Are you imagining parades, propaganda, and support for a war?
At least throw in some big breasted redheads while you’re at it, spice that fantasy up.
First , you obviously don’t understand what “propaganda” is.
Second, your spurious objections to the facts show that your position is baseless, not that mine is weaker.
Third, the fact that even when Iran has attacked US military forces and slaughtered hundreds there has been no military response from the US puts paid to your claims that Iran is acting in self defense, which is why you try to handwave them away or resort to tu quoque fallacies or selective memory.
*You might want to consider what it implies that you are hostile to facts and logic and view them as enemy “propaganda”.
*
That is a good example of the proper pejorative use of the word “propaganda”. You are describing, for instance, murdering US soldiers stationed in Saudi Arabia, at the behest of the Saudi government, as Iran fighting against an “incursion” into the Middle East. You are describing, for instance, Iran murdering US noncmobattants in Lebanon as fighting against an “incursion”. You’re also ignoring numerous other acts of Hezbollah’s kidnapping, murder, etc… over the years. Go figure.
Shocking as it may seem, you are yet again factually incorrect.
It’s really not complicated. I don’t think we need to embroil ourselves in another military conflict in the Middle East. And nor do I think we ought to allow Israel (either intentionally or inadvertently) to embroil us in another conflict in the Middle East. What part of that don’t you understand?
And here is a perfect example of why you and Finn seem like Frick and Frack. Aside from the fact I couldn’t slide a piece of paper between your positions on the topic at hand, neither of you seems capable of making an argument without veering into ad hominem.
(Yes, yes, to be sure, like Finn, you walk right up to the line of the permissible and spit across it.)
You disagree with Spoke, thus you are an Evil Doer, like me. Of course.
The fact that we’re both correcting his factual and logical errors just shows that we’re united in some sort of Axis, dedicated perhaps to Evil.
By the way, for those reading along who prefer reality to Spoke’s fantasy (at least until he incorporates some of those big breasted redheads I’ve requested), I have actually gone on record about attacking Iran. Not surprising, as this is the same fucking thread that’s been kicking around for the last 8 years or so…
There are way too many threads and I’m tired, the original bit where I talked about it most likely being a bad idea to bomb Iran is somewhere out there. A virtual cookie for whoever finds it, I guess.
Oh, and for those who are convinced by Spoke’s handwaving about Iranian attacks against US forces, let’s look at just one. His degree of error should give folks a clue as to what to expect from his similar arguments.
You evidently do not know what “ad hominem” means. Ibn did not say you were a moron, he called your statement moronic. Likewise, even if he had pointed out why you were wrong and then insulted you, that also wouldn’t be an ad hominem. Likewise, I’ve shown how you’re wrong in terms of facts, logic, and how your apologia is a rationalization for an unsupportable premise. I have not used any ad hom fallacies, at all.
Well, there is the part about the fact that the US has been holding Israel back. Then there is the part that the US has been pursuing non-military means to try and get Iran to stop this crazy quest. Then there is the fact that we actually do have I direct stake in the region, and we can’t just walk away and hope for the best. I lack the understanding of all that (to start with) wrt your own positions, because your positions don’t seem to be consistent and lack logical sense, to me. Which is why I asked. Sadly, I rmain unenlightened at this point.
-XT
P.S. I also don’t recommend a US attack or turning loose Israel, not at this time and not until at least every non-military means have been exhausted…and maybe not even then. I simply think that folks in this thread saying it’s no big deal I’d Iran gets the things, or that they are no threat to the US and thus aren’t our problem, etc etc, are, well, what we (me and my pocket mouse) normally refer to as ‘wrong’.
It happens regularly that leaders engage in suicidal conduct. Probably it’s because they overestimate their chances of success.
Not if Iran succesfully concealed its involvement. Let me ask you this: If you were Prime Minister of Israel; and there was a non-catastrophic but painful nuclear attack against Israel - for example a Jewish settlement of 1000 people was wiped off the map; and you thought there was a 75% chance that Iran was behind it; would you order that Tehran and every other major Iranian city be wiped off the map?
See, it’s conceivable that the Iranians might attack Israel with nukes and convince themselves that there’s a pretty good chance that Israel will not retaliate in kind.
If Israel cannot get the US to recognize Jerusalem as being part of Israel; if Israel cannot get the US to release Jonathan Pollard; if Israel cannot get the US to stop pressuring it to freeze settlement construction, it seems unlikely that Israel could get the US to launch a nuclear strike against a third country.
If The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were real that might happen, but they’re false so it wouldn’t.
I know that there’s a lot of anti-Semitic mythology suggesting that we live in some alternate universe where the US government is controlled by evil right-wing Jews who care more about Israel than the US, but here on planet Earth, that’s categorically false.
You think that the Israeli government that couldn’t get the US government to fund MEK, couldn’t stop the US government from giving arms to the Saudis, couldn’t prevent the US government from trading arms for hostages with Iran, couldn’t prevent the US government from offering to recognize and establish diplomatic relations with the PLO, and can’t even get the US to move its Embassy to Jerusalem can make the US launch a massive genocidal military strike at another country.
Please explain your reasoning, because to me and to anyone knowledgeable about US/Israeli relations your comment was mindnlowingly stupid.
Also, please answer my earlier question explaining why you think I want the US to go to war with Iran and why you think there’s no difference between my position and Finn’s.
Of course the easiest way to get the US to do something is to convince them it’s their own idea. (No need to actually “control” anyone.) I suppose I’d start by rattling sabers toward Iran. Then I’d launch a PR campaign to convince the US that they are Iran’s next target. Maybe I’d even hint at some secret intelligence to that effect. I’d be sure to raise the specter of mushroom clouds over American cities.
Of course, this will be a whole lot easier if a Republican’s in office, in which case their friends in the defense industry and the oil industry (not to mention Halliburton) stand to make a handsome profit if the country goes to war. Plus their base is a lot more bellicose and prone to fear-mongering. Also, they really want to win Florida.
Luckily, if I’m Israel, there are plenty of useful idiots on the internet who stand ready to help convince the populace that Iran poses a grave threat to the US. “Remember what they did to us in '83!” they’ll type (or '80, or however far back you need to go). Naturally they’ll be a little fuzzy about the dates involved, because they want Iran to seem like more of a current threat.
Why pretty soon, you’ll have the whole US population up in arms and ready to take out your latest foe, no matter the cost in blood and treasure!
I think I will not play your “I’ve got a question” game. Besides, I asked you first: if your position is different from Finn’s, please enlighten us as to how it differs. Because all I see is you rushing to his side whenever the word “Israel” is mentioned on these boards.
Oh no, you don’t resort to ad hominem at all. Why, as long as you direct your insults toward the argument and not the poster, you can be as explicitly insulting as you like! Neat!
[QUOTE=Spoke]
Of course the easiest way to get the US to do something is to convince them it’s their own idea. (No need to actually “control” anyone.) I suppose I’d start by rattling sabers toward Iran. Then I’d launch a PR campaign to convince the US that they are Iran’s next target. Maybe I’d even hint at some secret intelligence to that effect. I’d be sure to raise the specter of mushroom clouds over American cities.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah…get the UN and the IAEA to come up with some spurious ‘evidence’ that Iran is engaged in a nuclear weapons program. Then attempt to link Iran to various terrorist attacks (perhaps, done BY Israel and made to LOOK like it was Iran!). Then trick the Europeans into being concerned enough to up their sanctions as well. And THEN get Iran to threaten to close the straights and disrupt trade (you could do this by mullah-napping a top official and then sending in an impersonator to read a threatening script).
To paraphrase from Wayne’s World…it’s almost too easy…
Undoubtedly. It seems to be working well enough under the keen eyed Democrats too, though, since the Israelis have managed to trick us into increasing sanctions, along with our European friends. That false UN/IAEA report was brilliant…I think that, along with some of the other stuff is really what’s making all this work.
Yeah, they are very good at creating a threat out of whole clothe, as we can all see. Only idiots would fall for this stuff! It’s brilliant…almost too easy…
What will probably happen is they will get Bruce Willis to invade single handedly to save a puppy, arrange for him to be captured by evil Iranian thugs (all Israeli operatives of course), taken to a secret submarine lair (long and thin and full of seamen, of course), and then threaten to throw him into a pool with frickin sharks with frickin lasers on their heads, unless we give them one billioncagillionfintillionscicillion…yen. And then they will bounce a signal off sat-com 4, making it look like the Iranians are trying to steal the formula for the secret sauce from McDonald’s AND Dr. Pepper (simultaneously), thus causing the US to retaliate with everything we have in our arsenal…including Sylvester Stallone AND Arnold.
No, he didn’t. He pointed out that what you said was stupid. It was. Pointing out that an argument is stupid is different from claiming that an argument is wrong because the person making it is stupid. You really should learn what an ad hominem fallacy is if you’re going to claim that you’ve found an example of it.
And lo and behold, both Ibn and I point out your errors in fact, logic and historical knowledge. It’s interesting that you believe that means we must have a lockstep agreement. Almost as if your position requires errors in fact and logic, or else someone must be outside your camp. Interesting, that.
If it’s that easy, then why is the US embassy still not in Jerusalem? Why doesn’t the US recognize Israeli annexation of the Golan Heights and Jerusalem? Why is Jonathan Pollard still in jail? Why does the US pressure Israel not to build settlements?
Umm… you’re the one who made an assertion(that Finn and I are in lockstep) not me. On this site, when one makes an assertion, one is expected to back it up.
That said, I’ll humor you and list two massive ways in which we differ.
First, he’s a Zionist while I’m not.
Secondly, I think the Balfour Declaration was a huge mistake and that the world would have been better off without Israel. Finn obviously disagrees.
Now, that I’ve humored you, please explain how you can’t tell the difference between someone who supported the creation of Israel and someone who didn’t.
Thanks