The coming war with Iran

[IndyDave1776]

What makes that action irrational? Was there a severe penalty associated with that act? States do what they can get away with, and avoid things that they can’t. That makes them rational. When they simply don’t care, and are willing to accept the penalties which ultimately may threaten the existence of a particular govt or regime, then the action is irrational.

OK, so your worldview is no principles, no civility, just social Darwinism as you support the notion that a country pursuing nuclear weapons for the stated goal of eliminating another nation from the face of the planet is rational.

 

[IndyDave1776]

And that the Holocaust wasn’t well known until very late in the war. Hitler’s continued crusade to wipe out the Jews, at the detriment to the war effort, was indeed irrational.... and Nazi Germany was ultimately destroyed.

Iran has been declaring that very intention for decades and still stands by it, yet here you are arguing that the Iranians are rational.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Tell it to the American soldiers who have died or live with the results of Iranian IED's!..

 

[buckwacker]

You forget that up to a certain point in time, Germany was able to get away with whatever they wanted. England agreed to appeasement. Stalin signed a non-aggression pact (which also rewarded Germany with half of Czechoslovakia). Mexico was selling them oil.

So, until France and England finally declared war, what price did Germany pay?

And that the Holocaust wasn’t well known until very late in the war. Hitler’s continued crusade to wipe out the Jews, at the detriment to the war effort, was indeed irrational.... and Nazi Germany was ultimately destroyed.

So since they didn't encounter resistance, their attempts to take over the world were rational. I mean that's how kut defined rational.

The seeds of the holocaust started before the war, if I'm not mistaken early to mid 30s, but I guess that was rational too since they didn't encounter resistance.

 

[tsm]

Absurd to equate lack of resistance to rationality. That implies a murderer whose victims complied with all his demands acted rationally. Yeah, right.

 

[NKBJ]

The victors erect their monuments and write the history and their grand children argue over fairy tales.

About the mass murder of peoples during WWII, the National Socialist Workers Party borrowed from everywhere. Whenever they started experimenting instead of just doing what was previously proven to work they established a remarkable record of screwing up. They latched onto the concentration camp ideas of the British. The latched onto the moral justifications from the spiritualism and religion of the old Germanic secret societies. They latched onto the technocracy movement being popularized in the United States. They latched onto the eugenics being popularized in scientific establishments across the US and Europe. If you don't study the financing, technocracy and their religion then it's impossible to understand the motivations. And sooner or later you're gonna run smack into how the British establishment played them like a big fish. Go back a little further in time and you'll understand the motivations behind the Balfour Declaration and find out that Edward M. House led the US delegation (on behalf of President Wilson) that accepted the role of carrying out the Rhodes-Milner plan. That sets the stage for the holocaust.
Once western financial establishments bankrolled them into power and western corporations agreed to develope the technological systems that they needed to pull it all together, the NAZI's enacted the technocratic state that the west wanted. And, in order to get the German peoples to go along with it they had to make the people think they were getting what they wanted. Along with the benefits of Eucken's "full employment" economic policy that meant appeasing and exploiting the cultural baggage within the society at large as well as the huge chip they had on their shoulder after the way they were done over by the terms of the WWI armistice. So the NAZI had a lot of buttons to push, lots of ways to manipulate their public while bringing the centrally planned state to fruition.

Now, about the German government's war on its own people and gee golly how'd that happen?
Obviously the spiritual battle in high places between good and evil was raging over this but it was the cultural baggage within eastern Europe that made it possible for the government to single out "Juden" as well as others for extermination. The prejudices go back for centuries with evils done on both sides. It had become a part of the culture and the persistence of culture only let the prejudices grow. As far back as the 1300-1400's Juden were angering the man on the street with predatory lending practices. A century later it was an acknowledged problem (Burgermeister of Kronenberg, 1525) that Juden were operating as fences for stolen goods. Why? Oh, like how about maybe because as an identifiable group that cooperated amongst themselves they were prohibited from many other ways of making a living because the locals (in cooperating amongst themselves) didn't want competition. And then again look at the cultural baggage of the same people before they migrated westward, back when their kingdom sat astride caravan routes and they made their living off the flow of wealth. It was an already ancient problem ready for the NAZI's to exploit in the process promoting their new age of religious, political and economic realities. That's the way they operated, opportunism was their operating principle.
Thank goodness they managed to give so much of technocracy such a bad name for so long. It's taken over half a century for the globalists to put new lipstick on that old sow.

 

[Kutnupe14]

OK, so your worldview is no principles, no civility, just social Darwinism as you support the notion that a country pursuing nuclear weapons for the stated goal of eliminating another nation from the face of the planet is rational.

Obviously. That is the history of mankind. "Might makes right," is the only principle that's ever mattered, and you won't find a nation whose decisions aren't influenced by that fact. It's sobering statement to make, concerning humanity, but I have yet to see it proven false.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Iran has been declaring that very intention for decades and still stands by it, yet here you are arguing that the Iranians are rational.

Completely rational, hence why their regime still exists, unlike (brief list): Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya.
Those nations are all in the same region with Iran, with Iran being well more openly hostile, longer than any of the nations listed above. Why is it, that the Iranian Regime has avoided the fate of those others?

 

[TangoFoxtrot]

Has anyone thought that there may be no solution to the middle east wars? Historically they have been going on since Abraham.. all that have tried to get involved have become entangled in a quagmire. That is just a question.. ive thought about it alot and I cannot see a out, the turf and religious aspects of it appear to be impassable.. the orthodox jews have not had a place to make offerings to be absolved of their sins, that temple can only be on the temple mount which is in harsh conflict with the Muslims because that is where there temple is.. if we disagree with their religious ideals is beside the point because these are millenia old convictions and beliefs by both sides.. it would be as if a stranger came into your home and refused to leave and said if you make them leave they will kill you.. again, im not making a argument for which side is right (I do have my opinions) I'm asking how can a situation like that be resolved?

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[IndyDave1776]

Obviously. That is the history of mankind. "Might makes right," is the only principle that's ever mattered, and you won't find a nation whose decisions aren't influenced by that fact. It's sobering statement to make, concerning humanity, but I have yet to see it proven false.

Acknowledging that it has generally worked this way is one thing. Praising and endorsing it is something very different.

Completely rational, hence why their regime still exists, unlike (brief list): Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya.
Those nations are all in the same region with Iran, with Iran being well more openly hostile, longer than any of the nations listed above. Why is it, that the Iranian Regime has avoided the fate of those others?

The apparent explanation is that of intervention. Bush Jr. launched a discretionary war against Iraq and went all in with Afghanistan apparently for lithium. Obama and Hillary preferred a radical Islamist regime to the previous administration in Libya even though we hadn't had any real problems from Libya in a very long time, speaking volumes about their loyalties.

 

[erasure]

I'm asking how can a situation like that be resolved?

I've got a crazy, unprecedented idea, and it goes something like this: without American involvement

 

[Kutnupe14]

Acknowledging that it has generally worked this way is one thing. Praising and endorsing it is something very different.

The apparent explanation is that of intervention. Bush Jr. launched a discretionary war against Iraq and went all in with Afghanistan apparently for lithium. Obama and Hillary preferred a radical Islamist regime to the previous administration in Libya even though we hadn't had any real problems from Libya in a very long time, speaking volumes about their loyalties.

Agreed, but I'm unsure who did that.

 

[TangoFoxtrot]

I've got a crazy, unprecedented idea, and it goes something like this: without American involvement

I can half agree. Not getting involved does seem best but what do we do when it bleeds over to here and then there is the conundrum of betraying our best friends and ally over there.. Israel.. don't get me wrong, israel has nuke arsenal big enough to defend herself but we have been their friends forever.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[NKBJ]

Has anyone thought that there may be no solution to the middle east wars? Historically they have been going on since Abraham.. all that have tried to get involved have become entangled in a quagmire. That is just a question.. ive thought about it alot and I cannot see a out, the turf and religious aspects of it appear to be impassable.. the orthodox jews have not had a place to make offerings to be absolved of their sins, that temple can only be on the temple mount which is in harsh conflict with the Muslims because that is where there temple is.. if we disagree with their religious ideals is beside the point because these are millenia old convictions and beliefs by both sides.. it would be as if a stranger came into your home and refused to leave and said if you make them leave they will kill you.. again, im not making a argument for which side is right (I do have my opinions) I'm asking how can a situation like that be resolved?

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Yeah, I've been thinking about it occasionally for a lot of years. Yes, it can be resolved.

In one fashion it was resolved during the Ottoman Empire days. In another fashion it was commanded to be laid to rest during Pax Romana. The British had it tamed except for terrorists brought in from Europe. And seeing as Rome entered the conversation, kinda looks like they're gonna be part of a plan for resolving it again before too much longer.

 

[smittygj]

As someone who is only ~100 miles away from them as the crow flies, I am always monitoring what they are doing, and seeing their influence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. Their recent history says they are not going to quit. Just hope the current administration is ready to deal with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Abqaiq–Khurais_attack

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_2019_Gulf_of_Oman_incident#:~:text=The%20June%202019%20Gulf%20of,sophisticated%20operation%20placing%20limpet%20mines

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-security-yemen-idUSKCN24D0U6

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/riyadh-saudi-arabia-missile-or-drone-intercepted-tv-says/

 

[NKBJ]

I can half agree. Not getting involved does seem best but what do we do when it bleeds over to here and then there is the conundrum of betraying our best friends and ally over there.. Israel.. don't get me wrong, israel has nuke arsenal big enough to defend herself but we have been their friends forever.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

There's a point at which that tail began wagging our dog. And our country changed.

 

[JeepHammer]

What do you think happens if Iran assasinates a former president?

ISIS cost Iran a crap ton in people, materials, time & effort, leaves them a little short handed of cannon fodder.

I would expect exactly what we are seeing, a lot of nice, cheap propaganda,
The leadership living in bunkers,
And since the US needed boots on the ground intelligence (Human Intelligence) to make the strike they did,
Maybe a purge in senior leadership which will leave them even more short handed.

Right now their only response was increased terrorism in Iraq, local regional influence in a few other countries locally.
(Many US Allies)

I wouldn't put terrorism attacks past them in western countries, *IF* they can pull it off...

No matter how you feel about Trump, his biggest threat is from the people he abandoned, left holding the bag right here in the US, Justice, Congress, domestic terror groups.

 

[erasure]

our best friends and ally over there

What do we get out of this great friendship and alliance?

 

[JeepHammer]

I've got a crazy, unprecedented idea, and it goes something like this: without American involvement

Wonderful Idea, but not sure it's possible.

In '82 we BEGGED Reagan/Bush NOT to teach the hard won lessons of insurgency from Viet Nam to the Mujahideen, particularly the Wahhabi Islamic fanatics, but nobody listened.

In '89 when Soviets withdrew, everyone in the know begged Bush not to drop Afghanistan like a hot rock, but they did anyway giving rise to the Taliban Wahhabi extremists.
(See Osama bin Laden, etc.)

When finished with Saddam Insane in '90, we begged senior staff to get out of the middle east entirely, let them sort it out.
Everyone knew for a fact we would be there for AT LEAST 30 years, and here we are...

The professionals told GWB to stay the hell out of Iraq in round 2 of this crap, but again, nobody listened to the professionals.

China & Russia supplies the Wahhabi Islam types, they send well armed crazy cannon fodder, all the while it's America that bleeds.

If you want an example of listening to the professionals,
See the breakup of the soviet union and the Croatian/Bosnian genocidal war.
In & Out, side of right, use the military for what the military is for...

The difference between ignorant & stupid,
Ignorance simply means you don't have an education in a particular subject.
Stupid is having professionals tell you what to do, and ignoring it...

 

[NKBJ]

What do we get out of this great friendship and alliance?

Just exactly what the books published in the 1950's by William Guy Carr said.