Jump to content

The Original Greaser Bob

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    2946
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Original Greaser Bob

  1. I posted a link and indicated up front that it was one sided and explained how it contained some info that was helpful to an understanding of the Israeli mindset, being that it was an interview of an Israeli journalist. When I post a link to any podcast I'm not expecting everyone to link to it. But I am expecting the knee-jerkers to respond as you did. Not a surprise given the at least two absolutely laughably factually false statements you have made on this thread.
  2. Strong, openminded responses. He was interviewing a guy. Who is the one who delivered the relevant information. Propaganda: anything that fucks with your world view.
  3. Sam Harris | #422 - Zionism & Jihadism Sure, Sam hates Islam, and the podcast is completely one-sided,but I thought it brought 3 points home strongly. 1) the caged animal mindset of the Israelis. 2) the cynicism about Bibi Net. 3) the hard fact that no one really gives a rat's ass about the Palestinians.
  4. That's what my link said.
  5. Sure. And our strategy to defeat Japan did not equate to a commitment to nuke Japan, despite how rhetoric is generally presented. Same with the Russian nukes on Cuba. There was no commitment when N. Kruschevchev said "we will bury you.". Despite how that rhetoric was gnerally presented. I don't think one can ever say that a developed nuke will or won't be used. I do think that Israel's justification for fearing nuclear weapons, given the history of the 20th and 21st century, is way more rational than your sanguinity.
  6. They originally supported them as a countermeasure to the PLO, which provided to be a mistake, but was probably understandable in Hamas' infancy. I don't think anyone, especially not the Israelis, would put it past Net to do what you suggest or extend the way to retain power. For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it's blown up in our faces | The Times of Israel
  7. I never argued Ahmadinejad is the sole author of threats to destroy Israel and I provided you with some additional quotes from folks other than Ahmadinejad. If your argument is that Iran hasn't pursued a strategy of destroying Israel in the last few decades, I think the evidence belies that. And I do realize that some of the folks quoted later said "not really/JK". Given Iran's part in 10/7, I'm not putting much stock in that.
  8. I'm not. I'm ready for Trump to claim total success and then to fuck right off.
  9. Absolutely ridiculous statement. Hamas caused 10/7 and Iran is the leading supporter of Hamas in terms of funds and weapons. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) worked with Hamas to plan its 7 October 2023 surprise attack on southern Israel and gave the green light for Hamas to launch the assault on a meeting in Beirut on 2 October. In the Hamas-led attack, Palestinian militants killed 1,200 Israelis, primarily civilians, and took around 200 Israeli civilians and soldiers hostage.[24] In the weeks leading up to the attack, some 500 fighters from Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad received training in Iran, under the guidance of the IRGC Quds Force.[25] According to The Washington Post, the attack occurred "with key support from [Iran] who provided military training and logistical help as well as tens of millions of dollars for weapons."[5] According to The New York Times, Internal documents indicate that Hamas sought to persuade Iran and Hezbollah to participate in its attacks.[26][27] The group deferred the assault from an initial 2022 plan, aiming to secure regional backing. Although Iran and Hezbollah offered support, they were unprepared for direct involvement, prompting Hamas to proceed independently.[26][27] So second down the list. If you are lowballing Iranian involvement.
  10. Well, at least some good can come out of this -- clearing up Ahmadinejad's good name.
  11. In 2013, Supreme Leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, called Israel "an illegitimate regime" led by "untouchable rabid dogs" and "doomed to failure and annihilation."[8] In 2015, he said there would be "no Zionist regime in 25 years" and that "during this period, the spirit of fighting, heroism and jihad will keep [Israel] worried every moment."[9] Khamenei referred to Israel as "cancerous" on numerous occasions, has said Israel will be destroyed, and has pledged Iran's support for any group or nation confronting it.[1 On October 3, 2023, four days before the Hamas-led October 7 attacks on Israel, Khamenei delivered a speech in Tehran in which he said Israel would "die of [its] rage", and concluded by saying: "This cancer will definitely be eradicated, God willing, at the hands of the Palestinian people and the resistance forces throughout the region."[2] In 2024, Ali Khamenei told Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh: "The divine promise to eliminate the Zionist entity will be fulfilled and we will see the day when Palestine will rise from the river to the sea."[11] In 2014, Hossein Sheikholeslam, then secretary-general of Iran's Committee for Support for the Palestinian Intifada, stated that "the issue of Israel's destruction is important, no matter the method" and warned that "the region will not be quiet so long as Israel exists in it."[21] According to Dana H. Allin, Iran has covertly supported Palestinian suicide attacks targeting Israeli civilians.[33] The October 7 attacks on Israel—which killed approximately 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and saw the kidnapping of 250 hostages—was, at least in part, a product of Iran's strategy.[34] The Wall Street Journal cited senior Hamas and Hezbollah members who said the IRGC helped plan the assault and gave the go-ahead during an October 2 meeting in Beirut.[35] In the lead-up to the attack, about 500 Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad fighters reportedly received training in Iran under the supervision of the IRGC Quds Force.[36] Destruction of Israel in Iranian policy - Wikipedia In September [2019]] the commander of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said that destroying Israel was now an “achievable goal.” Four decades on from Iran’s Islamic revolution, “we have managed to obtain the capacity to destroy the impostor Zionist regime,” Major General Hossein Salami was quoted saying by the IRGC’s Sepah news site. “This sinister regime must be wiped off the map and this is no longer … a dream [but] it is an achievable goal,” Salami said.
  12. 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.
  13. 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?
  14. What a lame ass approach to discussion. Ask me some questions, and then follow up with this bullshit.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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."
  18. Yeah, how is it propaganda? As in "biased or misleading"?
  19. 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".
  20. I'm whispering that this is a dumb fucking statement.
  21. Constitution Smonstitution...
  22. 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.
  23. 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.
  24. Whenever the subject of puppets come up, I look stern and say. "They're marionettes is what they are."
  25. 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
×
×
  • Create New...