coming years, honestly. So for you to talk about a country trying to "remain in the past" rings quite a bit hollow. In fact, in the not so distant past, Iran was a rocking place with women who could wear bikinis and everything. America may be getting more progressive, but that fact has sparked outrage by about 40% of the population who can't handle any kind of change that doesn't confirm into their own strict ideas of what America and society should be...so yeah, the point they're hammering you with isn't without merit. 
 

Discrimination happens all over the world. To compare the west to Iran is laughable.  To compare the gov'ts of the west to Iran is just bizarre.  

What Iran was is not what it is today thanks to a radical theocratic state. They haven't progressed they've regressed.

No it doesn't. Our gov't isn't banning gays, making one religion the state religion, stating gays don't exis,t forcing strict religious codes. Private citizens may indeed be doing those things, but that isn't our federal gov't. There are private citizens in Iran who probably love that. There are probably more who don't.  They're playing an intentionally obtuse little game that isn't worth engaging in further.

[Ghost of LL 15664]

Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

Discrimination happens all over the world. To compare the west to Iran is laughable.  To compare the gov'ts of the west to Iran is just bizarre.  

I'm not going to compare governments in the west to Iran.  But I will compare certain Republican officeholders to the Mullahs.  Mike Huckabee and Josh Hawley have been pretty explicit on the point that they want to trash the Constitution and replace it with some form of evangelical shariah.  

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

9 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Thanks. The 7th Century is probably more appropriate when making that argument. 

But remember Western Civilization at that time was rather uncivil to the virtues you cite in the early middle ages (what was known as the "Dark Ages" for Western Civilization). Non-literate barbarians replaced the Western Roman Empire and, needless to say, the barbarians could not read Greek Eastern Orthodox writings. 

 

Yep ALMOST all religion has imposed unjust, strict, and harsh ways of life upon billions throughout history. Today religion is not the state. Our gov't today holds separation of church and state as a cornerstone of it's existence, regardless of what some try to do to break that bedrock Constitutional rule.

There simply is no comparison of modern Iran to pretty much any other western state in terms of individual freedom, and govt' not run by religious clerics.

 

[SydneyCarton 49323]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Discrimination happens all over the world. To compare the west to Iran is laughable.  To compare the gov'ts of the west to Iran is just bizarre.  

What Iran was is not what it is today thanks to a radical theocratic state. They haven't progressed they've regressed.

No it doesn't. Our gov't isn't banning gays, making one religion the state religion, stating gays don't exis,t forcing strict religious codes. Private citizens may indeed be doing those things, but that isn't our federal gov't. There are private citizens in Iran who probably love that. There are probably more who don't.  They're playing an intentionally obtuse little game that isn't worth engaging in further.

You are fucking wildly misrepresenting, or completely misunderstanding what I wrote. Oh, the governments of the west don't compare to Iran's? No shit. Our constitution doesn't look like theirs. Does discrimination happen everywhere? Sure. That's not really the point. What I was attempting to compare was trendlines. Going backwards, specifically.

You don't get to back away from the conversation because it's not going where it is comfortable for you. I've engaged you here about as respectfully as possible. But the fact of the matter is, particularly here in Texas, there have been plenty of bills put forward in the legislature that are religious based and favored by the current party in power. You might not see them as forcing strict religious codes, but many do. Limiting abortion, bathroom bullshit, and if Roe v. Wade is overturned then that's a freedom removed by a federal mandate. 

It's not an obtuse little game. Lets try this another way. You accuse them of regressing and going backwards, perhaps we should ask you to say HOW FAR BACKWARDS is idea. Because currently the United States is facing a movement of people to get LESS progressive. Move further right. Well, when should it stop to hit the sweet spot?  Because voting isn't enough anymore with political gerrymandering, minority checks against popular policy, etc. 

 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Ghost of LL said:

I'm not going to compare governments in the west to Iran.  But I will compare certain Republican officeholders to the Mullahs.  Mike Huckabee and Josh Hawley have been pretty explicit on the point that they want to trash the Constitution and replace it with some form of evangelical shariah.  

And why would you compare an entire gov't structure, and it's apparatus to 2 elected officials ?  They are not the gov't they are merely elected officials in a western gov't.  that whether they want to or not have to work from within the constitution.

 Iran is run by a group of clerics who dictate what is or isn't acceptable based on a very strict religious code. Not a single elected official in the west has that power. Not much of what Iran dos as a state is compatible with western philosophy.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

4 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

You are fucking wildly misrepresenting, or completely misunderstanding what I wrote. Oh, the governments of the west don't compare to Iran's? No shit. Our constitution doesn't look like theirs. Does discrimination happen everywhere? Sure. That's not really the point. What I was attempting to compare was trendlines. Going backwards, specifically.

You don't get to back away from the conversation because it's not going where it is comfortable for you. I've engaged you here about as respectfully as possible. But the fact of the matter is, particularly here in Texas, there have been plenty of bills put forward in the legislature that are religious based and favored by the current party in power. You might not see them as forcing strict religious codes, but many do. Limiting abortion, bathroom bullshit, and if Roe v. Wade is overturned then that's a freedom removed by a federal mandate. 

It's not an obtuse little game. Lets try this another way. You accuse them of regressing and going backwards, perhaps we should ask you to say HOW FAR BACKWARDS is idea. Because currently the United States is facing a movement of people to get LESS progressive. Move further right. Well, when should it stop to hit the sweet spot?  Because voting isn't enough anymore with political gerrymandering, minority checks against popular policy, etc. 

 

 

I'm not backing away from anything, in what universe are Iran, and western gov't comparable when discussing religion, freedom, and right of citizens ?

[washparkhorn 9967]

6 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Our gov't today holds separation of church and state as a cornerstone of it's existence

And this gets me back to Ted Cruz and the Dominionists. They don't seem to care about that cornerstone of Western Democracy. (see the video above I posted). 

[elfenix 34658]

8 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

You are fucking wildly misrepresenting, or completely misunderstanding what I wrote.

purposeful obtuseness is what onboard does.  that, and he's adopted molestation of ellipses now that fchorn isn't around to do it. 

[SydneyCarton 49323]

1 minute ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'm not backing away from anything, in what universe are Iran, and western gov't comparable when discussing religion, freedom, and right of citizens ?

Currently not at all. Which many people have said repeatedly, including myself.  But as I pointed out, I'm looking at a trend. And as Ghost pointed out, many political leaders in America with quite a bit of power are trending that way. You're not answering those questions directly, you're simply pointing out the status quo. Fine, they're not equal currently. Maybe they never will be, god hoping. But you were the one who brought up going backwards. And there is an increasingly loud and outspoken portion of American politicians who want to move America towards more of a Theocracy, to eliminate/reduce the barrier between church and state, to become a Christian Nation instead of just a Free Nation. Hawley, Ted Cruz, etc etc. 

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/philosophicalfragments/2012/10/26/christian-vision-for-kingdom-politics/

Those are powerful people with great sway in politics and they're pulling America towards a theocracy. 

[Neonmoon 38130]

5 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'm not backing away from anything, in what universe are Iran, and western gov't comparable when discussing religion, freedom, and right of citizens ?

We both had legalized slaves 

[Ghost of LL 15664]

8 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

And why would you compare an entire gov't structure, and it's apparatus to 2 elected officials ?  They are not the gov't they are merely elected officials in a western gov't.  that whether they want to or not have to work from within the constitution.

 Iran is run by a group of clerics who dictate what is or isn't acceptable based on a very strict religious code. Not a single elected official in the west has that power. Not much of what Iran dos as a state is compatible with western philosophy.

I'm not drawing that comparison.

I'm drawing the comparison between the Ayatollah Khomeini's vision for Iran in 1978 to Josh Hawley's vision for America in 2021.

[staboner 5066]

lulz

fascism!? no fucking way. 5 million jews are dead? you call me when lucky 6 million crosses the finish line. 

you motherfuckers are hysterical about everything. 

 

Edited February 11, 2021 by staboner

[Sawbonz 28081]

10 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I'm not drawing that comparison.

I'm drawing the comparison between the Ayatollah Khomeini's vision for Iran in 1978 to Josh Hawley's vision for America in 2021.

Did brisket steal your password?

[Bama Chick 28596]

I'm not backing away from anything, in what universe are Iran, and western gov't comparable when discussing religion, freedom, and right of citizens ?

Iran had a 40 year head start.

Check back in in 30-40 years if Ayatollah Hawley and Ayatollah Cruz get their way.

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

Maybe the world isn’t actually better off without Saddam Hussein acting as a check against Iranian power and influence in the region.

Also, the Saudis are no better than the Iranians.

[Anastasis 23699]

19 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Also, the Saudis are no better than the Iranians.

But they pay in cash. 

[Shady Ray 1633]

10 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Maybe the world isn’t actually better off without Saddam Hussein acting as a check against Iranian power and influence in the region.

Also, the Saudis are no better than the Iranians.

Exactly. I always find it amusing how many on the American Right act as though the Iranians are somehow more objectionable than the Saudis. I guess it is because the Saudis buy three times more American weapons than the next purchaser and only nominally oppose Israel for internal PR reasons, but otherwise are bosom buddies. 

 

For understandable reasons, the "Boomers and older" crowd remembers 1979 as a national embarrassment and they remember the 1983 bombing in Beirut, but due to U.S. media incompetence/interference, they miss how much chaos and damage the Saudis have inflicted on the rest of the world using our weaponry and waging such chaos using our military as essentially a supporting cast member...to which our betters not only facilitate but encourage.

 

If Iran suddenly made peace with Israel, our government would give zero fucks about their brutality and their citizens' lack of human rights. 

Edited February 12, 2021 by Shady Ray

[wildcat09 29556]

20 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I'm not backing away from anything, in what universe are Iran, and western gov't comparable when discussing religion, freedom, and right of citizens ?

You can thank the liberals you hate for all of the accomplishments that make us better than Iran.

[NorthTexasCougar 54]

On 2/11/2021 at 11:35 PM, WhatTheBuck said:

Maybe the world isn’t actually better off without Saddam Hussein acting as a check against Iranian power and influence in the region.

Also, the Saudis are no better than the Iranians.

The Saudis are even worse and more brutal.   The Sunni's are the ones you have to worry about.  

[NAVY 6910]

US just bombed some Iranian assets in Syria. 
 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/25/politics/us-iraq-iran/index.html

[Beantown Express 2.0 6586]

33 minutes ago, NAVY said:

US just bombed some Iranian assets in Syria. 
 

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/25/politics/us-iraq-iran/index.html

It's about time.  Trump is just showing the world how tough we are and we won't take shit from anybody....oh wait, it's Biden in charge now.  See, Biden is just a warmonger and if Trump was still in charge we would have peace in the middle east with unicorns instead of camels.  Is that how we do this?

[BradInATX 9208]

Didn't like when Trump did it. Don't like Biden doing it. Fucking cut the perpetual war bullshit out.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Bombing brown people again are we? America is back! 

[The Dog 44771]

[David Dennison 19440]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Bombing brown people again are we? America is back! 

Did we ever stop?

[Neonmoon 38130]

 

1 hour ago, BradInATX said:

Didn't like when Trump did it. Don't like Biden doing it. Fucking cut the perpetual war bullshit out.

Este 

[Continental Op 3934]

Dammit.  There's a happy medium between "OMG HOLY SHIT WE ARE PULLING EVERYONE OUT RIGHT THIS SECOND WITH NO PLAN!" and staying forever and bombing shit.  Figure out a way to fold up the tents in an orderly fashion and gtfo. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[DonkeyCigars 143]

Should surprise nobody that Biden would be a liberal hawk, right? It's been known (not saying it's good or bad, just thought it was understood).

Quote

 

“The only important intellectual difference between neoconservatives and liberal interventionists is that the former have disdain for international institutions (which they see as constraints on US power), and the latter see them as a useful way to legitimate American dominance. Both groups extol the virtues of democracy, both groups believe that US power – and especially its military power – can be a highly effective tool of statecraft,” the prominent US scholar Stephen M. Walt notes.

In the early 2000s, many Democratic Party members, which their opponents called “liberal hawks”, became active in the United States. They advocated virtually the same interventionist and imperialist policies as the neoconservatives, differing from the latter only stylistically.

There are many people in and around the Biden team who in 2003 authored the liberal hawkish “Progressive Internationalism: A Democratic National Security Strategy”: Kurt Campbell, Larry Diamond, Michèle Flournoy, Philip Gordon, Michael McFaul and Kenneth Pollack.

 

https://uwidata.com/15389-neocons-and-liberal-hawks-in-bidens-team/