Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DoD presents plan to deploy 120k troops to ME to confront Iran

Collapse

Google Ads

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post

    Are you implying it was to begin with? You do realize we're talking about fucking Iran, right?
    They didn’t break the deal, we did

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by md21 View Post

      They didn’t break the deal, we did

      If anybody falls for the Trump/Bolton/Pompeo shenanigans - we need to fucking put these people out of their stupidity

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by md21 View Post

        They didn’t break the deal, we did
        ITT: We take the word of a country that threatens to nuke its neighbors seriously.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post

          ITT: We take the word of a country that threatens to nuke its neighbors seriously.
          It's them or the word of Bolton, who has jerked off about invading Iran for 20 years and Trump, who will lie about the weather for no reason at all but just to see if he can do it.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by DPR View Post

            I never said anything about Afghanistan. Iraq was a complete bullshit invasion built on bullshit lies.

            Did Obama send 120k troops to Libya? I must have missed that.
            That Democrats voted for. Like your candidate in 2016.

            So you are basing it solely on ground troops? So fire bombing Dresden was fine because no ground troops?

            By October 2011 - President Obama had spent US$896–1,100 million bombing Libya. Why?

            Originally posted by md21 View Post

            They didn’t break the deal, we did
            Libyian disarmament
            In 2004, Paula DeSutter, the-then United States Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance stated that “we want to have lessons learned from [Libya's disarmament] because we want Libya to be a model for other countries.” Some prominent politicians and diplomats hoped that Iran, North Korea, and Syria would decide to follow the Libyan model of disarmament. Gaddafi stated that the West asked him on several occasions to advise Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear weapons programs.

            U.S. Intervention in Libya
            During the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, Gaddafi tried using Libya's voluntary disarmament to convince NATO to cease its Libya operations. At the same time, Gaddafi's son Saif and others in the Libyan government expressed their regret about Libya's previous disarmament.

            After President Obama deposing a leader who had given up their nuclear program voluntarily under Bush.

            In May 2018, North Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Kim Kye-gwan rejected assertion by U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton's assertion that North Korean denuclearization should follow the Libyan disarmament model.
            Last edited by TTURedRaider; 05-16-2019, 11:02 AM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by DPR View Post

              It's them or the word of Bolton, who has jerked off about invading Iran for 20 years and Trump, who will lie about the weather for no reason at all but just to see if he can do it.
              Why not say fuck you to both? That works too. Rip up that stupid ass deal, give neo con boy his walking papers, and tell the sandbox to take care of itself. I'm sick of that entire region, it's one big waste of time, life, and money.

              Comment


              • #52
                /facepalm

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by TTURedRaider View Post

                  That Democrats voted for. Like your candidate in 2016.

                  So you are basing it solely on ground troops? So fire bombing Dresden was fine because no ground troops?

                  By October 2011 - President Obama had spent US$896–1,100 million bombing Libya. Why?



                  Libyian disarmament
                  In 2004, Paula DeSutter, the-then United States Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance stated that “we want to have lessons learned from [Libya's disarmament] because we want Libya to be a model for other countries.” Some prominent politicians and diplomats hoped that Iran, North Korea, and Syria would decide to follow the Libyan model of disarmament. Gaddafi stated that the West asked him on several occasions to advise Iran and North Korea to give up their nuclear weapons programs.

                  U.S. Intervention in Libya
                  During the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya, Gaddafi tried using Libya's voluntary disarmament to convince NATO to cease its Libya operations. At the same time, Gaddafi's son Saif and others in the Libyan government expressed their regret about Libya's previous disarmament.

                  After President Obama deposing a leader who had given up their nuclear program voluntarily under Bush.

                  In May 2018, North Korean Deputy Foreign Minister Kim Kye-gwan rejected assertion by U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton's assertion that North Korean denuclearization should follow the Libyan disarmament model.
                  Take it up with the UN

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by md21 View Post

                    Take it up with the UN
                    President Obama breaks a deal we had with Libya and deposes the leader of that country. I have to take it up with the UN.

                    President Trump breaks a deal with had with Iran. Well who is going to agree to a deal with us ever again?

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by TTURedRaider View Post

                      President Obama breaks a deal we had with Libya and deposes the leader of that country. I have to take it up with the UN.

                      President Trump breaks a deal with had with Iran. Well who is going to agree to a deal with us ever again?
                      Obama was a on the right side of Libya - Turmp is on the wrong side of Iran.

                      Deal with it or shut the fuck up. Trump is disliked and therefore none of our allies are going to stand with him on Iran.
                      Last edited by sctrojan; 05-18-2019, 01:42 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by TTURedRaider View Post

                        President Obama breaks a deal we had with Libya and deposes the leader of that country. I have to take it up with the UN.

                        President Trump breaks a deal with had with Iran. Well who is going to agree to a deal with us ever again?
                        Oh?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          I swear to God, if these fucking retards start another war, I'm voting straight Democrat out of spite for the rest of my life.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by md21 View Post

                            Oh?
                            I mean we didn't ratify treaties or anything like with the Iran deal. Because that's hard and more binding.

                            In response, the Libyan government and its supporters stated that Libya returned to the international community, got a temporary United Nations Security Council seat, and saved some money due to it giving up its nuclear weapons program. Likewise, in an Al-Sharq al-Awsat interview, Gaddafi's son Saif al-Islam stated that the United States did offer security guarantees for Libya in exchange for dismantling its nuclear program and that he expected military and security cooperation agreements with the U.S. in the future.
                            Thanks to Libya, North Korea Might Never Negotiate on Nuclear Weapons
                            https://nationalinterest.org/feature...-nuclear-13756

                            President George W. Bush, wannabe-scourge of evil, nevertheless promised that Libya’s “good faith will be returned.” Khadafy was feted in European capitals. Tripoli was cited as a model for Iran, with North Korea to follow. Said the West: Give up your WMDs and a world of benefits will be yours, including security, trade and investment, diplomatic recognition and international respectability.

                            However, four years ago, the U.S. and European governments saw their chance. Under the guise of humanitarianism—Khadafy never massacred civilians, which the allies claimed they wanted to prevent—Washington and Brussels promoted low-cost (to them) regime change.

                            [...]Now Libya also stands as a stark warning against nonproliferation, at least by any government believing itself to be in Washington’s gun sights, or as having geopolitical ambitions that the United States might want to thwart. In return for paper guarantees, Khadafy sacrificed a military trifecta, including the one weapon that could have deterred the United States and Europe from taking advantage of his vulnerability.

                            The North Koreans took immediate note. The Foreign Ministry observed: “Libya’s nuclear dismantlement much touted by the U.S. in the past turned out to be a mode of aggression whereby the latter coaxed the former with such sweet words as ‘guarantee of security’ and ‘improvement of relations’ to disarm and then swallowed it up by force.” The celebrated disarmament agreement was “an invasion tactic to disarm the country.” The ministry insisted that events demonstrated how the North’s military-first policy was “proper in a thousand ways.”

                            [...]Of course, the Obama administration would not admit its mistake. At the time, State Department spokesman Mark Toner claimed: “Where [the Libyans are] at today has absolutely no connection with them renouncing their nuclear program or nuclear weapons.” This was nonsense. Had Khadafy possessed nukes, chemical weapons and/or missiles, the allies almost certainly would have kept their planes and drones at home. And Khadafy probably would still be in power.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by TTURedRaider View Post

                              I mean we didn't ratify treaties or anything like with the Iran deal.
                              Thanks, I didn’t think so either. Which makes the comparison invalid.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Spartan View Post

                                Revisionist. Bernie lost because he wasn't able to get his message out. The Democratic party put in a lot of effort for Clinton because it was "Her turn" and everyone else was just an obstacle to overcome. That's not to say he doesn't share some culpability in not being proactive enough, but boiling it all down to guns doesn't match reality.
                                I would say the DNC was more skeptical about Bernie’s message than they were of Hillary’s more centrist platform. Bernie was certainly culpable. No question. But, at the end of the day, all we can do is speculate as to whether Bernie would have resonated in the places Trump won big. I’m not sure if he would have.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X