[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

COVID-19 - sirdroseph - Jul 12, 2020 - 2:39am
 
Joe Biden - sirdroseph - Jul 12, 2020 - 1:50am
 
And the good news is.... - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 11, 2020 - 7:32pm
 
Those Lovable Policemen - R_P - Jul 11, 2020 - 7:26pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Jul 11, 2020 - 6:25pm
 
Looting & vandalism isn't protest - R_P - Jul 11, 2020 - 3:10pm
 
What Did You See Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 11, 2020 - 1:39pm
 
Canada - R_P - Jul 11, 2020 - 1:10pm
 
New Doves album ‘The Universal Want’ coming in September - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 11, 2020 - 11:00am
 
Religion as Beer - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 11, 2020 - 10:58am
 
Today in History - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 11, 2020 - 10:41am
 
Things You Thought Today - sirdroseph - Jul 11, 2020 - 10:37am
 
Words that should be put on the substitutes bench for a year - Proclivities - Jul 11, 2020 - 10:23am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - miamizsun - Jul 11, 2020 - 8:06am
 
Environment - Red_Dragon - Jul 11, 2020 - 6:26am
 
RP streams in Opus - Romain98 - Jul 11, 2020 - 6:10am
 
Bad Poetry - sirdroseph - Jul 11, 2020 - 4:46am
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - whatshisname - Jul 11, 2020 - 4:39am
 
AppleTV 4K and Radio Paradise stopping - edz - Jul 10, 2020 - 10:10pm
 
Trump - buddy - Jul 10, 2020 - 8:20pm
 
Fox Spews - buddy - Jul 10, 2020 - 5:44pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - edz - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:45pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:29pm
 
Make Scott laugh - kcar - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:29pm
 
Economix - R_P - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:16pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - Red_Dragon - Jul 10, 2020 - 1:57pm
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - ptooey - Jul 10, 2020 - 1:00pm
 
South Korea - islander - Jul 10, 2020 - 12:32pm
 
New Music - miamizsun - Jul 10, 2020 - 12:18pm
 
In My Room - miamizsun - Jul 10, 2020 - 11:58am
 
What the hell OV? - miamizsun - Jul 10, 2020 - 11:54am
 
Cool Stuff I Really Want - Proclivities - Jul 10, 2020 - 10:43am
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - Proclivities - Jul 10, 2020 - 9:36am
 
True Confessions - buddy - Jul 10, 2020 - 9:30am
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Jul 10, 2020 - 9:13am
 
TV shows you watch - ScottN - Jul 10, 2020 - 8:22am
 
Constitution - Red_Dragon - Jul 10, 2020 - 7:05am
 
Race in America - sirdroseph - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:57am
 
Removing rated songs - Cache personalization - BillG - Jul 9, 2020 - 8:36pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 9, 2020 - 3:40pm
 
Social Networking - R_P - Jul 9, 2020 - 12:54pm
 
Tech & Science - R_P - Jul 9, 2020 - 12:03pm
 
One Reason I Don't Trust the Police - miamizsun - Jul 9, 2020 - 11:19am
 
RP Daily Trivia Challenge - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 9, 2020 - 10:32am
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Jul 9, 2020 - 8:53am
 
Ask the Libertarian - Lazy8 - Jul 9, 2020 - 7:40am
 
Dog - kcar - Jul 8, 2020 - 11:13pm
 
Questions. - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2020 - 6:49pm
 
Sunrise, Sunset - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2020 - 4:01pm
 
what the hell, miamizsun? - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2020 - 4:00pm
 
Iran - R_P - Jul 8, 2020 - 1:31pm
 
China - R_P - Jul 8, 2020 - 11:48am
 
Happy Birthdy, Ringo Starr - norbertZ - Jul 8, 2020 - 4:07am
 
The Obituary Page - haresfur - Jul 7, 2020 - 8:16pm
 
Trump Lies - ScottN - Jul 7, 2020 - 8:00pm
 
Graphs, Charts & Maps - R_P - Jul 7, 2020 - 3:18pm
 
Things that are just WRONG - kcar - Jul 7, 2020 - 3:00pm
 
Immigration - R_P - Jul 7, 2020 - 2:28pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jul 7, 2020 - 11:14am
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 7, 2020 - 10:36am
 
HALF A WORLD - oldviolin - Jul 7, 2020 - 9:16am
 
Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest - Red_Dragon - Jul 7, 2020 - 9:03am
 
Counting with Pictures - yuel - Jul 7, 2020 - 7:53am
 
2020 Elections - KarmaKarma - Jul 7, 2020 - 7:47am
 
Sweet horrible irony. - kcar - Jul 6, 2020 - 9:36pm
 
Why are 2 of the best albums of the last decade completel... - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 6, 2020 - 1:55pm
 
What The Hell Buddy? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 6, 2020 - 1:31pm
 
The All-Things Beatles Forum - Steely_D - Jul 6, 2020 - 11:04am
 
The Electoral College - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 6, 2020 - 10:36am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Jul 6, 2020 - 8:55am
 
The List of Reasons Why Schlabby Hates People - sunybuny - Jul 6, 2020 - 7:47am
 
Florida - Coaxial - Jul 6, 2020 - 6:09am
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - miamizsun - Jul 6, 2020 - 5:44am
 
Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore - buddy - Jul 5, 2020 - 7:06pm
 
Live Music - buddy - Jul 5, 2020 - 6:59pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » war is a racket Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Post to this Topic
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 3:44pm



 kurtster wrote:

Perhaps you could come us with US only stats ?  Not US and ...
 

That's some Olympic-caliber wriggling right there.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 3:42pm

 R_P wrote:
 kurtster wrote:
Admit it or not, Trump has demonstrated strong restraint in using kinetic action during his tenure as POTUS so far.  I believe that will continue, unlike most others who oppose him.
 
Perhaps you could come us with US only stats ?  Not US and ...
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 3:34pm

 kurtster wrote:
Admit it or not, Trump has demonstrated strong restraint in using kinetic action during his tenure as POTUS so far.  I believe that will continue, unlike most others who oppose him.
🐂💩
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 2:55pm

 Proclivities wrote:


I thought his killing was a preemptive strike in response to "an imminent threat"; that's what Pompeo said on about fifteen different news programs last Sunday. (#sarcasm) 

...
Anyhow, my initial point was why anti-war sentiment seems to have been revitalized - no one wants American soldiers being sent off to some other mid-east nation all over again.  Well, maybe some people do, but not too many, I think.

 
I should have said also in retaliation as well as a preemptive strike.

And my initial point was that this newly re found anti war stuff is more based on partisan fear mongering than anything else.  Admit it or not, Trump has demonstrated strong restraint in using kinetic action during his tenure as POTUS so far.  I believe that will continue, unlike most others who oppose him.  I did not vote for him so we would be in more wars, nor did most of the others who voted for him.  I thought that a vote for Hillary would be a vote for WW III (among other things) based upon her track record ...

So thanks for the repartee today.  I got a lot out of my head and can now worry about things that I have some control over now.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 2:04pm



 Proclivities wrote:


I thought his killing was a preemptive strike in response to "an imminent threat"; that's what Pompeo said on about fifteen different news programs last Sunday.
(#sarcasm)  Anyhow, no one has claimed that the contractor (who was reportedly a linguist for a military contractor named Valiant Integrated, not a run-of-the-mill, lawless mercenary) had a life which was less important than Soleimani's.  Pretty much everyone concurs that Soleimani was a very bad guy.  It's hard to say what should've been done about him, but the last two Presidents didn't seem too keen on the idea of assassinating him, perhaps for different reasons and timing - or probably more because they listened to their advisers.  Did his death prevent this imminent threat from transpiring?  We don't know - there's no way to know.  Iran was a little more "fettered" when the nuclear deal (which they adhered to) was in place.  Anyhow, my initial point was why anti-war sentiment seems to have been revitalized - no one wants American soldiers being sent off to some other mid-east nation all over again.  Well, maybe some people do, but not too many, I think.

 

C'mon man, tow the lunatic line, will ya?
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 2:00pm



 kurtster wrote:
Let us not forget that Soleimani's death was in retaliation for the death of a US contractor earlier in the week. His demise was not unprovoked. Unless his life is more valuable than that of the contractor's.

I still do not believe that this will end up with our boots on the ground in Iran. But then again Obama famously promised no boots on the ground in Syria (and no more in Iraq for that matter). His side said and did nothing when he broke that promise, except for maybe Bernie ... but Bernie is not really a democrat ...

Or so we should have done nothing and let Soleimani (and Iran) continue unfettered ? Is that what you think we should have done instead ?
 
I thought his killing was a preemptive strike in response to "an imminent threat"; that's what Pompeo said on about fifteen different news programs last Sunday. (#sarcasm)  Anyhow, no one has claimed that the contractor (who was reportedly a linguist for a military contractor named Valiant Integrated, not a run-of-the-mill, lawless mercenary) had a life which was less important than Soleimani's.  Pretty much everyone concurs that Soleimani was a very bad guy.  It's hard to say what should've been done about him, but the last two Presidents didn't seem too keen on the idea of assassinating him, perhaps for different reasons and timing - or probably more because they listened to their advisers.  Did his death prevent this imminent threat from transpiring?  We don't know - there's no way to know.  Iran was a little more "fettered" when the nuclear deal (which they adhered to) was in place.  Anyhow, my initial point was why anti-war sentiment seems to have been revitalized - no one wants American soldiers being sent off to some other mid-east nation all over again.  Well, maybe some people do, but not too many, I think.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 1:32pm

 Proclivities wrote:


 kurtster wrote:
If we are speaking about Iran, which I am assuming we are, we have been at war with Iran since 1979 when they stormed our embassy in Tehran and took 52 hostages. They just stormed our embassy or tried to in Baghdad last week, which led to the timely demise of Soleimani....
 
  That is hyperbole which could be used in order to justify any action that Trump may take.  By such a metric we have been at war with Russia since 1945, does that mean we should start dropping bombs there?  Other than possibly the Lebanon "intervention" in the early '80s and the so-called "Tanker War" in the late '80s, we have not formally "been at war" with Iran.  Yes, it has often been an extremely adversarial relationship since the Shah was ousted, but as I said: I think part of what is riling people up is the idea of another war - a "new" one, with American soldiers, deployed in combat on foreign soil, once again.
  Anyhow, the Iranian Army or government did not storm the embassy in Baghdad (which I'm sure you know is in Iraq), though clearly some Iranian-backed combatants were among the protesters and the planners could have been Iranian governmental operatives.
 My point was not speculating as to whether the President's apparent course of action is legal or not, or if it will be advantageous or disastrous; I was adding to SirD's points about the apparent re-emergence of anti-war sentiments.
 
Scrawled on the wall at the embassy in Baghdad, translated says "Soleimani is our leader" according to the source for this picture.
.

Let us not forget that Soleimani's death was in retaliation for the death of a US contractor earlier in the week.  His demise was not unprovoked.  Unless his life is more valuable than that of the contractor's.

I still do not believe that this will end up with our boots on the ground in Iran.  But then again Obama famously promised no boots on the ground in Syria (and no more in Iraq for that matter).  His side said and did nothing when he broke that promise, except for maybe Bernie ... but Bernie is not really a democrat ...

Or so we should have done nothing and let Soleimani (and Iran) continue unfettered ?  Is that what you think we should have done instead ?
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 11:24am

 kurtster wrote:
If we are speaking about Iran, which I am assuming we are, we have been at war with Iran since 1979 1953 (...)

FYBS
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 9:20am



 kurtster wrote:
If we are speaking about Iran, which I am assuming we are, we have been at war with Iran since 1979 when they stormed our embassy in Tehran and took 52 hostages. They just stormed our embassy or tried to in Baghdad last week, which led to the timely demise of Soleimani....
 
  That is hyperbole which could be used in order to justify any action that Trump may take.  By such a metric we have been at war with Russia since 1945, does that mean we should start dropping bombs there?  Other than possibly the Lebanon "intervention" in the early '80s and the so-called "Tanker War" in the late '80s, we have not formally "been at war" with Iran.  Yes, it has often been an extremely adversarial relationship since the Shah was ousted, but as I said: I think part of what is riling people up is the idea of another war - a "new" one, with American soldiers, deployed in combat on foreign soil, once again.
  Anyhow, the Iranian Army or government did not storm the embassy in Baghdad (which I'm sure you know is in Iraq), though clearly some Iranian-backed combatants were among the protesters and the planners could have been Iranian governmental operatives.
 My point was not speculating as to whether the President's apparent course of action is legal or not, or if it will be advantageous or disastrous; I was adding to SirD's points about the apparent re-emergence of anti-war sentiments.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 8:17am

 sirdroseph wrote:
 islander wrote:


 sirdroseph wrote:
Haven't seen this spirit in here since 2008. Welcome back anti war people, I know you have been waiting a long time to be against war again.

{#Cowboy}

 

Well maybe you just aren't paying attention (or maybe you are just being intentionally selective), but the anti-war topic seems to be pretty steadily populated.  War is a pretty unpopular sentiment all around here. If you look hard enough, you'll even find me giving props to Trump for staying out of conflict for as long as he managed. Of course he's about to rectify that in a monumental way, but it was nice while it lasted.
 
Better check the dates on anti war and violence threads again homey.  Miami, your consistency is noted.{#Clap}
 

thanks

make worf not war

feel free to use that as your new tattoo



edit: r_p has been here too

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 8:09am

 Proclivities wrote:


 sirdroseph wrote:

Actually a more accurate description is criticism based upon whether they like the person doing the warring.  I believe most of us by nature are against war, but there are some who are only vocal in opposition when it fits their partisan narrative.
 

Perhaps, but keep in mind: the "old" wars have been going on so long that many people are bored with them, forgotten about them, or have conceded that there's nothing that can be done to resolve them.  The concept of a "new" war may be what is riling some folks up.
 
If we are speaking about Iran, which I am assuming we are, we have been at war with Iran since 1979 when they stormed our embassy in Tehran and took 52 hostages.  They just stormed our embassy or tried to in Baghdad last week, which led to the timely demise of Soleimani.  A general leading this assault on our embassy in a country other than his own which he has theoretically been restricted to for many years by treaty and the UN.  Iran has been provoking war the whole time.  Mining the Straits of Hormuz, blowing up or seizing oil tankers, blowing up oil fields, seizing our Navy vessels and shooting down drones in international spaces, let alone chanting death to America and Israel the whole dang time.

So Trump takes out the current mastermind and everyone is up in arms, right ?  This is the first direct action against Iran since Reagan went in and rescued our hostages, IIRC.  And we did not even attack Iran.  We blew up the dude in Iraq, not Iran.  Soleimani is a real bad guy, but ...  That is all I have been hearing about him.  The but parts.  Seems like those who are saying the but parts care more about Iran, than America.

I am not worried about this leading to war.  We're already involved in one.  This is the oldest one we have been involved in over there.  I am more of the opinion that this will slow down Iran.  They respect power and force.  There has been a 32 year vacuum of power directed at Iran since Reagan.  Obama gave them $150 billion to go quietly away.  How did that work out ?  All the doomsday scenarios presented because of Trump's foreign policy have been wrong, to date.  We should already be in the middle of a Nuclear Winter by now if all the experts were correct about Trump.

Pardon my terseness.
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 7:51am

 Proclivities wrote:


 sirdroseph wrote:

Actually a more accurate description is criticism based upon whether they like the person doing the warring.  I believe most of us by nature are against war, but there are some who are only vocal in opposition when it fits their partisan narrative.
 

Perhaps, but keep in mind: the "old" wars have been going on so long that many people are bored with them, forgotten about them, or have conceded that there's nothing that can be done to resolve them.  The concept of a "new" war may be what is riling some folks up.
 
That is fair and may account for some of the passion, but as Peter Griffin said to congress when attempting to pass the cigarette bill........"C'mon!"  Ted Nugent and James Woods can be the inverted example of this discussion, but does this make them objective?{#Lol}
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 7:43am



 sirdroseph wrote:

Actually a more accurate description is criticism based upon whether they like the person doing the warring.  I believe most of us by nature are against war, but there are some who are only vocal in opposition when it fits their partisan narrative.
 

Perhaps, but keep in mind: the "old" wars have been going on so long that many people are bored with them, forgotten about them, or have conceded that there's nothing that can be done to resolve them.  The concept of a "new" war may be what is riling some folks up.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 7:40am

 islander wrote:


 kurtster wrote:

Hah !  You're not suggesting that being anti war is just a fad are ya ?  {#Wink}
 

Yeah, it's bad no matter how you slice it. Exploiting something like this for political gain just makes it worse.

 
And your consistency is also noted {#Rolleyes}
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 7:40am



 sirdroseph wrote:
 islander wrote:


 sirdroseph wrote:
Haven't seen this spirit in here since 2008. Welcome back anti war people, I know you have been waiting a long time to be against war again.

{#Cowboy}


 

Well maybe you just aren't paying attention (or maybe you are just being intentionally selective), but the anti-war topic seems to be pretty steadily populated.  War is a pretty unpopular sentiment all around here. If you look hard enough, you'll even find me giving props to Trump for staying out of conflict for as long as he managed. Of course he's about to rectify that in a monumental way, but it was nice while it lasted.
 
Better check the dates on anti war and violence threads again homey.  Miami, your consistency is noted.
{#Clap}
 
well I only scrolled down 3 years in the anti war thread, but I figured that was enough to demonstrate the point. Oh look, it started 9 years ago... what was that you were saying?


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 7:39am

 sirdroseph wrote:
 islander wrote:


 sirdroseph wrote:
Haven't seen this spirit in here since 2008. Welcome back anti war people, I know you have been waiting a long time to be against war again.

{#Cowboy}

 

Well maybe you just aren't paying attention (or maybe you are just being intentionally selective), but the anti-war topic seems to be pretty steadily populated.  War is a pretty unpopular sentiment all around here. If you look hard enough, you'll even find me giving props to Trump for staying out of conflict for as long as he managed. Of course he's about to rectify that in a monumental way, but it was nice while it lasted.
 
Better check the dates on anti war and violence threads again homey.  Miami, your consistency is noted.{#Clap}
 
{#Yes}
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 7:37am



 kurtster wrote:

Hah !  You're not suggesting that being anti war is just a fad are ya ?  
{#Wink}
 



Yeah, it's bad no matter how you slice it. Exploiting something like this for political gain just makes it worse.

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 7:35am

 islander wrote:


 sirdroseph wrote:
Haven't seen this spirit in here since 2008. Welcome back anti war people, I know you have been waiting a long time to be against war again.

{#Cowboy}

 

Well maybe you just aren't paying attention (or maybe you are just being intentionally selective), but the anti-war topic seems to be pretty steadily populated.  War is a pretty unpopular sentiment all around here. If you look hard enough, you'll even find me giving props to Trump for staying out of conflict for as long as he managed. Of course he's about to rectify that in a monumental way, but it was nice while it lasted.
 
Better check the dates on anti war and violence threads again homey.  Miami, your consistency is noted.{#Clap}
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 7:33am



 sirdroseph wrote:
Haven't seen this spirit in here since 2008. Welcome back anti war people, I know you have been waiting a long time to be against war again.

{#Cowboy}


 

Well maybe you just aren't paying attention (or maybe you are just being intentionally selective), but the anti-war topic seems to be pretty steadily populated.  War is a pretty unpopular sentiment all around here. If you look hard enough, you'll even find me giving props to Trump for staying out of conflict for as long as he managed. Of course he's about to rectify that in a monumental way, but it was nice while it lasted.
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: Jan 7, 2020 - 7:31am

 kurtster wrote:

Hah !  You're not suggesting that being anti war is just a fad are ya ?  {#Wink}
 
Actually a more accurate description is criticism based upon whether they like the person doing the warring.  I believe most of us by nature are against war, but there are some who are only vocal in opposition when it fits their partisan narrative.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next