Iranian war

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

By the way, your own records show your warships never broadcast their warnings on commercial frequencies, and the airline was flying a commercial air route. It may have been a mistake, but it was a really bad one. One that normal people would think have no chance of happening. For surely there was a protocol in place to test for commercial airliners. Hence a country like Iran would have every reason to think it deliberate.

I am way past caring what Iran thinks about anything. They created the situation that resulted in the airliner being shot down when they viciously attacked our other warship.

0 Replies

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

I never did overlook that part. I posted the commercial airliner shooting because of your hypocrisy. If you are going to apply a standard to another countries actions - you must also apply the same standards to your country's actions.

I personally can see how it happened the way you describe. I can also see how Iran would be very skeptical of the U.S. version. The point is, your view "Iranian attacks on the U.S' is hypocritical, employing double standards that you don't apply to your own countries actions.

The only way there could be hypocrisy or a double standard would be if I were unfairly condemning Iran for an accidental attack that they made against us.

I've never seen anyone try to make a case that any of Iran's attacks against us was accidental. I doubt that such a case can be made.

I accept Russia's explanation that they believed that Korean Air flight 007 was hostile. I do criticize them a bit because there was no urgency and they had time to double check, but I do fully believe them when they say that they believed it was hostile. So actually I do apply the same standards.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

Even were I to consider such an evil viewpoint - it would still be a blind viewpoint, failing to consider the repercussions on my own people.

Those repercussions don't matter in a nuclear war. In a nuclear war the only thing that matters is exterminating the enemy and smashing everything that they've ever built.

vikorr wrote:

I would hope you need more than decades old events, or there would be a long list of countries that need to pre-emptively strike the U.S:

If anyone wants to have a war with us, that's fine with me. But our military gets to bomb them mercilessly until they've run out of targets.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Those repercussions don't matter in a nuclear war

We have very different views on this.

Quote:

If anyone wants to have a war with us, that's fine with me. But our military gets to bomb them mercilessly until they've run out of targets.

I was just pointing out, once again, your hypocrisy when it comes to what you believe justifies pre-emptive strikes. By your standards, there are a lot of countries that should pre-emptively attack the U.S. - displaying once again the hypocrisy on your part.

Whether or not they would be successful is an entirely different matter.

And once again, you show a bloodthirsty bent.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

The only way there could be hypocrisy or a double standard would be if I were unfairly condemning Iran for an accidental attack that they made against us.

The hypocrisy exists in what you are willing to consider, and what you are not. As I've said multiple times - you emply a very narrow view, excluding all other views, to justify your countries actions...then when it comes to other countries, you reverse the lense. It's hypocritical. It's dishonest.

Honesty, as you often claim to stick to - involves considering all sides, admitting all subjective assessments, admitting qualifiers, admitting knowledge gaps, etc. You are not doing this, at all. You remind me, in this way, of a religious ideologist who starts with an ending, and tries to make all information fit into the ending, disregarding anything that doesn't.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

What I do is adhere to the facts.

Since we are the good guys, the facts usually show that we are right and everyone who opposes us is wrong.

That isn't bias. It is merely the truth.

I do actually criticize the US when I can factually see that we've done wrong. There is another thread here on a2k where I am defending Russia and criticizing the US. Take a look at my position here:

http://able2know.org/topic/519470-3#post-6858078

1 Reply

@vikorr,

The strikes wouldn't be preemptive. Iran has been attacking us since 1979.

I don't think it is at all hypocritical to treat a rogue nation differently from a respectable civilized country.

I also don't think it is hypocritical to treat bank robbers differently from police officers.

I think the police officer/bank robber metaphor is perfectly apt. I think I've used it before in a past discussion with you about this same topic.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

What I do is adhere to the facts.

Uh huh

Quote:

Since we are the good guys, the facts usually show that we are right and everyone else is wrong.

Uh huh. Don't know what histories you read. Most of your wars were for economic benefit, and little else (excluding Somalia, and Afghanistan). Good guys don't invade other countries for money. There were excuses each time of course, but behind the unbelievably poor reasons for invasions (WW2 excluding), were overwhelming economic benefits for the U.S. (the only one I can't find reason for, is Iraq 2003)

Quote:

I do actually criticize the US when I can factually see that we've done wrong

Good for you - you can see some blatant unarguable facts...while all others done by your country are interpreted in your favour, and anything against interpreted through a different lense.

1 Reply

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

Most of your wars were for economic benefit, and little else (excluding Somalia, and Afghanistan). Good guys don't invade other countries for money. There were excuses each time of course, but behind the unbelievably poor reasons for invasions (WW2 excluding), were overwhelming economic benefits for the U.S. (the only one I can't find reason for, is Iraq 2003)

Most Cold War conflicts were to prevent Communism from taking over the world.

So, after excluding Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq 2003, WWII, and conflicts to prevent Communism, what are we left with?

vikorr wrote:

Good for you - you can see some blatant unarguable facts...while all others done by your country are interpreted in your favour, and anything against interpreted through a different lense.

I believe that I am interpreting everything accurately and fairly.

I also dispute the contention that good guys don't go to war for money. I certainly don't think we should seize loot unjustly, but if some tinpot dictator unjustly seizes the assets of a US business, I think that it would be perfectly legitimate for us to go to war over that.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

I see the armchair General is still spouting shite.

1 Reply

@eurocelticyankee,

You cannot point out a single thing that is inaccurate in my posts.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

How many women and children have you actually killed with your smart bombs and war talk or is it all just in that sick sad mind of yours.

Have you ever even served in the military or have you ever seen first hand what a bomb can do to.
I doubt it, just another armchair keyboard warrior probably still living with Mammy.

1 Reply

@eurocelticyankee,

Like I said, you cannot point out a single thing in my posts that is untrue.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

shhh listen .... is that Mammy calling you for dinner.

1 Reply

@eurocelticyankee,

Name-calling is a common trait among leftists. It happens whenever they are unable to add anything intelligent to a conversation.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

which is you calling someone with whom you disagree, "stupid". Sorta engaging in the very thing youre blaming others for.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

It has nothing to do with disagreement. It has to do with the fact that his arguments are based on name-calling instead of being based on challenging my facts or my logic.

0 Replies

"Sustain and modernize the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile with five programs currently underway (W76-2 Modification Program, B61-12 Life Extension Program, W80-4 Life Extension Program, W88 Alteration 370, and W87-1 Modification Program)"
http://www.energy.gov/nnsa/budget

I wonder how long it will be until we start putting 455kt warheads on our ICBMs. Probably a few more years. But at least it's coming.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

I named you an armchair keyboard warrior which is what you are.

So what would you call somebody without any actual military or combat experience who sits in an armchair at a keyboard and rants about war.

3 Replies

@eurocelticyankee,

Your name-calling is just an attempt to distract from your inability to point out anything that I'm wrong about.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know