Iran War

[BeaverFever]

When Trump invaded Venezuela supposedly to rid them of a “narco-terrorist” regime, he ended up keeping the narcoterrorists in power and just naming himself as their new leader. Meanwhile there’s been zero change to the amount of cocaine in USA. 

So now will Trump try to appoint himself ayatollah of Iran?

 

 

Edited March 1 by BeaverFever

[herbie]

So the USA just murdered the Ayatollah, his daughter and his grandkid.

I'm a bit confused here. Point out who the good guys are in this kerfuffle.

[paxamericana]

9 minutes ago, herbie said:

I'm a bit confused here. Point out who the good guys are in this kerfuffle.

What the hell are you on about. This isn’t about good or bad, this is about American interests. Play with China and you get a regime change. That’s the message, don’t fck with us. Russia and China is next, you’ll see.

Edited March 1 by paxamericana

[Goddess]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

 

Our OLD relationship means something different than 'our relationship'.

Do you agree?  Yes or no?

Not sure I'm following you.

If you're making the distinction that the OLD relationship is over and now there is a NEW relationship, then.....maybe.

Except Carney was very clear that the NEW relationship does not include our economy or military/security cooperation and he's repeatedly told Canadians that the Americans are our enemy who is trying to take us over.  And he's convincing Canadians that our closest relationship is now China.  To the point that Canadians now hate Americans and prefer the Chinese.

Doesn't sound like much of a relationship to me.  Sounds more like a divorce.

 

[paxamericana]

1 minute ago, Goddess said:

Sounds more like a divorce.

A unfortunate mistake.

[BeaverFever]

13 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

They killed 10,000+ people and they were restarting a nuclear program. There is every reason to rush because if another Biden gets elected there is zero chance that we would stop Iran from getting a Nuke. Zero.

1) MAGAs don’t care about how many foreigners are killed in a foreign land

2) Trump is only 1 year into his term  no need rush 

3) Iran hasn’t been able to get nukes to date and they’ve been trying dor decades

4)) BIDEN???!  Lmao

 

16 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

This is not about the world. This is about US. Iran is a major threat. Well....was.

Iran has been contained for decades. Trump isn’t attacking Iran because they’ve suddenly become strong, he’s attacking them because they’ve suddenly become weak and vulnerable.

 

19 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Blah blah blah. TDS...TDS...FASCIST!"

Whatever dude. Look at the Big picture. Venezuela can't supply our enemies with an oil market. Cuba is about to fall and their people will be liberated. The Mexican cartels are on the run. Russia lost a major revenue stream and just lost an arms supplier. Guess who is next? 

And China is sitting over there questioning their strategy. Because all of their allies are falling. They are being put in a corner. Either play nice with the US or be isolated and hope everything changes. Hope Vance/Rubio lose to who? AOC and Newsome? Kamala and a sock puppet? 

This move in Iran is stabilizing the ME and making everyone in the ME our friend. It is weakening Russia, China and North Korea. This was not necessary? I say it was mandatory. As do the citizens of Iran, who now view the country they once called the great satin as the great savior. 

I am afraid that you and the MAGA cult are going to be in for a big surprise. Are you too young to remember what happened when you tried to “liberate” Iraq?

Let’s be clear what is happening:  Trump is initiating unprovoked attacks against America’s traditional enemies with the naive belief that he can topple these regimes and some friendly stable alternative will magically spring into place without spilling a drop of American blood and with no consequence to global economic stability. The naïveté is absolutely galling but its to be expected given that there is not ONE person in the entire Trump administration with any kind of relevant education or experience to know WTF they are talking about. 

[paxamericana]

Just now, BeaverFever said:

he’s attacking them because they’ve suddenly become weak and vulnerable

Okay, and what’s wrong with that? It’s a good time to push. 

 

2 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

naive belief that he can topple these regimes

The goal isn’t just regime change it’s to control the flow of oil, America could care less about the next despot as long as they don’t align themselves with Beijing.

[Goddess]

2 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

A unfortunate mistake.

I don't think the pro-China Canadians realize how much of a mistake yet.  Once they're all in "re-education camps" they'll prolly still be like "It would have been so much worse with the Americans.  Thank gawd Carney hooked us up with the Chinese! Elbows up!"

[User]

18 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

When Trump invaded Venezuela supposedly to rid them of a “narco-terrorist” regime, he ended up keeping the narcoterrorists in power and just naming himself as their new leader. Meanwhile there’s been zero change to the amount of cocaine in USA. 

So now will Trump try to appoint himself ayatollah of Iran?

 

 

Maduro was arrested for his crimes and is currently facing those charges now. It was not a regime change, that is your continued straw man argument to go against where you both want Trump to have fully occupied the nation and install a new leader while also criticizing him for doing what you want him to do. 

That arrest was not to change the amount of cocaine in the US, it was not a war on cocaine either, but drugs in general and what stats are you using to claim there has been zero change?

 

[BeaverFever]

28 minutes ago, West said:

Iran has one of the largest untapped oil reserves in the world. 

You are wrong in your analysis and with how rapid China completes infrastructure projects then it's not out of the question. One such project is 

• China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC): A major $46+ billion, multi-year project, including oil and gas pipelines (e.g., Gwadar to Nawabshah) designed to transport energy from the Middle East via the Gwadar port.

Gwadar to Nawabshah Is inside Pakistan and not near China. China also consumes far more oil than what can be transported via pipelines 

[User]

20 minutes ago, herbie said:

So the USA just murdered the Ayatollah, his daughter and his grandkid.

I'm a bit confused here. Point out who the good guys are in this kerfuffle.

Technically, it looks like Israel bombed them, also, it is not "murder"

 

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Not sure I'm following you.

1. If you're making the distinction that the OLD relationship is over and now there is a NEW relationship, then.....maybe.

2. Except Carney was very clear that the NEW relationship does not include our economy or military/security cooperation and he's repeatedly told Canadians that the Americans are our enemy who is trying to take us over. 

3. And he's convincing Canadians that our closest relationship is now China.  To the point that Canadians now hate Americans and prefer the Chinese.

4. Doesn't sound like much of a relationship to me.  Sounds more like a divorce.

 

1. I am making that distinction.  These words in speeches are chosen very carefully.

2. No, he said that old relationship included CLOSE cooperation.  He did not say we wouldn't support the US any more. In fact his statements on Iran today support the US, morally at least.

3. He didn't say that China is our closest relationship.

4. You're right that it doesn't sound like much of a relationship.

But these little words that they put into statements are important, and you have to look at them closely.

[paxamericana]

3 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

China also consumes far more oil than what can be transported via pipelines 

Agreed. The most efficient and cost effective delivery method is still oil tankers. Which is why America won’t tolerate oil producers that are not part of the petrodollar system.

Edited March 1 by paxamericana

[Goddess]

2 minutes ago, paxamericana said:

as long as they don’t align themselves with Beijing.

I think a lot of people don't realize that Beijing has always had world domination aspirations and has been working away at that for centuries, decades.  If anyone wants to take us over, it's the Chinese.

I think America just wants a strong, resource rich Western hemisphere to be able to ward off the Chinese.

 

[User]

7 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Iran has been contained for decades. Trump isn’t attacking Iran because they’ve suddenly become strong, he’s attacking them because they’ve suddenly become weak and vulnerable.

You just spew absolute ignorance and garbage with no care for the truth. 

Iran had been building up proxies for decades and they were not contained as they have been disrupting shipping and killing people in Israel. 

Only because in the last couple of years both Israel and America have been blowing the shit out of all of those capabilities, can you even say they are as contained as they have been. 

 

[Hodad]

6 hours ago, herbie said:

Give me a Nobel Peace Prize or I'll kill you all !

 

I think the media has made a big mistake. 

All this time they've been reporting on Trump's Board of Peace. I now suspect a homophonic transcription error. 

The accurate version is "Trump's bored of peace."

[User]

10 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

3) Iran hasn’t been able to get nukes to date and they’ve been trying dor decades

Yes, as we and Israel have also been trying to stop them for decades. Israel has bombed them before, killed their scientists, used cyber warfare... you act like Iran was just trying and couldn't get it done, the reality is that a lot has been done to keep them from doing it, but they have been getting closer and closer. 

[BeaverFever]

1 minute ago, User said:

Maduro was arrested for his crimes and is currently facing those charges now. It was not a regime change, that is your continued straw man argument to go against where you both want Trump to have fully occupied the nation and install a new leader while also criticizing him for doing what you want him to do. 

That arrest was not to change the amount of cocaine in the US, it was not a war on cocaine either, but drugs in general and what stats are you using to claim there has been zero change?

 

Well Trump never provided stats  to ever show that there was an increase in cocaine much less an increase Venezuela-routed cocaine but we were all told the reason that his had to happen ASAP with no time for congressional approval was that there was a cocaine emergency due to Maduro purposely flooding USA with cocaine as part of deliberate attack on USA.
 

NOW you’re claiming it was never about the cocaine? It was just to arrest a random criminal right when Trump was pardoning and releasing the ex-president of Honduras for the same thing?

[Goddess]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No, he said that old relationship included CLOSE cooperation. 

Yes.  And that relationship is over.

They are no longer our economic partners and will not receive our cooperation on military/security.

5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

He didn't say that China is our closest relationship.

Not in that speech.  But it's clear he wants deepening ties to China.  And NOT with the US.  They are now our enemy, ready to storm our border at any second.  Hie entire election campaign was based on "The Americans are going to invade us."

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

But these little words that they put into statements are important, and you have to look at them closely.

I am.

Our NEW relationship with the US is basically a divorce. A really ugly divorce.

So if you're saying we still have a relationship with the US, then I guess, yes.

The new relationship is like our EX after a messy, dirty divorce - we hate them, we bad-mouth them and we rebound into China's arms.

Which is exactly what I said at the start, before your semantics lesson.

[Michael Hardner]

22 minutes ago, Goddess said:

 

 

1. So if you're saying we still have a relationship with the US, then I guess, yes.

2. The new relationship is like our EX after a messy, dirty divorce - we hate them, we bad-mouth them and we rebound into China's arms.

3. Which is exactly what I said at the start, before your semantics lesson.

1. Exactly.

2. We're never going to quit the US.  We're going to pay for this new faux independence though.

3. Semantics means "meaning".  So, yes, I think that the meaning of words is important.  No, we're not "done ' with the US and we're not 'allies" with China.

If you have a problem with me disagreeing with your framing of the situation, what's this board for?

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

3. Semantics means "meaning".  So, yes, I think that the meaning of words is important. 

Really. define woman

[ironstone]

54 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Iran has been contained for decades.

That's debatable since one must keep in mind that they have been sponsoring terrorism all over the region which has caused an awful lot of deaths. 

[Goddess]

12 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

If you have a problem with me disagreeing with your framing of the situation, what's this board for?

I don't.  I enjoy the debate with just about everyone here.  🙂  That's why I've been here so many years.

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No, we're not "done ' with the US

Not yet.  Carney's still working on that.  But it's getting close.  Getting Canadians to hate Americans is working very well.

17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

and we're not 'allies" with China.

Not yet.  Carney's still working on that.  But it's getting close.  Getting Canadians to believe China is no threat to us is working very well.

[Hodad]

5 hours ago, Goddess said:

I guess kudos to Carney for coming out and saying he supports the US.  It must have killed him to say it.  We are not the US's ally anymore.  As Carney said, our relationship with the US is OVER. 

 

This reads with some implication of blame on Carney.

The US and Canada have been fast friends, aligned and allied culturally, economically and militarily. 

Then, along comes Trump, mocking you culturally, attacking you economically, and threatening your sovereignty. 

The question isn't how could Carney look for new allies, it's how could he not?

Do Canadian conservatives all suffer from battered spouse syndrome? When a partner betrays you so fundamentally, it's time to look elsewhere. 

This rift is tragic, but it's not Carney's fault, it's Trump's. 

[LinkSoul60]

46 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Getting Canadians to believe China is no threat to us is working very well.

We've been trading with China for over 50 years and they've been investing in Canada for over 30. Canadian's don't have a problem with this deal. Poll I saw was something like 65% thought it was good and 22% thought it was bad. It's not suddenly bad to deal with China because a liberal signed this latest agreement.

We should hear more about his India visit pretty soon.  Are you okay to do more trade with them?