Uncensored discussion of the four-year dark winter predicted by and carried out by Biden
@Typo-MAGAshiv It was a pretty meaningless deal. Two enemies negotiated in bad faith. Neither got anything they wanted except to stop negotiating unsuccessfully.
The more powerful nation wanted to keep the other down, so it was never going to offer the weaker power anything meaningfully good, only the chance of less pain if it complied. The less powerful nation wanted to quietly gain a powerful tool that its enemies have that might get it taken more seriously but it had to lie and pretend it wouldn't seek the tool it really wants in return for slightly less pain. How was a deal like that ever going to last?
In the end this one will only be won by actions. It is almost impossible to turn an enemy into a neutral nation by offering the absence of fear or suffering. You have to actually create a positive vision of a place for that nation at your table or defeat it. Either positive actions in diplomacy are needed or victory.
You can't achieve victory without boots on the ground. Boots on the ground require resources. When you have a huge debt and a proxy war draining you, a new war is a poor investment, particularly when you sell yourself as a police man not a conqueror, when you hand back shattered countries to embittered citizens not keep them as resources.
When the US puts boots on the ground in muslim countries it has a good record of short term success and a terrible record of long term success. It does not know how to offer a civilised non western country a vision that it can buy into. Not everyone thinks that a slightly higher standard of living is worth the cost of being ruled by liberal values and the fiat dollar.
Read MoreWell, that's what bothers me: there is no such things as opinions when facts are involved. Whether the water is wet or not is not a matter of rhetoric, but rather an observation.
When you talk about rounds, it implies that we are using tricks and tactics to force the opposing party to concede a victory. That is frivolous.
What matters is the truth and only the truth and truth is not subjective (unless you're a woman).
I was responding to the trump dooming. I do not think this is going to have the negative ramifications the sentiment of your post conveyed
Wrong
About??
Half of the people on here were saying there was going to be world war III. What has happened instead has been everyone distancing themselves from Iran
as a petty personal attack to get rejected out of hand and ultimately just reinforcing the factually incorrect statements from before that were getting addressed.
I'm not giving you a petty rejection to an argument. People are saying XYZ is going to happen and time hasn't panned out for it. All we would be doing is arguing about it
World War III is not going to happen and the dust will settle from this and I will even go as far as to predict the middle East will become more peaceful because of how badly Iran is getting dismantled
@Typo-MAGAshiv OK fair enough, I'm incorrect that Obama's peace prize got awarded FOR the nuclear deal.
Everything else I've said about it stands, including the fact that Iran was willfully complying with the terms of the deal and openly showing that they were not enriching uranium beyond what was needed for their power generating reactors and for medical isotopes. (Iran has a very advanced medical system by modern standards.)
@Stigma OK, that's just embarrassing
@MentORPHEUS It's okay because this time the president of the USA has the afterthought of asking "everyone" to keep the prices down... why didn't anyone else think of this after doing something that will inevitably make them rise?!
2
3
Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize for this accomplishment
was the Nobel Committee comprised of Time Lords? Because Obama's nuclear deal with Iran was completed in 2015, and they awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009, for the Grand Achievement of Not Being Dubya Bush. It was quite the farce, though not as bad as when one of those was awarded to Yasser Arafat (the Father of Modern Terrorism!).
Anyway, whether that was a deliberate lie or just a monumentaln display of profound ignorance, expect some vcards coming your way.
How exactly was it a shitty deal, exactly???
It relied a lot on just the word of a bad faith actor, and gave them billions of dollars with which to fund terrorism.
This article gets into it a bit.
One of those (typically Democrat) noble intentions, but head-in-the-clouds ignorant schemes.
Read More
1
2
A little vignette that recent events brought back into memory.
In 1984, working my first job as a pump attendant at a gas station. The price of gas had fluctuated upward a few pennies, not connected to any geopolitical current event. At that job, you heard lots of unsolicited complaints from the public when prices moved upwards, but very notably, NEVER heard a peep when they moved downwards.
Anyway, this very old man was there to buy gas at well below $1 per gallon for his V8 powered Lead Sled, and went off on a rant when he saw the price was fractionally higher than the week before. He practically screamed in his husky quavering old-man voice, "WE SHOULD HAVE JUST TOLD THOSE IRANIANS HOW MUCH WE'D PAY THEM FOR GAS!!!1!!!" Dude was SERIOUSLY worked up with spittle literally flying as he hissed out his angry complaint. I remember, as a minimum wage service worker with ZERO power to set prices and ZERO prior involvement in geopolitics with one foot still in legal childhood, just standing there, thinking, "What the fuck, old man?!?!?"
Read More
1
2
