How can people say the US started the conflict with Iran??

[Justank]

Yeah, I guess we'll just throw that it's 'very likely that he wasn't familiar with Joe'. Gues what, check this:



from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/u...core-ios-share

Basically, Hunter and this "clueless buddy" made a lot of money from Joe's position by pursuing business with international entities that had a stake in American foreign policy decisions. Yup, it's not fox, this is the NYTimes. It's not just Trump questioning Biden's practice, it's everyone. The guy and his family are corrupt to the core.

I think you misunderstood, I was making the point that Joe Biden was not familiar with Devon Archer, not the other way around. I don't doubt for a second Devon Archer and Hunter Biden got positions based on connections they have. I just don't think Joe Biden is competent enough to have been in on it or really aware it was happening.

No it means that he did have connections with someone at the company unlike what he claimed that he knew no one in the company and it's just Hunter doing his own thing.

Reminder that this is what I responded to, you trying to say that Joe Biden was connected to or in on the Burisma thing somehow because he met Devon Archer at some point, not whatever else is going on with the Biden family. I don't have a high enough opinion of Joe Biden to believe he had any idea who Devon Archer was beyond being an associate of Hunter's. You want to investigate the family as a whole for whatever else, go for it, but the Burisma shit doesn't hold any water. It was always pushed to try to give Trump cover for getting Ukraine to announce an investigation, not for any merit it held.

On topic, as mentioned by others the OPs post is garbage getting pushed by Trumpists on social media that leaves out major events. Killing the JCPOA and restarting sanctions did more to set this off again than anything else.

[callipygoustp]

"Looks at title"
"Looks at last couple of pages"

Yep, another thread derailed for pages and pages.

[ohtlmtlm]

- - - Updated - - -

The JCPOA was just handing terrorists money as a reward for their hard work in terrorism. We should kill terrorists who have US blood on their hands not hand them money and rewards. JCPOA was treason, it's akin to giving Al Qaeda money for not killing us anymore and saying "oh it was working, they ain't killing us anymore". We need to kill terrorists, not just bribe them to not shoot us.

We gave them their money back for weapons orders we canceled after they overthrew the dictator we installed after the CIA/MI6 deposed their democratically elected leader. This was the 1979 Iranian revolution.

Good hyperbole tho.

if you care yo educate yourself on the topic:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irania...'%C3%A9tat

[sarahtasher]

It takes extreme bad faith (or being an American FOX listener) to imagine that Iran is an agressive expansionist power and the US innocent victims. FFS, who attacked whom ?

[Calfredd]

You don't give terrorists their money back. If Al Qaeda members had accounts and properties in the US, we give it back to them and make peace?

I mean, since all the way back to Reagan, we've negotiated with terrorists. But no, we'd usually seize stuff like that unless in the case that Orbitus brought up.

[Orbitus]

You don't give terrorists their money back. If Al Qaeda members had accounts and properties in the US, we give it back to them and make peace?

We had no choice in the matter. We lost a court case.

[Justank]

The JCPOA was just handing terrorists money as a reward for their hard work in terrorism. We should kill terrorists who have US blood on their hands not hand them money and rewards. JCPOA was treason, it's akin to giving Al Qaeda money for not killing us anymore and saying "oh it was working, they ain't killing us anymore". We need to kill terrorists, not just bribe them to not shoot us.

Cool you don't like the implementation of the JCPOA. That happened though, why do you feel that ending it was a good move given that by all accounts Iran was complying?

[Orbitus]

We do. We don't' hand it to terrorist, we hand it to a secular, modern, peaceful Iranian government when it emerges. There is no question that this money is not ours but you don't have it terrorist who took over a country. That's insane and it's treason.

Again, we had no choice in the matter. And it wasn't our choice who we gave it to. It was to their government, not some random person. Are you going to attack them and do a regime change? Good fucking luck.

[Orbitus]

I don't care if they were complying. They are humanity's enemy. Their regime must be eradicated just like ISIS or Al Qaeda. To be a good deal, JCPOA should have included a verse to make sure the Iranian regime becomes a secular regime that doesn't oppress its people or neighbors and abandon terrorists. We just gave money to a terrorist organization on the account that this money belonged to Iran. We're not dealing with Iran, we're dealing with a terrorist regime who kidnapped the country and is spreading death and chaos while advocating for a fucken religious theocracy that oppresses minorities and well anyone who opposes them. They are the anti-thesis of humanity.

We have no right to tell another country how they can run their country. We can't tell them what god or religion they can follow.

[sarahtasher]

You don't give terrorists their money back. If Al Qaeda members had accounts and properties in the US, we give it back to them and make peace?

I have an utterly startling information. It's not because you don't like a country that they are terrorists. I know Americans struggle immensely with the concept, but when there are wars, declared or not, sometimes your soldiers might be shot at and killed.

[Orbitus]

Well, might as well make peace with ISIS and Al Qaeda ... they would leave us alone if we give them the middle east and recognize them as legit rulers. I'm pretty sure!

Thanks for building the biggest fucking strawman you could have.

[sarahtasher]

I don't care if they were complying. They are humanity's enemy. Their regime must be eradicated just like ISIS or Al Qaeda. To be a good deal, JCPOA should have included a verse to make sure the Iranian regime becomes a secular regime that doesn't oppress its people or neighbors and abandon terrorists. We just gave money to a terrorist organization on the account that this money belonged to Iran. We're not dealing with Iran, we're dealing with a terrorist regime who kidnapped the country and is spreading death and chaos while advocating for a fucken religious theocracy that oppresses minorities and well anyone who opposes them. They are the anti-thesis of humanity.

Dude, one question. Who is funding salafism world wide, the creed that actually fly airplanes into buildings ? The handful of Iranian ''terror'' attacks, which are decades old, were aimed at, guess what, soldiers. It's a bombing, it's an act of war, but hardly ''terrorism''

I would like so much to know why exactly firing missiles (usually at weddings) is ''civilized'' but ramming trucks filled with explosives against military bases is ''terrorism''. (Please note that ramming trucks filled explosives against civilian buildings is terrorism)

- - - Updated - - -

Well, I don't like them because they're terrorists, I don't think they're terrorists because I don't like them. There are a lot countries I don't like.

- - - Updated - - -



Not really, Iran is exactly what a country would look like if it was taken over by Alqaeda.

They would be all fracking dead, since Salafists kill around 50 or 100 Shias for every ''important'' (white) people they kill.

[Calfredd]

Not really, Iran is exactly what a country would look like if it was taken over by Alqaeda.

To be fair, they had help from the good ol' Red, White, and Blue.

[sarahtasher]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_a...ored_terrorism

One, most of those cases are thought to be Iran related, because in the nineties. Talibans and Al Quaida were sort of good guyz who hatez kommunists. Second, those bombings includes attacks by the Hezbollah against military targets….(I know, those ''savages'' don't know how war is made : they bomb your soldiers with car bombs in addition of being killed by much more virile and cool missiles)

[Kotuthan]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_a...ored_terrorism

I do not see why you Americans and Iranians do not get along. You guys have so much in common.

-You torture people and hold them without trial or mock trials.
-You both still hold executions.
-You both fund and back terrorists.
-You both target Civilian Airliners.
-You both have no concern if you actions kill Civilians or ruin lives.

[Pannonian]

I don't care if they were complying. They are humanity's enemy. Their regime must be eradicated just like ISIS or Al Qaeda. To be a good deal, JCPOA should have included a verse to make sure the Iranian regime becomes a secular regime that doesn't oppress its people or neighbors and abandon terrorists. We just gave money to a terrorist organization on the account that this money belonged to Iran. We're not dealing with Iran, we're dealing with a terrorist regime who kidnapped the country and is spreading death and chaos while advocating for a fucken religious theocracy that oppresses minorities and well anyone who opposes them. They are the anti-thesis of humanity.

Have you ever looked at history? A conflict doesn't end because one side dominates the other, but when both sides reconcile. Let me give you some examples:

Apartheid in SA
English Civil War
War of the Roses
WW 2 (in stark contrast to WW1, were no reconciliation was tried)
Both American Civil Wars

the list goes on and on

Unless you make a deal with the former enemy that gives them a perspective in the future, the conflict will never end.

That's why the Iran deal for all its problems was a real chance at peace, because it did give Iranians something, let them keep their face.

Of course there is an exception. Eradicate them all. But that means every last one of them. Which in case of Iran would be the most horrific genocide and crime in human history.

[Draco-Onis]

Well, I don't like them because they're terrorists. I don't think they're terrorists because I don't like them. There are a lot countries I don't like.

But everything Iran does Saudi Arabia does as well we call them terrorists because we don't like them and the reason we don't like them is because we meddled with them and they fought back so...

[ati87]

But everything Iran does Saudi Arabia does as well we call them terrorists because we don't like them and the reason we don't like them is because we meddled with them and they fought back so...

I would argue that the crap Iran pulls off are in response to the crap pulled off by SA. Situation in yemen is what it is because SA decided to join in a internal matter.

[Orange Joe]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_a...ored_terrorism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ored_terrorism

[smityx]

For modern history you probably need to go back to the coup of 1953. Then back to 15th century CE when the area was reislamized