Jump to content
Airbrush

Is this war with Iran?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Who drew first blood... asking for a friend... well not a friend, some sweaty muscular guy with torn clothes just kicked my door down to ask... Um he has a very large... knife. 

Edited by Moontanman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Who drew first blood... asking for a friend... well not a friend, some sweaty muscular guy with torn clothes just kicked my door down to ask... Um he has a very large... knife. 

Calm down now, Hulk...that's just a mirror...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or...      He's watching the last Rambo movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MigL said:

Or...      He's watching the last Rambo movie.

Or the first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, iNow said:
17 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

So literally just pick a random Democrat who was in office at the time

Just to be sure we’re clear, it appears you cannot name even one. Is that correct?

I'll be truthful with you, I find it a little dishonest of you to quote the first part of what I said, and entirely ignore the second. Even cutting the sentence in half. 

 

17 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

So literally just pick a random Democrat who was in office at the time, and they likely said nothing. Here's a list of names of the 120th congress (2011)  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/112th_United_States_Congress

If you didn't wish to read into the link, and/or didn't take that to be as good as providing a name directly, you could simply quote the entire thing and say something like "I don't believe providing a list is as good as you personally giving some examples." If we're going to have a good faith discussion, I think this is a must.

 

17 hours ago, iNow said:

Just to be sure we’re clear, it appears you cannot name even one. Is that correct?

No. That is not correct. 

Allow me to pull a top name from the list, which was seemingly your justification for picking Mitch McConnell as an example (it seems like a reasonable way to do it.)

In 2011, Nancy Pelosi did not believe Obama required congressional approval for his air operations in Libya. https://thehill.com/homenews/house/166843-pelosi-backs-obama-on-libya

In 2011, Chuck Schumer also did not believe that Obama required congressional approval for his air operations in Libya, however he did believe they should remain "limited" in scope. https://observer.com/2011/03/schumer-cautions-against-expanding-role-in-libya/

Again, for reference, those killed well over 1,100 individuals, and injured around 4,500 more, and involved hundreds of US air strikes across a countries sovereign territory.

 

Now, with Trump ordering a drone strike on an Iranian terrorist, both of them have stepped up saying Trump has crossed the line and violated the war powers resolution. This is hypocrisy of the democratic party.

Note two things however. Firstly, I fully acknowledge that the GOP is just as hypocritical in this area. And Secondly, I fully acknowledge you never claimed that democrats are not hypocritical. This is in response to your request. 

19 hours ago, iNow said:

Which ones?

Which democrats argued for increased military autonomy under Obama but argue now for less under Trump. Be specific. References would help, too. This is news to me.

 

Edited by Raider5678

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

I'll be truthful with you, I find it a little dishonest of you to quote the first part of what I said, and entirely ignore the second. Even cutting the sentence in half. 

 

It is you being dishonest. iNow asked for a name of someone who did something. You gave him a list of people who MIGHT have done something. It boggles the mind that you think that is the same thing.

1 hour ago, Raider5678 said:

In 2011, Nancy Pelosi did not believe Obama required congressional approval for his air operations in Libya. https://thehill.com/homenews/house/166843-pelosi-backs-obama-on-libya

In 2011, Chuck Schumer also did not believe that Obama required congressional approval for his air operations in Libya, however he did believe they should remain "limited" in scope. https://observer.com/2011/03/schumer-cautions-against-expanding-role-in-libya/

There, now was that so hard?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Raider5678 said:

I'll be truthful with you, I find it a little dishonest of you to quote the first part of what I said, and entirely ignore the second

I'll be truthful with you. I don't care.

Now, just to be sure I'm tracking what you're saying... Are you suggesting it was Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer who had a different approach with Obama than with Trump, was it the entire 112th congress as you originally replied, or was it something in between?

If we can agree it was something in between, then perhaps we can also agree to move on beyond this silliness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, iNow said:

If we can agree it was something in between, then perhaps we can also agree to move on beyond this silliness.

Blaming Obama is the default position of Republicans. It has nothing to do with the reality of the day, accountability for unlawful acts or actual governance.

Obama drone bad, Trump drone good.

Just another day for double standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As per topic?: US airbase in Iraq hit by rockets

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-51028954

 

Per CNN: https://www.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/us-iran-soleimani-tensions-intl-01-07-20

"Iran’s state-run news Press TV reports the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) targeted the US airbase of Ain al-Asad in Anbar province in western Iraq."

Apparently ballistic missiles launched from Iran itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rangerx said:

Just another day for double standards.

To Raiders credit, he was not blaming Obama, but was instead trying to make sure I (or those who lean left more broadly) was not applying double standards. He and you are aligned on this point. 

18 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

As per topic?: US airbase in Iraq hit by rockets

We’re going to see lots of this. In the meantime, the administration has yet to provide evidence of an imminent attack. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, iNow said:

To Raiders credit, he was not blaming Obama, but was instead trying to make sure I (or those who lean left more broadly) was not applying double standards. He and you are aligned on this point. 

We’re going to see lots of this. In the meantime, the administration has yet to provide evidence of an imminent attack. 

Prior to Soleimani's assassination?

There is an attack happening right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, iNow said:

To Raiders credit, he was not blaming Obama, but was instead trying to make sure I (or those who lean left more broadly) was not applying double standards. He and you are aligned on this point. 

Yeah, it wasn't directed at Raider, who's point stands. It was in the broader sense that the discussion invariably ends up there. For distraction, and little else.

I'm sure after Trump's gone, his antics will resurface and in typical fashion, Republicans will dismiss it as ancient history or in otherwise revisionist form.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Prior to Soleimani's assassination?

Correct.

Reminder of context: We discussed this in terms of justifiable reasons Trump would take this step unilaterally and without consulting congress. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, iNow said:

Correct.

Reminder of context: We discussed this in terms of justifiable reasons Trump would take this step unilaterally and without consulting congress. 

Thanks INow. I thought that was what you meant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Obviously in response.

What did you expect? Or the very least a response to what?

An act of war?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just saw a breaking news announcement, Iran has launched another wave of missiles against US air Bases and is threatening our smaller allies in the region. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rangerx said:

What did you expect? Or the very least a response to what?

An act of war?

I wouldn't have expected missiles to have been launched from Iranian soil (if in fact they were...other reports say they came from 10K / 6 miles away. Iran is obviously further than that from Al-Assad Airbase)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I wouldn't have expected missiles to have been launched from Iranian soil (if in fact they were...other reports say they came from 10K / 6 miles away. Iran is obviously further than that from Al-Assad Airbase)

Soon we'll know, but I suffixed an additional question.

Is the Iranian "response" and act of war in response to an act of war?

Seems to me we have a war going on here. A unilateral one as far as the US goes at this point.

Edited by rangerx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Soon we'll know, but I suffixed an additional question.

Is the Iranian "response" and act of war in response to an act of war?

Seems to me we have a war going on here. A unilateral one as far as the US goes at this point.

I don't know any strict definition. But I know they are clearly acts of violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I don't know any strict definition. But I know they are clearly acts of violence.

Do you think it might be prudent to discuss this with congress?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rangerx said:

Do you think it might be prudent to discuss this with congress?

I would think so. Unless they are responding to imminent threats...and even then the "gang of eight" should be notified, should they not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Whether D Trump's actions were  an act of war, or even a declaration of war, is academic now.
Iran's retaliation  puts the US in a state of war with Iran.

The president is scheduled to address the nation sometime tonight.
I have a feeling Tomahawk cruise missiles will be flying towards Iranian targets before local daybreak.

 

edit
All this just to distract for impeachment !

Edited by MigL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, iNow said:

Now, just to be sure I'm tracking what you're saying... Are you suggesting it was Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer who had a different approach with Obama than with Trump, was it most of the entire 112th congress as you originally replied, or was it something in between?

I originally replied with what I considered to mean as most of the 112th congress. So I modified what you said there(in bold). That's my position. This is what I believe you would say is somewhere in between. 

We both agree here, or at least agree closely enough that it doesn't matter to continue discussing.

2 minutes ago, MigL said:

All this just to distract for impeachment !

I doubt all of this was purely to distract from impeachment.

I do not doubt that it is a bonus in Trump's mind, however.

Edited by Raider5678

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I would think so. Unless they are responding to imminent threats...and even then the "gang of eight" should be notified, should they not?

Indeed they should and of course, imminent threats command special attention.

 

That said, though we know Soleimani is a bad guy, imminence is yet to be disclosed.

Good governance provides for that, if not arranged prior to the undertaking but near immediate after execution to follow up.

I want to see hard evidence of imminence. You'd think if they had it, they be blowing their horns at a deafening db.

And I'm talking about a tangible conspiracy and paper trail against the USA, not some amateur appointee's opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.