Is this the end of Ahmadinejad?

#26
#26
Or just the waste and by-products are improperly disposed of say in the hands of some radical Muslims. It doesn't take much to create a dirty bomb. But honestly I think this is more about leverage than anything. Iran with a bomb or capabilities is treated much differently than one without these things.
 
#27
#27
volinbham said:
It's now no longer "if" they develop the bomb, it's how many and what delivery capabilities they acquire.
Click to expand...

By the time that they have figured out how to mount tactical nuclear weapons onto ballistic missiles, Israel will have turned Iran into a glass parking lot.

Ahmadinijad has said multiple times that Israel should be wiped off the map, and from a radical like him I would take that literally.

I personally think that Obama should not open up talks with Iran, but that is doubtful given his recent apology tour. Its funny to me how many people on the left see our intervention in the middle east, specifically in Afghanistan, a terrible thing. They just elected women into their government for the first time ever. The human rights abuses there are insane (public executions for gays, women oppression, etc.)
 
#28
#28
The irony how the Left preaches human rights but coddles the most despicable violators of human rights out there. The ones Obama runs to apologize to are the ones who have subjected Obama's core voting demographics to torture, bombings, imprisonment, second class status, etc. (gays, women, ethnic minorities, Jews, unions, etc.)
 
#29
#29
CSpindizzy said:
The irony how the Left preaches human rights but coddles the most despicable violators of human rights out there. The ones Obama runs to apologize to are the ones who have subjected Obama's core voting demographics to torture, bombings, imprisonment, second class status, etc. (gays, women, ethnic minorities, Jews, unions, etc.)
Click to expand...

Waterboarding is nothing compared to the torture that minorities and "criminals" are subject too. Petty thieves get their hands lopped off. I watched a very interesting documentary on this phenomenon called "kitchen accidents".

Basically its when the brides family doesnt provide a large enough dowry. The husband will drench his wife in cooking oil, burn her alive, and then file the "report", or whatever you want to call it, as a cooking accident. This happens frequently and there are no punishments for such action.
 
#30
#30
CSpindizzy said:
The irony how the Left preaches human rights but coddles the most despicable violators of human rights out there. The ones Obama runs to apologize to are the ones who have subjected Obama's core voting demographics to torture, bombings, imprisonment, second class status, etc. (gays, women, ethnic minorities, Jews, unions, etc.)
Click to expand...

Crap. There is irony on both sides here.

Saudi Arabia is one of the worst when it comes to human rights abuses and terrorism. Bush and his cronies coddled, befriended, and hung out with the Saudi royals on a regular basis. They are close family friends with the Bush's. To point out the irony of only the "Left" on this is hypocritical at best, loony at worst.
 
#31
#31
rjd970 said:
Crap. There is irony on both sides here.

Saudi Arabia is one of the worst when it comes to human rights abuses and terrorism. Bush and his cronies coddled, befriended, and hung out with the Saudi royals on a regular basis. They are close family friends with the Bush's. To point out the irony of only the "Left" on this is hypocritical at best, loony at worst.
Click to expand...

Ahhh. The cut and paste response every time. I never said there was no irony on the right. If you go back and read some of my posts from a year or more ago, you'd see I was quick to point that out many times. I never said the left is the "only" hypocritical side here. Those are your words and misunderstanding. Bush and the Saudis is one example. Obama and numerous thugs of the world makes your point uneven and lopsided as well.
 
#33
#33
CSpindizzy said:
Ahhh. The cut and paste response every time. I never said there was no irony on the right. If you go back and read some of my posts from a year or more ago, you'd see I was quick to point that out many times. I never said the left is the "only" hypocritical side here. Those are your words and misunderstanding. Bush and the Saudis is one example. Obama and numerous thugs of the world makes your point uneven and lopsided as well.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding with this? I don't need to go to your posts of a year ago, you said this yesterday:

The irony how the Left preaches human rights but coddles the most despicable violators of human rights out there.
Click to expand...

This is clearly a dig at Obama and the left only, and no misunderstanding on my part. If you really meant that the left isn't the only ones here you would have said something along the lines of american foreign policy, or both sides guilty of this. I guess you really meant to say this:

The irony of how we preach human rights but coddle the most despicable violators of human rights out there.
Click to expand...

Obama has his fair share of missteps and issues he's fumbled, but pointing out the "irony of the left" on this is silly.
 
#34
#34
the left is "in charge" now, rjd. When my side pointed out Clinton's screwups in the context of a Bush blunder or other policy decision, the left crowed on about "bringing up Bill Clinton..."
 
#35
#35
MG1968 said:
the left is "in charge" now, rjd. When my side pointed out Clinton's screwups in the context of a Bush blunder or other policy decision, the left crowed on about "bringing up Bill Clinton..."
Click to expand...

Wait...so I would have had a point here if we were talking in the context Clinton screw-ups, but since I am bringing up Bush the response is "the left is in charge now, rjd"?

Besides, I wasn't even talking about screwups per se, I was talking about the irony of how we coddle dictators and human rights abusers, and how it is not only a "left" or "right" problem.
 
#36
#36
no, that's not what I meant, and you know it.

Cspin is criticizing Obama, and you bring up Bush. When the left criticized Bush, and the right brought up Clinton, the left cried about it.

try this, whenever Obama is criticized, try to see the criticism for what it is and frame your counter argument in such a way that it doesn't involve Bush.
 
#37
#37
rjd970 said:
Are you kidding with this? I don't need to go to your posts of a year ago, you said this yesterday:



This is clearly a dig at Obama and the left only, and no misunderstanding on my part. If you really meant that the left isn't the only ones here you would have said something along the lines of american foreign policy, or both sides guilty of this. I guess you really meant to say this:



Obama has his fair share of missteps and issues he's fumbled, but pointing out the "irony of the left" on this is silly.
Click to expand...

Where did I say the left is the only one that does this? I said they were hypocrites in regard to that issue. But I have taken shots at hypocrisy on the right as well. I know the obvious is beyond you here so I'll help you out when I can. If the Left proves hypocrisy I will point it out. When the right does, I will do the same. I pointed out hypocrisy when Bush was President and have done the same here when Obama is President.

I pick a current and relevant story and point out blatant hypocrisy. Since the Dems are in power, they are the ones who get a greater focus. Are you telling me I am not allowed to point out hypocrisy unless I find every other case that is related?
 
#38
#38
CSpindizzy said:
Where did I say the left is the only one that does this? I said they were hypocrites in regard to that issue. But I have taken shots at hypocrisy on the right as well. I know the obvious is beyond you here so I'll help you out when I can. If the Left proves hypocrisy I will point it out. When the right does, I will do the same. I pointed out hypocrisy when Bush was President and have done the same here when Obama is President.

I pick a current and relevant story and point out blatant hypocrisy. Since the Dems are in power, they are the ones who get a greater focus. Are you telling me I am not allowed to point out hypocrisy unless I find every other case that is related?
Click to expand...

it would seem that we are not allowed to criticize Obama unless we can first find a way to criticize the previous administration. At least that's what I'm getting from folks like rjd and lawgator.
 
#39
#39
MG1968 said:
no, that's not what I meant, and you know it.

Cspin is criticizing Obama, and you bring up Bush. When the left criticized Bush, and the right brought up Clinton, the left cried about it.

try this, whenever Obama is criticized, try to see the criticism for what it is and frame your counter argument in such a way that it doesn't involve Bush.
Click to expand...

I think that is what you meant, and you just qualified with this response. Can you sit there and tell me you never brought up Clinton as a comparison when legitimate criticism of Bush was leveled?

Cspin has a point. Obama is coddling guys that have abysmal human rights records. I fully acknowledge that. But why the need to say it is the "irony of the left" and the ones "Obama runs to apologize too"? I stand by my claim...it is crap. This is something we as a country have a bad record of, and if Cspin wants to paint is as only a problem of the left, then sure, I am going to bring up a similar example on the right.
 
#40
#40
Certain people on the left cannot carry on a conversation without bringing up Bush. They are incapable of dealing with the present without harping on the past. Some on the left are still griping about Bush stealing the election from Gore. Even worse some are still harping on the Right's 'witchhunt' of Clinton's dirty habits with interns.

The point is that Obama set a high bar for himself and his followers bought into it. We heard how horrible, corrupt, and evil Bush and the GOP was and how many need to be impeached and/or prosecuted. We heard about how this evil would never happen under Obama. We heard about how Obama was never going to impose US hegemonic policies on other nations and how human rights was going to rule the day. I can go on and on how a new day in America was coming and how so much change and things were going to be so different. The point is that everything Obama ever promised is falling apart. What was his crutch during the election is not coming to pass after he sees firsthand his lack of experience proves he knows nothing how the system works. rjd wants to keep bringing up Bush? Well I beat on him as well. I pointed out this but in some rant about equality in bashing (equality seems to find its way even in bashing?) I am not offering a disclaimer to my statement and including decades old references to bipartisan hypocrisy as well. Perhaps I will include references to Lincoln in his debate with Douglas as a equal Republican-Democrat bashing.
 
#41
#41
rjd970 said:
I think that is what you meant, and you just qualified with this response. Can you sit there and tell me you never brought up Clinton as a comparison when legitimate criticism of Bush was leveled?

Cspin has a point. Obama is coddling guys that have abysmal human rights records. I fully acknowledge that. But why the need to say it is the "irony of the left" and the ones "Obama runs to apologize too"? I stand by my claim...it is crap. This is something we as a country have a bad record of, and if Cspin wants to paint is as only a problem of the left, then sure, I am going to bring up a similar example on the right.
Click to expand...

Your point is valid, save the "Obama runs to apologize too" comment. This is a legitimate argument made by the right. Obama's apology tour was pretty shameless, it did nothing to endear us to any of our enemies or allies. It only serves to make a country that is as weak as it has been for some time look weaker.
 
#42
#42
rjd970 said:
and if Cspin wants to paint is as only a problem of the left, then sure, I am going to bring up a similar example on the right.
Click to expand...

Good. Do so. I probably beat you to it years ago when it happened. But please get your statement correct. I never said the left had a monopoly on hypocrisy. ONLY was never used. Obama was the one who made this an issue. He built his foreign policy platform on all of this. Making this a pedestal issue makes pointing out hypocrisy easy. When someone builds their campaign on this behavior being wrong and the opposite being priority, Obama deserves getting pounded for such hypocrisy.
 
#43
#43
CSpindizzy said:
Where did I say the left is the only one that does this? I said they were hypocrites in regard to that issue. But I have taken shots at hypocrisy on the right as well. I know the obvious is beyond you here so I'll help you out when I can. If the Left proves hypocrisy I will point it out. When the right does, I will do the same. I pointed out hypocrisy when Bush was President and have done the same here when Obama is President.

I pick a current and relevant story and point out blatant hypocrisy. Since the Dems are in power, they are the ones who get a greater focus. Are you telling me I am not allowed to point out hypocrisy unless I find every other case that is related?
Click to expand...

I don't care what you do. But you're the one who pointed out the "irony of the left". What do you really expect, for people to just assume you mean the right is guilty as well? No one said you have to find every other case it is related, but don't be surprised when you frame the entire statement around it being a problem of the left and somebody calls out that the right is just as guilty.

Frankly, it has been a comedy show around here lately with some of the criticisms of Obama and the democrats. The crazy thing is the vast majority of it is completely legitimate, but I don't ever remember the criticism being what it is now when Bush was in office making his stupid mistakes.
 
#44
#44
KB5252 said:
Your point is valid, save the "Obama runs to apologize too" comment. This is a legitimate argument made by the right. Obama's apology tour was pretty shameless, it did nothing to endear us to any of our enemies or allies. It only serves to make a country that is as weak as it has been for some time look weaker.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying I agree with Obama's "apology tour" here...but at the same time, do you think the more hardline, tough approach made us look any stronger or worked any better over the last 8 years?

Similarly, I think it was a valid point of the left that we made more enemies than we got rid of with the Bush approach.
 
#46
#46
rjd970 said:
I'm not saying I agree with Obama's "apology tour" here...but at the same time, do you think the more hardline, tough approach made us look any stronger or worked any better over the last 8 years?

Similarly, I think it was a valid point of the left that we made more enemies than we got rid of with the Bush approach.
Click to expand...

No the hard line approach did not work as hoped. That being said there is huge ground in between "hard line" and "America is to blame in every instance". I think in some cases something in between to be about right. In other cases (Iran and North Korea) keeping the pressure on while toning down the rhetoric in public could possibly work, although i highly doubt it. So why not just keep the pressure on and try to negotiate from a position of power until there is no option but open hostility?
 
#47
#47
rjd970 said:
but I don't ever remember the criticism being what it is now when Bush was in office making his stupid mistakes.
Click to expand...

Seeing as how you didn't know I equally criticised Bush when he was in office, I could see why you don't remember. Take a trip in time on the posts. It was done.

I'll take reference to your concerns and address your sensitivities on equally pointing out hypocrisy next time. I just chose to deal with the present instead of keep living in the past. Some people can choose to move on rather than dig up ghosts of yesteryear. If it makes you feel better I will say Bush stupidly criticised Clinton's 'nation-building' during the 2000 election and then chose to install nothing but nation-builders in his whole foreign policy team. But in his defense he did not build a whole moral argument around this and numerous other issues to the point of calling them evil, criminal, and worthy of prosecution either. Barry established this as a moral issue he pledged to change. Within a few months he violated these promises but yet to point that out or say anything about Obama being just as 'evil' makes for unfairness?
 
#49
#49
MG1968 said:
which enemies do you speak of?
Click to expand...

First off, by "enemies" I don't necessarily mean physical combatants. We were on better terms with the Russians 8 years ago, for starters. And at the very least, the ME didn't view us as imperialists.

Do you really think the "anti-american views" of the world at large has decreased or increased since the turn of the century?
 
#50
#50
KB5252 said:
enemies may be a poor choice of words. I was speaking about Chavez and those like him.
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring to your post. rjd said that Bush's policies created more enemies for the US. I'm just curious to know which "enemies" are new.

post #49 doesn't really answer the question either. Russia is and will always be a thorny foreign policy thicket for the US.

as far as the "world at large", how much of those anti American sentiments were provided by a media all to willing to favor criticism of Bush?
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top