Rand Paul: Trump's Syria strike will not 'make us safer'

[SolomonVII]

I think you forgot that the US started it by assassinating Iran's first elected president...over oil rights.

You may have forgotten that the US installed a brutal dictator over Iran and supported him for 30 years, then gave him asylum when he was ousted.

You may have also forgot that the US blatantly shot down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing around 300 civilians.

And you may not realize that the US has ringed Iran with military forces.

And you seem not to have noticed that Iran's actions have only been against US forces within their region...just as the US would react to other nations operating around US borders (like Cuba, Nicaragua, and Grenada).

Does Iran sponsor terrorism in the US? No, Saudi Arabia does.

If the only way the US can get Americans killed is by messing with Iran, then Iran is not a threat to the US.

Sounds like you are firmly on the Iranian side of the Iranian/American side of the conflict.
Which is fine, I suppose, for as long as you recognize that Iran and America are enemies (and not just "enemies"), that was the point I had been disputing in the first place.

 

[LoveBeingAMuslimah]

Except the Saudis are not actually political or social allies, they're just business associates with deep pockets.

Assad and Iran are only "enemies" to the US because they are Saudi Arabia's enemies, not because they've ever threatened the US.

I think you forgot that the US started it by assassinating Iran's first elected president...over oil rights.

You may have forgotten that the US installed a brutal dictator over Iran and supported him for 30 years, then gave him asylum when he was ousted.

You may have also forgot that the US blatantly shot down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing around 300 civilians.

And you may not realize that the US has ringed Iran with military forces.

And you seem not to have noticed that Iran's actions have only been against US forces within their region...just as the US would react to other nations operating around US borders (like Cuba, Nicaragua, and Grenada).

If the only way the US can get Americans killed is by messing with Iran, then Iran is not a threat to the US.

The Western Left "anti-war" movement wants "peace" with the mass murderer Assad. In the 1940s they wanted "peace" with Hitler. Never forget.

Does Iran sponsor terrorism in the US? No, Saudi Arabia does.

How does Saudi Arabia do so?

 

[RDKirk]

Sounds like you are firmly on the Iranian side of the Iranian/American side of the conflict.
Which is fine, I suppose, for as long as you recognize that Iran and America are enemies (and not just "enemies"), that was the point I had been disputing in the first place.

No, I'm not. Not at all.

I'm saying that it's absolute and utter stupidity on the part of the US for there even to be an Iranian/American conflict.

Iran is an enemy only because and only for as long as America makes it an enemy.

And America is making Iran an enemy for the sake of oil companies that are in bed with Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is that active enemy of the US and the west. It's Saudi Arabia that is supporting ISIS and supplying the terrorists who are "coming soon to a theater near you."

 

[Armoured]

No, I'm not. Not at all.

I'm saying that it's absolute and utter stupidity on the part of the US for there even to be an Iranian/American conflict.

Iran is an enemy only because and only for as long as America makes it an enemy.

And America is making Iran an enemy for the sake of oil companies that are in bed with Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is that active enemy of the US and the west. It's Saudi Arabia that is supporting ISIS and supplying the terrorists who are "coming soon to a theater near you."

Good luck. Those facts don't fit the narrative.

 

[SolomonVII]

No, I'm not. Not at all.

I'm saying that it's absolute and utter stupidity on the part of the US for there even to be an Iranian/American conflict.

Iran is an enemy only because and only for as long as America makes it an enemy.

And America is making Iran an enemy for the sake of oil companies that are in bed with Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia is that active enemy of the US and the west. It's Saudi Arabia that is supporting ISIS and supplying the terrorists who are "coming soon to a theater near you."

One would think that the last eight years of Obama would have put to bed the notion that Iran will reciprocate any love that America shows to it.
Obama bent over backwards to give Iran anything it could ask for, and Iran's response was "Death to America".
The if "only America was not so evil" argument fails, because if only America was not so evil, in any way you define that evil, Iran is still Iran.
And as long as Iran is Islamist and ayatollah, America is the great Satan. That is their religion, and it is something that they actually believe in. They believe in it much more in fact than many Americans believe in America.

If only America nuked SA, God forbid, Iran would still see America as the Great Satan.

 

[RDKirk]

One would think that the last eight years of Obama would have put to bed the notion that Iran will reciprocate any love that America shows to it.
Obama bent over backwards to give Iran anything it could ask for, and Iran's response was "Death to America".

Killed their first elected president.
Installed a brutal dictator.
Shot down a civilian airliner.
Circled them with hostile military forces.
Identified them as a regime that must be destroyed.
Aided their mortal enemy Iraq against them (I personally prepared intelligence reports that went to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war).
Never for a moment stopped breathing threats against them.

It's silly to talk about them "reciprocating any love" when no "love" has been shown to them--only evil--and there is no reason to expect them not to continue to be angry when the US has never stopped threatening them.

America needs to just leave them alone.

 

[SolomonVII]

Killed their first elected president.
Installed a brutal dictator.
Shot down a civilian airliner.
Circled them with hostile military forces.
Identified them as a regime that must be destroyed.
Aided their mortal enemy Iraq against them (I personally prepared intelligence reports that went to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war).
Never for a moment stopped breathing threats against them.

It's silly to talk about them "reciprocating any love" when no "love" has been shown to them--only evil--and there is no reason to expect them not to continue to be angry when the US has never stopped threatening them.

America needs to just leave them alone.

Like I say, we are both in agreement that these two countries are enemies.
But what I always find odd is how a soldier in the American army could actually go about killing for what they believe to be such an evil regime, and still be able to sleep with himself.

 

[RDKirk]

Like I say, we are both in agreement that these two countries are enemies.
But what I always find odd is how a soldier in the American army could actually go about killing for what they believe to be such an evil regime, and still be able to sleep with himself.

First, the oath says, "...I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic...."

Second, your rush over the Absurdity Abyss with "such an evil regime" is merely typical Internet resort to extremes when logical argument runs out.

The fact is that if the agents and stooges of Saudi Arabia weren't pushing the US into false conflict with Iran, it would be more apparent that Saudi Arabia was the primary Middle East danger to the US.

 

[SolomonVII]

Second, your rush over the Absurdity Abyss with "such an evil regime" is merely typical Internet resort to extremes when logical argument runs out. ...

You have used the example twice now.
If shooting down a civilian plane out of malice does not define evil, I have no idea what does define evil. It is absurd to think that this is not evil.
But if you do not believe that it was done out of malice, then it is a false point to be making for you to be doubling down on in the first place.
Is it too much that I take you at your word, and note that you yourself have stated that no love has been shown to them, only evil.
Any logic or allusion to the facts of Obama's eight years of apology tours was thereby brushed aside with your own belief that America has only shown Iran evil.

If it is an absurd abyss, nay an Absurdity Abyss, to take you at your word, then I I am guilty as charged.

 

[RDKirk]

You have used the example twice now.
If shooting down a civilian plane out of malice does not define evil, I have no idea what does define evil. It is absurd to think that this is not evil.
But if you do not believe that it was done out of malice, then it is a false point to be making in the first place.

I think it was done out of politically generated callousness. Politics generates aggressiveness where aggressiveness is unnecessary.

It does put soldiers in a bad position, with most having the attitude of General Danial (Chappie) James:

"This is my country and I believe in her, and I believe in her flag, and I’ll defend her, and I’ll fight for her and serve her. If she has any ills, I’ll stand by her and hold her hand until in God’s given time, through her wisdom and her consideration for the welfare of the entire nation, things are made right again.”

 

[TLK Valentine]

Like I say, we are both in agreement that these two countries are enemies.

You didn't say why... perhaps now you understand?

But what I always find odd is how a soldier in the American army could actually go about killing for what they believe to be such an evil regime, and still be able to sleep with himself.

Many don't.

Posttraumatic stress disorder - Wikipedia

 

[LoveBeingAMuslimah]

I can't believe this mentality still exists: "Saudi Arabia is the real enemy. It supports ISIS. Iran is cool. Be okay with it even though it supports genocide in Syria and Iraq, because, well....supposedly it ain't attacking us."

Regarding specious claim about Saudi Arabia supporting ISIS:


"The investigations proved that the cell was involved in the terrorist operation that targeted worshipers at the Prophet’s Mosque last year, by providing the suicide bomber, Naer Musallam Hammad al-Nujaidi – a Saudi national – with the explosive belt."

ISIS has never attacked inside Iran even though it is one of Assad's principle backers as well as the Iraqi Shi'a militias that are fighting against ISIS in Iraq. Hmm.

Details emerge about ISIS cell members involved in the Prophet's Mosque attack

Regarding Iran's good nature and why we should ally ourselves with them even as they unabashedly back a genocidal terrorist and ethnic and sectarian cleansing:

The chief commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (I.R.G.C.) says Iran’s revolution has now “crossed borders,” is expanding, and has defeated the “Arrogance” – a term Iranian leaders use for the United States. “This revolution has now turned into an instrument for the expansion of the Islamic revolution and promotion of the God’s religion around the world,” Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari told a gathering of I.R.G.C. commanders and top clerics on Tuesday. He boasted that Iran’s regional proxies – what he termed as the “resistance front” – are exporting Iran’s revolution across the region, and stressed that Iranian youth are also more motivated now to defend the revolution, including in foreign countries, than they were during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. He further explained that the country’s “Islamic revolution is at its third stage, which is the establishment of the Islamic government” around the world. “The main threat to our country is the danger of antirevolutionary vision based on American Islam that exists in the country,” he warned, in an implicit criticism of Iranian politicians and activists who advocate for improving ties with the West.

I.R.G.C. Chief: Iran’s Revolution Is Expanding and Helping Establish Global “Islamic Government”

With God’s help, all plots by America, Israel and despised and anti-Islam Saudi Arabia against the Islamic Revolution have been defeated,” he told the audience. And he credited Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who has the final say in all state matters, for successfully exporting the Islamic Revolution outside Iran. “Enemies imposed the war [with Iraq in 1980s] on us to avert the export of the revolution to the world,” he said. “But thirty eight years after the revolution,” he added, “this movement has gone beyond the borders… Iran’s morale support to resistance forces in the region caused the defeat of these countries in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.”

I.R.G.C. Chief Calls for Preparing Next Generation to Defend Revolution and Export It Abroad

So why, more than a year after the nuclear deal that thawed US-Iran relations, are videos like this still being produced? FRANCE 24 spoke to Morteza Kazemian, an Iranian political analyst based in Paris.

[...]Why? Because anti-American discourse is a key element in defining the Islamic Republic of Iran, and it is used to justify everything from financial crises to divorce rates. It also helps consolidate the ultra-conservative camp’s base of supporters. In domestic matters, the United States is a useful enemy.

Why Iran keeps making anti-American propaganda videos

Maybe people should stop being naive and being played (or being straight up propagandists like Code Pink). Have they learned nothing from Iraq post-2003? When Iran-backed sectarian ideology temporarily dominates in a region and oppresses the majority (or large minority) of the population (i.e. Sunnis), something like ISIS emerges. And then people will almost solely focus on a symptom and not the cause. Context is only important when talking about Iran, apparently.

Tragic that Sunni countries are letting the Iranian regime get away with this and merely stand back and watch it try to exert control on Sunnis before their very eyes. Unfortunately for Iran, it won't succeed for long because the Sunnis are the majority. It is the 7th year of the genocide in Syria, yet the Sunnis are still a thorn in the side of Assad's regime and its allies.