Answers to outlaw's silly questions...

callen

Obama's attempting to get elected and the American humans have been brainwashed into thinking every Arab is out to do them harm, or better yet is an evildoer. Thus he's attempting to distance himself as far as possible from having Muslim background...only way he has a chance. Imagine if he said he agreed in the palestinian plight, or that Iran has the same rights to protect itself as any other country on this planet...heck if the most powerful country that's just recently acheived regime change tells you your evil and your the problem, I'd arm myself to the teeth as well.

I'm guessing if Obama gets past all the prejudiced week Americans and gets elected he'll make a better attempt at peace in the Middle East than Dubya and his goons that profit from the conflict. War = $$$$$$

RolandTD20Kdrummer

callen wrote:

Obama's attempting to get elected and the American humans have been brainwashed into thinking every Arab is out to do them harm, or better yet is an evildoer. Thus he's attempting to distance himself as far as possible from having Muslim background...only way he has a chance. Imagine if he said he agreed in the palestinian plight, or that Iran has the same rights to protect itself as any other country on this planet...heck if the most powerful country that's just recently acheived regime change tells you your evil and your the problem, I'd arm myself to the teeth as well.

I'm guessing if Obama gets past all the prejudiced week Americans and gets elected he'll make a better attempt at peace in the Middle East than Dubya and his goons that profit from the conflict. War = $$$$$$

while the rest of the world looks on in astonishment (and horror) at the US voting public

hehe

cornnifer

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

while the rest of the world looks on in astonishment (and horror) at the US voting public

hehe

The last i checked, the rest of the world kinda liked Obama. One canadian conspiacy theorist is hardly "the rest of the world".

hehe

RolandTD20Kdrummer

cornnifer wrote:

The last i checked, the rest of the world kinda liked Obama. One canadian conspiacy theorist is hardly "the rest of the world".

hehe

More about the decision making in general....but on the Obama thing....we'll see

I'll make sure to bump all the right threads for you

catefrances

NMyTree wrote:

I just love the ....."Everything is anti-semitism when you disagree with, call for accountability/responsibility of .......or criticize anything Israel/Jewish related " .......crowd.

Infinitely entertaining.

you cant be antisemitic and support the palestinians anyway. they too are semitic. people are lazy when it comes to shit like this.

NMyTree

catefrances wrote:

you cant be antisemitic and support the palestinians anyway. they too are semitic. people are lazy when it comes to shit like this.

Sssshhhhhhhhh.....

No reality permitted:D

RolandTD20Kdrummer

It's all a big conspiracy unless I support Obama...

Oh man...

Q: But what does this "anti-semite" know about US history?

A: Nothing unless I support Obama...

hahahaaa

Its Evolution Baby

cornnifer wrote:

The last i checked, the rest of the world kinda liked Obama. One canadian conspiacy theorist is hardly "the rest of the world".

hehe

The rest of the world is openly rooting for Obama for President. It's one of many factors that is influencing my vote.

I feel Obama can rebuild the bridges burned by the Bush Administration.

I want to be able to travel to Europe without being spit on!!!

Sludge Factory

cornnifer wrote:

Yes, i support diplomatic talks with Iran. No, i don't think sanctions will make them less likely to comply.
Iran has no military options on the table? Really? You know this how? They've emoved military options from their table? Correct me if i'm wrong but "Retaliating if attacked" sounds a hell of alot like a military option on their table. As does "wiping Israel off the face of the map". In fact, that sounds like a direct threat.

Retaliating if attacked is in a completely different category as opposed to our policy of all options on the table. We are basically saying all our options are on the table if you don't listen to us. Last I checked Iran was it's own fucking country. It would be nice if our "military option" was one of retaliating if attacked like it used to be instead of the bullshit "attacking you if we don't like the look on your face or because you have something we want".

One is defensive, the other is offensive.

cornnifer

Sludge Factory wrote:

Retaliating if attacked is in a completely different category as opposed to our policy of all options on the table. We are basically saying all our options are on the table if you don't listen to us.

.

Where are you getting this? Bush, yeah. But when did Obama ever say "i'll bomb the hell out of Iran if they give me screwface? When? That isn't what "keeping options on the table means. Thats your biased agenda driven interpretation.
i'm not a warmonger. i'm a pacifist. A peacenik, really. i'm also not naive. If you get hammered drunk and want to drive through my neighborhood or that of my friends, sorry, but i have to take your damn keys. As soon as taking your keys is an option that isn't "on the table" you plow over my friends and my kids.
This Obama is a warmonger nonsense is tired and completely spun. Oh, well.

NMyTree

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

It's all a big conspiracy unless I support Obama...

Oh man...

Q: But what does this "anti-semite" know about US history?

A: Nothing unless I support Obama...

hahahaaa

Do you have a link to a credible news source to support those thoughts?

Bwahahahaha:D:D:D

fuck

cornnifer wrote:

Where are you getting this? Bush, yeah. But when did Obama ever say "i'll bomb the hell out of Iran if they give me screwface? When? That isn't what "keeping options on the table means. Thats your biased agenda driven interpretation.
i'm not a warmonger. i'm a pacifist. A peacenik, really. i'm also not naive. If you get hammered drunk and want to drive through my neighborhood or that of my friends, sorry, but i have to take your damn keys. As soon as taking your keys is an option that isn't "on the table" you plow over my friends and my kids.
This Obama is a warmonger nonsense is tired and completely spun. Oh, well.

The only one spinning anything here is you.
Not one person here called Obama a warmonger. In fact, the only one who did is you (sarcastically, of course). Obama's current stance on Iran is pretty much the same as Bush's, unfortunately. Pushing sanctions, with some talks, and keeping military option on the table... he even naively called their nuclear program "illegal."

Also, did you ever take the SATs back in the day? No offense, but your score on analogies must have been one of the shittiest in history. Are you freakin kidding me? How is Iran comparable to a drunk driver?

Rhinocerous Surprise

_outlaw wrote:

Also, did you ever take the SATs back in the day? No offense, but your score on analogies must have been one of the shittiest in history. Are you freakin kidding me? How is Iran comparable to a drunk driver?

It's more like taking someone's keys if they don't agree with your opinions.

fuck

Sludge Factory wrote:

Retaliating if attacked is in a completely different category as opposed to our policy of all options on the table. We are basically saying all our options are on the table if you don't listen to us. Last I checked Iran was it's own fucking country. It would be nice if our "military option" was one of retaliating if attacked like it used to be instead of the bullshit "attacking you if we don't like the look on your face or because you have something we want".

One is defensive, the other is offensive.

exactly. saying you'll retaliate is NOT having military option on the table.

also, if someone thinks that pushing sanctions on Iran won't make talks any more strenuous than it already would be, then that's just naivety speaking. how can you go to Ahmadinejad and ask for friendly talks, but also be pushing for sanctions on their country? it makes no sense.

oh, and Iran never threatened Israel. The wiping off the map comment is bullshit.

Its Evolution Baby

_outlaw wrote:

exactly. saying you'll retaliate is NOT having military option on the table.

also, if someone thinks that pushing sanctions on Iran won't make talks any more strenuous than it already would be, then that's just naivety speaking. how can you go to Ahmadinejad and ask for friendly talks, but also be pushing for sanctions on their country? it makes no sense.

oh, and Iran never threatened Israel. The wiping off the map comment is bullshit.

The reality of the situation is that war has been "on the table" with Iran since the Hostage crisis.

It doesn't mean we will ever act on it.

cornnifer

_outlaw wrote:

Also, did you ever take the SATs back in the day? No offense, but your score on analogies must have been one of the shittiest in history. Are you freakin kidding me? How is Iran comparable to a drunk driver?

My analogy is just fine. Its your understanding of it thats all screwed up. You keep screaming about Iran's nuclear program being legal. SO is getting fitshaced drunk. You follow me so far? Do try and keep up Mr. SAT. Mmmkay?
Now if you decide after getting stumble drunk to drive a car, its no longer o.k. and i'm excercising the option i left on the table to take your keys, forcefully if necessary. Get it? If Iran decided to turn their, apparently legal nuclear program, illegal and threaten us or the region, we better have kept the option to take their damn keys.
That isn't an advocation of war with Iran. It isn't even a threat. Its preparedness, plain and simple.

Go on with your SAT scores. i'm guessing you just took them last year. Good luck with that.

Sludge Factory

cornnifer wrote:

i'm not a warmonger. i'm a pacifist. A peacenik, really. i'm also not naive. If you get hammered drunk and want to drive through my neighborhood or that of my friends, sorry, but i have to take your damn keys. As soon as taking your keys is an option that isn't "on the table" you plow over my friends and my kids.
This Obama is a warmonger nonsense is tired and completely spun. Oh, well.

It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself there.

cornnifer wrote:

Where are you getting this? Bush, yeah. But when did Obama ever say "i'll bomb the hell out of Iran if they give me screwface? When? That isn't what "keeping options on the table means. Thats your biased agenda driven interpretation. .

I got it from your post which I quoted where you said "Retaliating if attacked sounds a hell of alot like a military option on their table". I was just attempting to point out that it really isn't, it's just a statement saying you will defend yourself if some asshole aggresses against you. I wasn't even referring to Obama's stance when I wrote that, it was a generalized example of how absurd the thinking is in this nation where people have to threaten others to get their way.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Its Evolution Baby wrote:

The reality of the situation is that war has been "on the table" with Iran since the Hostage crisis.

It doesn't mean we will ever act on it.

It's just a matter of time. Kinda like carving up a big fat turkey sooner or later the entire bird is on the plate (which is on the table...haha)

Obama is flat out a jackass for parroting the Bush empirical ideology towards Iran, and whether or not you think military options are on the table...WHAT MATTERS is that Iran most certainly believes it. That's what really matters.

Way to make friends Obama...ya jackass

whore yourself for those votes....whore yourself out...oooo...yeah

go bobo go!

fuck

cornnifer wrote:

My analogy is just fine. Its your understanding of it thats all screwed up. You keep screaming about Iran's nuclear program being legal. SO is getting fitshaced drunk. You follow me so far? Do try and keep up Mr. SAT. Mmmkay?
Now if you decide after getting stumble drunk to drive a car, its no longer o.k. and i'm excercising the option i left on the table to take your keys, forcefully if necessary. Get it? If Iran decided to turn their, apparently legal nuclear program, illegal and threaten us or the region, we better have kept the option to take their damn keys.
That isn't an advocation of war with Iran. It isn't even a threat. Its preparedness, plain and simple.

You're not taking their keys, you're bombing them. You're throwing their car, with them in it, off a cliff. If you think that's the simple answer, then fine. obviously your analogy is off from the beginning though. Iran's nuclear program thus far is legal (which you just admitted, too bad your boy Barack doesn't think so). That's all there is to it. To say "we'll only take their keys if it BECOMES illegal" is stupid because the U.S. already THINKS it's illegal, meaning they're already trying to do something about it, with no proof.


it's more like you stopping a guy driving fine, who isn't drunk, claiming he is, and then throwing his car off the cliff.

fuck

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

whether or not you think military options are on the table...WHAT MATTERS is that Iran most certainly believes it.

excellent point.