Tulsi Gabbard

Discussion of current events
User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 3401
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by Sertorio » Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:35 am


User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4213
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by Doc » Sat Jan 04, 2020 12:08 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Sat Jan 04, 2020 7:35 am
Soleimani was responsible for the deaths of 10's of thousands to 100's of thousands of people.
mcgowan.jpg
mcgowan.jpg (63.44 KiB) Viewed 651 times
Damn Obama for killing Osama Bin Laden as well
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
dagbay
Posts: 358
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 8:27 pm

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by dagbay » Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:38 am

I had a lot of respect for Tulsi but she lost most of it when she missed so badly with her predictions of war with Iran. She clearly belongs with the appeasement camp, notwithstanding her correct analysis that the removal of Saddam Husein created the blunder for the USA, ISIS and the Iranian expansionist move into Iraq. That Regime Change US fantasy has been the main cause of many of the turbulent conflicts in the 3rd world. As much as it is unpalatable to many in the West stability in the Third World is achieved either by one side's complete demise or when two or more opposing sides are equally powerful and constantly battling it out thus balancing each other. In either case common people are routinely oppressed, hurt and killed for no good reason.
I'd rather be diving or flying alas for now I am on terra firma.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 3401
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by Sertorio » Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:44 am

dagbay wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:38 am
I had a lot of respect for Tulsi but she lost most of it when she missed so badly with her predictions of war with Iran. She clearly belongs with the appeasement camp, notwithstanding her correct analysis that the removal of Saddam Husein created the blunder for the USA, ISIS and the Iranian expansionist move into Iraq. That Regime Change US fantasy has been the main cause of many of the turbulent conflicts in the 3rd world. As much as it is unpalatable to many in the West stability in the Third World is achieved either by one side's complete demise or when two or more opposing sides are equally powerful and constantly battling it out thus balancing each other. In either case common people are routinely oppressed, hurt and killed for no good reason.
Appeasement? Peace is only possible when peoples/countries respect each other. The US does not respect Iran or the Iranian people, and therefore can never have peace with them. Left alone Iran will not threaten anyone, even if it refuses to recognize Israel. And leaving Iran alone is not appeasement, it is common sense. We may not like the regime in Iran, but that's none of our business. It will have to be the Iranians to solve that problem. After all they have been handling such problems for over five thousand years, so I think we can trust them to keep doing it to their satisfaction.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4213
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by Doc » Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:57 am

Sertorio wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:44 am
dagbay wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 8:38 am
I had a lot of respect for Tulsi but she lost most of it when she missed so badly with her predictions of war with Iran. She clearly belongs with the appeasement camp, notwithstanding her correct analysis that the removal of Saddam Husein created the blunder for the USA, ISIS and the Iranian expansionist move into Iraq. That Regime Change US fantasy has been the main cause of many of the turbulent conflicts in the 3rd world. As much as it is unpalatable to many in the West stability in the Third World is achieved either by one side's complete demise or when two or more opposing sides are equally powerful and constantly battling it out thus balancing each other. In either case common people are routinely oppressed, hurt and killed for no good reason.
Appeasement? Peace is only possible when peoples/countries respect each other. The US does not respect Iran or the Iranian people, and therefore can never have peace with them. Left alone Iran will not threaten anyone, even if it refuses to recognize Israel. And leaving Iran alone is not appeasement, it is common sense. We may not like the regime in Iran, but that's none of our business. It will have to be the Iranians to solve that problem. After all they have been handling such problems for over five thousand years, so I think we can trust them to keep doing it to their satisfaction.
There is not much of a lack of respect for Iranians in the US, outside of their choice of leadership. And most people in the US realize the Iranian people haven't been given much of a choice in even that.
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

Jim the Moron
Posts: 1820
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by Jim the Moron » Sun Jan 26, 2020 10:59 am

More evidence that the fix is in . . .

"Everybody knows the Establishment hates Rep.Tulsi Gabbard."
https://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/ ... si-gabbard

CNN dirty tricks . . .

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 4213
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by Doc » Sun Jan 26, 2020 11:16 am

Jim the Moron wrote:
Sun Jan 26, 2020 10:59 am
More evidence that the fix is in . . .

"Everybody knows the Establishment hates Rep.Tulsi Gabbard."
https://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/ ... si-gabbard

CNN dirty tricks . . .
What? The Clinton News Network is biased against Gabbard? Well that just can't be correct can it?

“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

neverfail
Posts: 4944
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am
Location: Singapore

Re: The 1938 Munich appeasement syndrome.

Post by neverfail » Sun Jan 26, 2020 3:02 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:44 am
Appeasement? Peace is only possible when peoples/countries respect each other.
In 1938 the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain showed respect for Germany and its leader Adolf Hitler by accepting Hitler's world that the Third Reich harbours no further territorial ambitions past the incorporation of the Czech Sudetenland into greater Germany. It became evident within 6 months that Hitler was a liar and Chamberlain his dupe.

Britain showed respect towards Germany but Germany proved unworthy of trust.

That memory has burned deep into the consciousness of not only the British but into that of all of the nations of Anglo heritage. Let there be no more Munichs'.

Iran under the Ayatollahs is seen as being somewhat like Nazi Germany back in the 1930's. Can you trust them to keep their word? Not likely - so that leaves only the option of confrontation - like what the Western democracies should have done with Nazi Germany back in 1938 over the Sudetenland annexation issue.

Better to be safe than sorry!

But of course down in the wartime-neutral backwater of Portugal; through non-involvement in both the war and the diplomatic machinations that preceded the outbreak, you missed out on learning that lesson, didn't you? Which is why you can wax sanctimonious over the alleged misdeeds of the Anglo powers today.

("It is easy to be morally righteous when you are impotent" - a jibe by former Prime Minister of Australia, the late E. G. Whitlam.)

Jim the Moron
Posts: 1820
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by Jim the Moron » Sun Jan 26, 2020 4:27 pm

"Fascinating" regurgitation of Nazi Germany factoids, neverfail. Isn't there another thread you can post that tiresome stuff on besides this one?

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 3401
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: The 1938 Munich appeasement syndrome.

Post by Sertorio » Sun Jan 26, 2020 4:34 pm

neverfail wrote:
Sun Jan 26, 2020 3:02 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:44 am
Appeasement? Peace is only possible when peoples/countries respect each other.
In 1938 the British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain showed respect for Germany and its leader Adolf Hitler by accepting Hitler's world that the Third Reich harbours no further territorial ambitions past the incorporation of the Czech Sudetenland into greater Germany. It became evident within 6 months that Hitler was a liar and Chamberlain his dupe.

Britain showed respect towards Germany but Germany proved unworthy of trust.

That memory has burned deep into the consciousness of not only the British but into that of all of the nations of Anglo heritage. Let there be no more Munichs'.

Iran under the Ayatollahs is seen as being somewhat like Nazi Germany back in the 1930's. Can you trust them to keep their word? Not likely - so that leaves only the option of confrontation - like what the Western democracies should have done with Nazi Germany back in 1938 over the Sudetenland annexation issue.

Better to be safe than sorry!

But of course down in the wartime-neutral backwater of Portugal; through non-involvement in both the war and the diplomatic machinations that preceded the outbreak, you missed out on learning that lesson, didn't you? Which is why you can wax sanctimonious over the alleged misdeeds of the Anglo powers today.

("It is easy to be morally righteous when you are impotent" - a jibe by former Prime Minister of Australia, the late E. G. Whitlam.)
My complete quote was:
Appeasement? Peace is only possible when peoples/countries respect each other. The US does not respect Iran or the Iranian people, and therefore can never have peace with them. Left alone Iran will not threaten anyone, even if it refuses to recognize Israel. And leaving Iran alone is not appeasement, it is common sense. We may not like the regime in Iran, but that's none of our business. It will have to be the Iranians to solve that problem. After all they have been handling such problems for over five thousand years, so I think we can trust them to keep doing it to their satisfaction.
But you prefered to leave out 95% of what I wrote.

Post Reply