Bill Maher
- Thread starter danmand
- Start date
Spot on with the Kim Davis thing. I can't stand her. She's basically saying she should be allowed not to do part of her frickin job and to discriminate against homosexuals on religious grounds. And they accommodated her! If she were a racist rather than a homophobe, and refused to provide marriage licenses to black people, do you think she would be accommodated then?
Sorry. Could not listen past the first item- the Iran "deal". Maher should apply for the Democratic Party spokesperson's position. Little wonder kooks like Trump and Sanders are dominating this election cycle, thus far. The electorate is just fed up with the current "leaders".
It was either this or eventual war with Iran. You preferred the latter?Sorry. Could not listen past the first item- the Iran "deal". Maher should apply for the Democratic Party spokesperson's position.
Is that the choice? So America will let Iran go nuclear, lift the sanctions so they can export more terror and prop up the nutjob government, prop Syria, nuke Israel and go after the Gulf States. Yeah, I can only see rainbows and unicorns ahead. BTW, little Israel buried Saddam's nuclear ambitions back in the 80s without going to war. And here we have a superpower giving away the store and negotiating with a schizophrenic regime like with an equal-making itself look weak and silly.It was either this or eventual war with Iran. You preferred the latter?
Israel's bombing of Iraq's nuclear reactor in the 80's (at a time
when Saddam was an U.S. ally) was an act of war. The reason the
aggression didn't escalate into an all-out war was obvious--Iraq
would've been destroyed had it retaliated. It is understandable
for Iran to want to acquire nuclear weapons so as not to suffer
the same fate of Iraq. Without U.S. protection Saudi Arabia
some day might want nuke as well.
when Saddam was an U.S. ally) was an act of war. The reason the
aggression didn't escalate into an all-out war was obvious--Iraq
would've been destroyed had it retaliated. It is understandable
for Iran to want to acquire nuclear weapons so as not to suffer
the same fate of Iraq. Without U.S. protection Saudi Arabia
some day might want nuke as well.
The train has already left the station. France, UK, Germany, Russia have lifted their sanctions and are busy making deals with Iran. if the americans want to refrain from doing business there, so much the better for the other countries.Is that the choice? So America will let Iran go nuclear, lift the sanctions so they can export more terror and prop up the nutjob government, prop Syria, nuke Israel and go after the Gulf States. Yeah, I can only see rainbows and unicorns ahead. BTW, little Israel buried Saddam's nuclear ambitions back in the 80s without going to war. And here we have a superpower giving away the store and negotiating with a schizophrenic regime like with an equal-making itself look weak and silly.
PS: Iran has taken delivery of Russian S300 batteries, (maybe soon S400) so the bombing of Iran may be a bit more difficult than the bombing of Iraq.
You don't think Iran and EVERYONE else has learned from what Israel did?Is that the choice? So America will let Iran go nuclear, lift the sanctions so they can export more terror and prop up the nutjob government, prop Syria, nuke Israel and go after the Gulf States. Yeah, I can only see rainbows and unicorns ahead. BTW, little Israel buried Saddam's nuclear ambitions back in the 80s without going to war. And here we have a superpower giving away the store and negotiating with a schizophrenic regime like with an equal-making itself look weak and silly.
Wow, you must be one of those rural south people he is talking about. You don't think Israel will nuke Iran if Iran nukes Israel? You don't think Iran knows what will happen if they nuke Israel? Geez
So you think that the Iranian religious fanatics are capable of reason. Interesting.You don't think Iran and EVERYONE else has learned from what Israel did?
Wow, you must be one of those rural south people he is talking about. You don't think Israel will nuke Iran if Iran nukes Israel? You don't think Iran knows what will happen if they nuke Israel? Geez
The reason Iraq did not retaliate was because they had no capabilities to hit back. Just like Iran.Israel's bombing of Iraq's nuclear reactor in the 80's (at a time
when Saddam was an U.S. ally) was an act of war. The reason the
aggression didn't escalate into an all-out war was obvious--Iraq
would've been destroyed had it retaliated. It is understandable
for Iran to want to acquire nuclear weapons so as not to suffer
the same fate of Iraq. Without U.S. protection Saudi Arabia
some day might want nuke as well.
Which, as o&g already mentioned, was still an act of war. If that's what you're advocating, that's fine. But that was the choice. Iran would have eventually acquired what they needed to make nuclear weapons, at which point we either had to accept that or take them out. Or do what the US did and regulate it and possibly, hopefully stave off that future. If they still do acquire the capabilities of creating nukes, we still have the option of taking them out. Hopefully it doesn't come to that.The reason Iraq did not retaliate was because they had no capabilities to hit back. Just like Iran.
And Iran is a tougher nut to crack than Iraq.
So, it was an act of war. And? So, was the Entebbe raid. So, was the strike on Syria's secret WMD facility. Again, and? You do have a point, though. Iran is a nut. A third world nut and as soon as it gets a delivery system, it will become untouchable. All we can hope for is that they'll nuke the Saudis first.Which, as o&g already mentioned, was still an act of war. If that's what you're advocating, that's fine. But that was the choice. Iran would have eventually acquired what they needed to make nuclear weapons, at which point we either had to accept that or take them out. Or do what the US did and regulate it and possibly, hopefully stave off that future. If they still do acquire the capabilities of creating nukes, we still have the option of taking them out. Hopefully it doesn't come to that.
And Iran is a tougher nut to crack than Iraq.
And that's the choice. Either attack them and destroy their infrastructure, possibly creating a much more unstable situation, or use diplomacy to disable their nuke program, at the risk they become a more powerful nation that has fundamentally different beliefs from us.So, it was an act of war. And? So, was the Entebbe raid. So, was the strike on Syria's secret WMD facility. Again, and?
Neither option is optimal obviously. It all depends on which option is the lesser evil.
I'm too old for the "lesser evil". These days I believe in doing the right thing for the right reasons. In a serious negotiation a superpower would tell the third world potentate with the nuclear ambitions: "Stop what you're doing or we'll fuck you up". And then the superpower would, wisely, move carriers into the Gulf and fly in the tanks. Just in case the message was ignored. Too bad America does not understand the power it holds. Which is good and bad for the rest of us.And that's the choice. Either attack them and destroy their infrastructure, possibly creating a much more unstable situation, or use diplomacy to disable their nuke program, at the risk they become a more powerful nation that has fundamentally different beliefs from us.
Neither option is optimal obviously. It all depends on which option is the lesser evil.
