Iraqi uprising against US military presence is increasing. Are geopolitical interests justification good enough for waging war against Iraqi nation on Iraqi soil ?

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

38 minutes ago, remake it said:

Until your POTUS reneged on the Iranian nuclear deal there was no such thing as the clear and present danger you talk about.

Yes. There. Was. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

 

 

 

For the Orange Man Bad crowd who may be confused, Droney McPeaceprize is Obama.  Cry more.

 

 

 

And another reminder, for those refusing to come to grips with reality ...

 

 

 

By all means, please do continue to freak out that Trump actually protected embassy staff who were in harm's way, and then took out a terrorist who broke UN travel restrictions to not travel to Iraq, who was planning to murder many civilians.

 

Cry.  More.

 

 

 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Watch. This. Video.  30 seconds.

https://mobile.twitter.com/SSG_PAIN/status/1214640567742656513

 

 

 

[Papillon + 485]

I rather fear that some American users here seem to believe that if you disagree with Mr Trump even 1% then you are 100% a Democrat supporter? This appears to explain several dynamics here, one of them being the incapability to listen to an opposing view, but also Americans' own divisions politically and instant whataboutisms, hence the references to Obama and Clinton. This is of course fine to certain users when Mr Kirkman is a clear Republican, but not fine and attacked if the argument came from a Democrat.

For example, a video clip of Hillary Clinton stating she would attack Iran. Can someone explain to me what exactly this proves please? Presumably this is Mr Kirkman's way of saying ''well you cannot complain about Trump, as she would have done it too!'', or ''Democrats can't complain, she would have done it too.''

Have you considered everyone that if she had, that she would receive abuse too? (and quite probably from the very people now praising Mr Trump of course, as every single action taken becomes a ridiculous political and moral competition, mixed with a sprinkle of whataboutism).

I don't see how this is any kind of argument, all it proves is that not only do some believe everyone thinks like an American, but also appears they are unaware that someone outside the USA could have an opinion on it, as it is always instantly turned into a republican v democrat issue, rather than a human or moral one. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

4 minutes ago, Papillon said:

I rather fear that some American users here seem to believe that if you disagree with Mr Trump even 1% then you are 100% a Democrat supporter? This appears to explain several dynamics here, one of them being the incapability to listen to an opposing view, but also Americans' own divisions politically and instant whataboutisms, hence the references to Obama and Clinton. This is of course fine to certain users when Mr Kirkman is a clear Republican, but not fine and attacked if the argument came from a Democrat.

For example, a video clip of Hillary Clinton stating she would attack Iran. Can someone explain to me what exactly this proves please? Presumably this is Mr Kirkman's way of saying ''well you cannot complain about Trump, as she would have done it too!'', or ''Democrats can't complain, she would have done it too.''

Have you considered everyone that if she had, that she would receive abuse too? (and quite probably from the very people now praising Mr Trump of course, as every single action taken becomes a ridiculous political and moral competition, mixed with a sprinkle of whataboutism).

I don't see how this is any kind of argument, all it proves is that not only do some believe everyone thinks like an American, but also appears they are unaware that someone outside the USA could have an opinion on it, as it is always instantly turned into a republican v democrat issue, rather than a human or moral one. 

Unsurprisingly, you missed the entire gestalt of what Tom was saying. Right there at the top, you see that part about people clutching their pearls who were silent about Obama killing thousands with drones? These same people are now screaming bloody murder about Trump. This isn't about whataboutism, this is cut and dried hypocrisy. They are the ones who are putting party first and Tom is rightly calling them out for that blatant partisanship. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Papillon, I am fed up with mainstream media attacking the USA and glorifying dictatorships.

I am fed up with mainstream media attacking Trump and glorifying Clinton and Obama.

Watch the Ricky Gervais opening monologue at Golden Globes a few days ago for a dose of reality.

[Papillon + 485]

I appreciate this Tom but the mainstream media does not represent views of the average user here I assume, or quite possibly anywhere. If you post these articles to highlight these things then fair enough but you are an intelligent fellow and so presumably know the hypocrisies are visible to all. That was all I was suggesting, I do not feel the comparisons to previous presidents for example is necessary as the world in the modern age is full of news of little value or even truth, and the majority of populations are aware of this I would hope.

Do you atleast accept or appreciate my point that Mrs Clinton would be attacked if she had won and was proceeding as Mr Trump is today? This was all I was trying to highlight, everything appears to become an us v them issue with regard to political parties there and I was unaware how strongly this manifests itself in terms of hypocrisy and comparison, not personally from you but in a general sense. 

Edited January 8, 2020 by Papillon

[James Regan + 1,776]

Yeah @Papillon I can understand your point and don’t think your personally attacking Tom but the collective. Tom has never hidden or tries to hide from his political slant.

Your point about this channel being overrun with US Republicans is not really news that being it’s American and about oil.

I would personally like to have some like minded Democratic Tree Huggers but the thread would just get nasty quick.

I am most definitely right wing and it wouldn’t matter where I lived and in some instances when it all depends on the current environment at that time. I think the collective here are just sick of what has been happening in US politics over the past decade and now during these unprecedented times it makes for fertile ground for full freedom of expression.

We Brits are social chameleons and are fairly insignificant in the big picture, so we being a moaning race need to complain about something so open season on Tom and all other Petroleum Bonaparte types.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

4 minutes ago, James Regan said:

I think the collective here are just sick of what has been happening in US politics over the past decade and now during these unprecedented times it makes for fertile ground for full freedom of expression.

^ this

The rats in DC are connected to the rats in Hollywood.

Ricky Gervais exposed the rats in Hollywood in his opening monologue at Golden Globes.

Trump has been exposing the rats in DC.

Hollywood and DC would cheerfully like both of them dead.

[Papillon + 485]

17 minutes ago, James Regan said:

I can understand your point and don’t think your personally attacking Tom but the collective. Tom has never hidden or tries to hide from his political slant.

Not at all sir and yes he makes it rather clear. However it is the elements such as a random tweet that he starts his post with, in terms of freedom of expression that I find a little odd. If I wished to explore the wisdom of random people on Twitter, and posted maybe one hundred of them here, and they all criticised Mr Trump and were factual for example, would this be an appreciated valid post suddenly, or would it merely be attacked for expressing an alternate differing view? I have a feeling I know the answer already sir. 

When users are 'sick of mainstream media' attacking the USA and Trump it is not valid. When users use this same mainstream media to find random opinions on Twitter that they agree with, it suddenly is valid? If you agree it is fine, if you don't it is fake news. 

17 minutes ago, James Regan said:

I would personally like to have some like minded Democratic Tree Huggers but the thread would just get nasty quick.

What does this tell you about users' willingness to hear an opposing view sir?

Edited January 8, 2020 by Papillon

[remake it + 288]

Lots of jingoistic justifications of the US actions, but Soleimani's trip to Iraq was no secret and the reason his assassination does not fit any of the molds cast by Trump loyalists here is due to him being invited by the Iraqi government to meet with PM Adel Abdul Mahdi to help him make the country a safer place.  That went well!

[James Regan + 1,776]

25 minutes ago, remake it said:

Lots of jingoistic justifications of the US actions, but Soleimani's trip to Iraq was no secret and the reason his assassination does not fit any of the molds cast by Trump loyalists here is due to him being invited by the Iraqi government to meet with PM Adel Abdul Mahdi to help him make the country a safer place.  That went well!

In reality he could have been delivering the Nobel Prize for Peace but the horse had already bolted, I think kudos should be given to the planning and the chosen location designers, zero colateral damage, even the palm trees and posters on the walls were not touched. He could have been taken out on his flight but that would have been disproportionate.

This agent planned more terrorist acts and killed more innocent people than UBL and was caught in the act, fortunately his activities caused him to disappear and he will never be the martyr that he promised to so many others but never had the kahonies to do himself.

The region is safer now and with any hope this may be the end game.

Alexa turn off lights In Tehran....

Edited January 8, 2020 by James Regan

[remake it + 288]

Just now, James Regan said:

The region is safer now and with any hope this may be the end game.

Which part of @DayTrader does the comedy here did you not hear?

[James Regan + 1,776]

Just now, remake it said:

Which part of @DayTrader does the comedy here did you not hear?

Please reboot I don’t understand, respectfully.

[Papillon + 485]

2 minutes ago, James Regan said:

The region is safer now and with any hope this may be the end game.

With respect sir, just one hour ago you started a thread with the title ''10 rockets hit US Air Base in Iraq''.

[James Regan + 1,776]

58 minutes ago, Papillon said:

Not at all sir and yes he makes it rather clear. However it is the elements such as a random tweet that he starts his post with, in terms of freedom of expression that I find a little odd. If I wished to explore the wisdom of random people on Twitter, and posted maybe one hundred of them here, and they all criticised Mr Trump and were factual for example, would this be an appreciated valid post suddenly, or would it merely be attacked for expressing an alternate differing view? I have a feeling I know the answer already sir. 

When users are 'sick of mainstream media' attacking the USA and Trump it is not valid. When users use this same mainstream media to find random opinions on Twitter that they agree with, it suddenly is valid? If you agree it is fine, if you don't it is fake news. 

What does this tell you about users' willingness to hear an opposing view sir?

I think like any other type specific forum this forum being of lado direita you should not be so surprised at push back and the willingness to hear or rebut is fueled only to lash out at a belief or opinion heavily guarded.

[James Regan + 1,776]

5 minutes ago, Papillon said:

With respect sir, just one hour ago you started a thread with the title ''10 rockets hit US Air Base in Iraq''.

Safer in the long term after 17 years one attack is chicken feed in the grand scheme. Safer place was meant for the future as there has to be an end game.

Germany is now a fairly safe place...

Have I answered this out of context or is this a plug to drive traction to the thread?

[remake it + 288]

6 minutes ago, James Regan said:

I think like any other type specific forum this forum being of lado direita you should not be so surprised at push back and the willingness to hear or rebut is fueled only to lash out at a belief or opinion heavily guarded.

Try thinking skills rather than ideology - you might be surprised at the difference.

[Papillon + 485]

1 minute ago, James Regan said:

Safer place was meant for the future as there has to be an end game.

Yes and I am sure this was said a few times previously over the years with regard to the whole region.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

4 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Yes. There. Was. 

There was no means of ensuring that the Iranians were acting in good faith concerning their side of the deal. Any inspectors could only see what the Iranians wanted them to see.

If you look at how quickly Iran began the enrichment process after Trump pulled out of the agreement, it is questionable if they ever stopped the process in the first place.

History shows us that Iran, since the Revolution, has been a ‘clear and present danger’ for the entire Middle East. To mention US meddling while ignoring Iranian influence in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere is simply bias. 

[James Regan + 1,776]

6 minutes ago, remake it said:

Try thinking skills rather than ideology - you might be surprised at the difference.

Só a personal attack on my intelligence try not being so pompous we passed over many assholes who think they are the dogs nuts, the amount of time you spend here shows your not that smart either.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

The recent targeted killing/assassination has absolutely nothing to do with regime change. Regime change is essentially up to the Iranian people.

The hit was a direct response to an attack on the US Embassy. By attacking the US Embassy in a foreign country the Iranians ignored a sovereign border which opened the door for the US to play by the same rules.

The Iranians thought, from previous experience with other US Presidents, that the US would once again try to maintain the ‘moral high ground’ and respond in a toothless manner.

With Trump at the helm, this incorrect assessment of the new American resolve, cost them a general.

I think it is now obvious that Trump, whether you agree with it or not, will no longer allow the opposition to play by one set of rules while handcuffing himself with another.

[James Regan + 1,776]

27 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The recent targeted killing/assassination has absolutely nothing to do with regime change. Regime change is essentially up to the Iranian people.

The hit was a direct response to an attack on the US Embassy. By attacking the US Embassy in a foreign country the Iranians ignored a sovereign border which opened the door for the US to play by the same rules.

The Iranians thought, from previous experience with other US Presidents, that the US would once again try to maintain the ‘moral high ground’ and respond in a toothless manner.

With Trump at the helm, this incorrect assessment of the new American resolve, cost them a general.

I think it is now obvious that Trump, whether you agree with it or not, will no longer allow the opposition to play by one set of rules while handcuffing himself with another.

I agree we have been dancing around these madmen for years time to put that line down on concrete it won’t blow away like sand. Target acquisition gained send it....

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

11 minutes ago, James Regan said:

I agree we have been dancing around these madmen for years time to put that line down on concrete it won’t blow away like sand. Target acquisition gained send it....

Jimbo, ‘send it’ is a good ol’ sniper term....but I guess it could apply equally to a Hellfire missile. Simply an ‘economy of scale’...😂

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Hypothetically, is it okay to burn down Notre Dame but somehow politically incorrect to hit back at other places of ‘cultural interest’?

Personally I think that hitting any place of religious significance is chicken shit...unless the enemy is using that location as sanctuary...which is also chicken shit.