Iran: What has Trump Done Now?

Musburger1 said:
The better analogy would be to compare the Palestinians with the Native American population forced onto reservations.
Click to expand...

Not even very close to that. Having said that, we'd probably treat Native Americans worse if they launched terror attacks and tried to murder people instead of generally acting like civilized human beings.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Not even very close to that. Having said that, we'd probably treat Native Americans worse if they launched terror attacks and tried to murder people instead of generally acting like civilized human beings.
Click to expand...
How is confiscating land, herding people into slums, shooting unarmed civilians civilized? If you were treated this way, had no access to a court system, no weapons to defend yourself, perhaps you would resort to terror tactics as well.
Or maybe you’d be content to live like a slave in squalor. Most of the people murdered yesterday (and for the past several years) aren’t terrorists.
 
Musburger1 said:
How is confiscating land, herding people into slums, shooting unarmed civilians civilized?
Click to expand...

It's relative. Prior to the dominance of the modern West, the norm was total conquest - basically a combination of genocide and for the more humanitarian societies, permanent slavery. So compared to that, herding people into slums that are better living standards than they came from, giving them voting rights, private property rights, and only shooting resisters is quite civilized.
 
Mr. Deez said:
It's relative. Prior to the dominance of the modern West, the norm was total conquest - basically a combination of genocide and for the more humanitarian societies, permanent slavery. So compared to that, herding people into slums that are better living standards than they came from, giving them voting rights, private property rights, and only shooting resisters is quite civilized.
Click to expand...
Private property rights? Are you serious? Bulldozing whole neiborhoods, forcibly removing the inhabitants from their homes and placing hem into slums is granting property rights? On what planet?

I guess marching the Cherokee to Oklahoma as hundreds died was much the same. At least a few casinos eventually were thrown in as consolation.
 
My only beef with US/Iran relations is that whatever we are attempting to do to the Iranian state will actually burden normal, everyday citizens, most of them poor, while the Iranian state will continue living the same lifestyle through either back room deals with the EU or just extracting more out of their citizenry. I prefer an olive branch to the people while threatening the state. Of course, I don't know how to do that because those two groups are intertwined. I would probably fund rebel groups and stand back.
 
Monahorns said:
My only beef with US/Iran relations is that whatever we are attempting to do to the Iranian state will actually burden normal, everyday citizens, most of them poor, while the Iranian state will continue living the same lifestyle through either back room deals with the EU or just extracting more out of their citizenry. I prefer an olive branch to the people while threatening the state. Of course, I don't know how to do that because those two groups are intertwined. I would probably fund rebel groups and stand back.
Click to expand...

This is a regime with a demographic problem. They experienced a population explosion with the youth becoming very Westernized. Time is on our side. We simply need to constrain the religious zealots from getting their hands on nukes.
 
Monahorns said:
My only beef with US/Iran relations is that whatever we are attempting to do to the Iranian state will actually burden normal, everyday citizens, most of them poor, while the Iranian state will continue living the same lifestyle through either back room deals with the EU or just extracting more out of their citizenry. I prefer an olive branch to the people while threatening the state. Of course, I don't know how to do that because those two groups are intertwined. I would probably fund rebel groups and stand back.
Click to expand...
We have been funding rebel groups. The MEK
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Mujahedin_of_Iran
 
Yes, Seattle Husker, I have read that before. That is why I think a good long term strategy is to show that younger generation that the US is a friend and ally by opening up trade to them.
 
Monahorns said:
Yes, Seattle Husker, I have read that before. That is why I think a good long term strategy is to show that younger generation that the US is a friend and ally by opening up trade to them.
Click to expand...
And we are doing just the opposite. Meanwhile China and Russia offer support. We don’t feel the need to use diplomacy; just force.
And we aren’t making many friends.
 
Musburger1 said:
Private property rights? Are you serious? Bulldozing whole neiborhoods, forcibly removing the inhabitants from their homes and placing hem into slums is granting property rights? On what planet?

I guess marching the Cherokee to Oklahoma as hundreds died was much the same. At least a few casinos eventually were thrown in as consolation.
Click to expand...

Yes, Native Americans have private property rights.

You're doing what the Left often does with Western countries. You're applying 21st century morals to 17th - 19th century activities and ignoring all context. Of course, we forced Native Americans off of land. Of course, we had legalized slavery for hundreds of years. Of course, we mistreated ethnic and religious minorities. And yes, other Westernized countries have done other things we'd judge harshly today. However, what you ignore is that what the West did wasn't harsh or morally questionable by global standards at the time. When other societies just storm into other lands and torture or starve everybody to death, Indian reservations don't look so bad. When African tribes were literally butchering and eating each other or getting slaughtered by Islamic conquerors from the Arab world, British colonialism didn't look so bad. Furthermore, part of Western civilization is self-reflection. We can look back on slavery and other past bad acts, see the immorality of them, and at least make some effort to make things right.

Genocide and slavery are considered remarkable acts of brutality today. Not long ago, they were commonplace and routine, because most civilizations didn't give a crap about nor consider the well-being of anybody but themselves, and plenty of them still don't and still don't hesitate to commit acts of genocide and slavery. The idea of giving a crap has risen with the rise of the West, and countries and societies that tend to give a crap are countries in which Western influence is or has been strong. Rip them all you want, but the world would be a MUCH nastier place had there never been a dominant West.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Yes, Native Americans have private property rights.

You're doing what the Left often does with Western countries. You're applying 21st century morals to 17th - 19th century activities and ignoring all context. Of course, we forced Native Americans off of land. Of course, we had legalized slavery for hundreds of years. Of course, we mistreated ethnic and religious minorities. And yes, other Westernized countries have done other things we'd judge harshly today. However, what you ignore is that what the West did wasn't harsh or morally questionable by global standards at the time. When other societies just storm into other lands and torture or starve everybody to death, Indian reservations don't look so bad. When African tribes were literally butchering and eating each other or getting slaughtered by Islamic conquerors from the Arab world, British colonialism didn't look so bad. Furthermore, part of Western civilization is self-reflection. We can look back on slavery and other past bad acts, see the immorality of them, and at least make some effort to make things right.

Genocide and slavery are considered remarkable acts of brutality today. Not long ago, they were commonplace and routine, because most civilizations didn't give a crap about nor consider the well-being of anybody but themselves, and plenty of them still don't and still don'tst.
Click to expand...
Just how dense are you? The point is a "modern day society," Israel, is treating Palestinians the same way 18th and 19th century countries treated their conquests. I thought the context was clear. I'm comparing the actions of Israel TODAY to the prior models such as 20th century apartheid, mid to late 19th century Indian wars, and early 18th century slavery.

What America, the British, and other groups did may have been par for the course in the respective eras, what Israel does in the present should be condemned globally. You can't follow the most basic story line can you?
 
Musburger1 said:
Just how dense are you? The point is a "modern day society," Israel, is treating Palestinians the same way 18th and 19th century countries treated their conquests. I thought the context was clear. I'm comparing the actions of Israel TODAY to the prior models such as 20th century apartheid, mid to late 19th century Indian wars, and early 18th century slavery.

What America, the British, and other groups did may have been par for the course in the respective eras, what Israel does in the present should be condemned globally. You can't follow the most basic story line can you?
Click to expand...

Don't be an *******. You brought those issues up as negatives (which you're now backing away from) and then analogized them with acts of modern day Israel. It's horse crap all the way around. It's not like apartheid. It's not like the Indian Wars. It's not like slavery.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Don't be an *******. You brought those issues up as negatives (which you're now backing away from) and then analogized them with acts of modern day Israel. It's horse crap all the way around. It's not like apartheid. It's not like the Indian Wars. It's not like slavery.
Click to expand...
You’ve just shown yourself to be a bigot, fascist, or racist of some sort if you are ok with what the Israël government does.
It is like apartheid and it is like what was done to the Indians. It was wrong then, though more universally condoned, and its wrong now; no matter what people like Trump or bigots like yourself say to justify these actions.
 
Musburger1 said:
You’ve just shown yourself to be a bigot, fascist, or racist of some sort if you are ok with what the Israël government does.
It is like apartheid and it is like what was done to the Indians. It was wrong then, though more universally condoned, and its wrong now; no matter what people like Trump or bigots like yourself say to justify these actions.
Click to expand...

Yep, you've got me figured out. I'm just a big fascist and Nazi for taking issue with your characterizations. The guy who defends Jews is the Nazi, and the guy who mollycoddles Jew-haters (at least when Jews are on the other side) and whose political philosophy is virtually defined by having an alt-Right hero's nuts in his mouth is the fair-minded and tolerant one. Makes sense.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Yep, you've got me figured out. I'm just a big fascist and Nazi for taking issue with your characterizations. The guy who defends Jews is the Nazi, and the guy who mollycoddles Jew-haters (at least when Jews are on the other side) and whose political philosophy is virtually defined by having an alt-Right hero's nuts in his mouth is the fair-minded and tolerant one. Makes sense.
Click to expand...
There is a difference in being a Jew and being a Zionist. Continue showing your ignorance.
 
Musburger1 said:
There is a difference in being a Jew and being a Zionist. Continue showing your ignorance.
Click to expand...

I know that, and I'm neither a Jew nor a Zionist. However, once you deployed the Nazi card in the most idiotic context I've seen in my 30 years of following politics, you pretty much blew what little credibility you had to have a serious discussion.
 
Musburger1 said:
If anybody decides to check out sources other than filtered media, start here.
Click to expand...

This line is BS. What you are saying is "unless you recognize my biased media, typically state owned media as the truth, it's useless to debate." Just playing devils advocate...you post some of the most dubious sources of media as anyone on this board.

Others don't admit they are citing biased sources when they call MSM fake. Why? Because they know that what they are claiming as "truth" is even MORE biased. What they are really upset about is that the MSM doesn't represent THEIR bias. Of course, FoxNews does but they are conveniently left off the MSM list while pointing out they have the highest ratings. Overall, the screams of fake news, or "filtered media", is a rather lazy approach to debating. If you're using information from a news source in an argument than be willing to standup for their credibility as well as be challenged when their credibility is dubious (e.g. moonoveralabama). Finally, anyone posting opinion pieces as "news" should be challenged.

OK...I feel better getting that off my chest. Carry on.
 
Seattle Husker said:
This line is BS. What you are saying is "unless you recognize my biased media, typically state owned media as the truth, it's useless to debate." Just playing devils advocate...you post some of the most dubious sources of media as anyone on this board.

Others don't admit they are citing biased sources when they call MSM fake. Why? Because they know that what they are claiming as "truth" is even MORE biased. What they are really upset about is that the MSM doesn't represent THEIR bias. Of course, FoxNews does but they are conveniently left off the MSM list while pointing out they have the highest ratings. Overall, the screams of fake news, or "filtered media", is a rather lazy approach to debating. If you're using information from a news source in an argument than be willing to standup for their credibility as well as be challenged when their credibility is dubious (e.g. moonoveralabama). Finally, anyone posting opinion pieces as "news" should be challenged.

OK...I feel better getting that off my chest. Carry on.
Click to expand...
I care much less about the source of the media than the message. The MSM would never allow this man’s interview to be broadcast. But then, I’m willing to bet you haven’t nor will you listen to what the man has to present.

Probably 75% of articles linked by myself are written by independent journalists who are ostracized by the MSM because they report on or hold views contrary to government or the corporate media. You want to take away RT’s influence? Very simple remedy. Simply stop censoring stories and journalists and present diverse viewpoints on MSM and it won’t be necessary to seek out alternative news to get exposure to all sides.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Others don't admit they are citing biased sources when they call MSM fake. Why? Because they know that what they are claiming as "truth" is even MORE biased. What they are really upset about is that the MSM doesn't represent THEIR bias. Of course, FoxNews does but they are conveniently left off the MSM list while pointing out they have the highest ratings. Overall, the screams of fake news, or "filtered media", is a rather lazy approach to debating. If you're using information from a news source in an argument than be willing to standup for their credibility as well as be challenged when their credibility is dubious (e.g. moonoveralabama). Finally, anyone posting opinion pieces as "news" should be challenged.
Click to expand...

Fake news is a problem with the MSM. How many anti-Trump stories have we seen from the MSM that had "unnamed sources" that turned out to be false? Just look at how the American press handled the Israel/Palestine conflict the other day. I read the stories and they sounded like something that the Huffington Post would write. They behaved like they were propagandizers for Hamas. I still can't find a newspaper/site from the MSM that correctly states that 50 of the 62 dead were Hamas operatives.
 
Musburger1 said:
I care much less about the source of the media than the message. The MSM would never allow this man’s interview to be broadcast. But then, I’m willing to bet you haven’t nor will you listen to what the man has to present.

Probably 75% of articles linked by myself are written by independent journalists who are ostracized by the MSM because they report on or hold views contrary to government or the corporate media. You want to take away RT’s influence? Very simple remedy. Simply stop censoring stories and journalists and present diverse viewpoints on MSM and it won’t be necessary to seek out alternative news to get exposure to all sides.
Click to expand...

The assumption that these "independent journalists" aren't working for a MSM outlet only because they have a contrary view is a significant leap. There is any number of reasons someone doesn't get hired for a job, starting with experience, quality or ethics. Nobody has a "right" to a platform to start their views.

Most of the pieces you post are opinion columns draped in news with unverifiable facts. If you were assessing them for hire as a professional journalist it would be perfectly reasonable to be concerned as an employer.
 
Garmel said:
Fake news is a problem with the MSM. How many anti-Trump stories have we seen from the MSM that had "unnamed sources" that turned out to be false? Just look at how the American press handled the Israel/Palestine conflict the other day. I read the stories and they sounded like something that the Huffington Post would write.
Click to expand...

Good question. How many turned out to be true? What about the sources you consume information from? What's the success rate?

Garmel said:
They behaved like they were propagandizers for Hamas. I still can't find a newspaper/site from the MSM that correctly states that 50 of the 62 dead were Hamas operatives.
Click to expand...

So what are your sources? Even TimesofIsrael (they site the IDF official statements) are quoting your numbers.
 
Last edited:
Seattle Husker said:
The assumption that these "independent journalists" aren't working for a MSM outlet only because they have a contrary view is a significant leap. There is any number of reasons someone doesn't get hired for a job, starting with experience, quality or ethics. Nobody has a "right" to a platform to start their views.

Most of the pieces you post are opinion columns draped in news with unverifiable facts. If you were assessing them for hire as a professional journalist it would be perfectly reasonable to be concerned as an employer.
Click to expand...
You have no idea what you are talking about. These independent journalists are many times experts in various fields and/or have experience within government. Pat Buchanan, Gilbert Doctorow, Mike Kreiger, are three examples of a Conservive politician, an expert on Russia, and former intelligence agent whose knowledge and expertise is beyond reproach but have been shunned by MSM. You ramble on about a subject where you haven’t a clue what you are saying.
Correction: Krieger has a background as financial analyst. Ray McGovern and William Binney are two ostracized individuals who served in the intelligence agencies.
 
Last edited:
Seattle Husker said:
Of course, FoxNews does but they are conveniently left off the MSM list while pointing out they have the highest ratings. Overall, the screams of fake news, or "filtered media", is a rather lazy approach to debating.
Click to expand...

Debating? Seriously? There's no debating how fake the MSM is. Only the biggest liberal hack on the planet would even attempt to debating it. It's every single day on the hour that they are making up fake news. I honestly don't think you believe that and are just trolling. Because to truly believe that would come across as ignorant and should be embarrassing for you. Kind of like that liberal lady on her knees in the street screaming NOOOOOOOOOO as they were announcing our new President Donald Trump at his inaugural. That was really funny and so embarrassing at the same time.

On a side note we are witnessing our last President being the worst ever to our new President who is headed toward being the best President as far as policies go in modern history.
 
I35 said:
Debating? Seriously? There's no debating how fake the MSM is. Only the biggest liberal hack on the planet would even attempt to debating it. It's every single day on the hour that they are making up fake news. I honestly don't think you believe that and are just trolling. Because to truly believe that would come across as ignorant and should be embarrassing for you. Kind of like that liberal lady on her knees in the street screaming NOOOOOOOOOO as they were announcing our new President Donald Trump at his inaugural. That was really funny and so embarrassing at the same time.

On a side note we are witnessing our last President being the worst ever to our new President who is headed toward being the best President as far as policies go in modern history.
Click to expand...

Lot's of words without any substance, all commentary, no supporting facts as usual. I suggest sticking to "likes" of others posts.
 
Musburger1 said:
You have no idea what you are talking about. These independent journalists are many times experts in various fields and/or have experience within government. Pat Buchanan, Gilbert Doctorow, Mike Kreiger, are three examples of a Conservive politician, an expert on Russia, and former intelligence agent whose knowledge and expertise is beyond reproach but have been shunned by MSM. You ramble on about a subject where you haven’t a clue what you are saying.
Correction: Krieger has a background as financial analyst. Ray McGovern and William Binney are two ostracized individuals who served in the intelligence agencies.
Click to expand...

Did you just claim Pat Buchanan is censored? He's spent a career in politics and various media positions, many of them "mainstream" on virtually every network.

Doctorow has pretty fringe views and is a regular on Russian Propaganda outlets. Like a porn actress trying to make the leap to the big screen, it's a big challenge to go from propaganda to mainstream commentator.

Based on these examples you aren't looking for news but rather want "MSM" to carry fringe commentators, specifically ones you support.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Did you just claim Pat Buchanan is censored? He's spent a career in politics and various media positions, many of them "mainstream" on virtually every network.

Doctorow has pretty fringe views and is a regular on Russian Propaganda outlets. Like a porn actress trying to make the leap to the big screen, it's a big challenge to go from propaganda to mainstream commentator.

Based on these examples you aren't looking for news but rather want "MSM" to carry fringe commentators, specifically ones you support.
Click to expand...
Strange. I don’t recall seeing Buchanan’s face for quite some time. And as far as Doctorow being “fringe,” that’s just your way (and establishments way) of demonizing someone whose views you are afraid of getting air time because they might expose holes in the MSM narrative. Better to demonize and censor - the equivalent of burning books - than to allow competing viewpoints of which you might have to debate and defend against.
 
Seattle Husker said:
Good question. How many turned out to be true? What about the sources you consume information from? What's the success rate?
Click to expand...

Just my guesstimation. I'd say about 25%-50% of the MSM anti-Trump stories are either completely fake or not telling the full truth. Although the Hamas/Israeli stories have nothing to do with Trump they are a prime example of the MSM not telling the full truth. I'd say my sources are much more reliable than the MSM(although nothing's perfect).
 
@Seattle Husker Just today many in the MSM are taking Trump out of context. Trump was referring to MS-13 as animals. What do you see in the MSM? Trump is referring to illegal immigrants as animals. This is excactly the kind of fake news that's out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top