T1B

BSmack wrote:As I suspected, you have absolutely no constructive ideas as to how the US should be openly engaging Iran.

What do you mean by openly? Oh, I get it...the US should legitimize the brutal mullahs by reestablishing diplomatic relations, right? Look, asshat, the US has been directly engaging Iran for two decades with zero results. What the hell is wrong with you people? You pretend that the US has not been engaged with Iran and you look foolish for doing so...

LTS TRN 2 wrote:Weasel, what's with the niggling? I believe you were instructed to desist such tedious patter and to offer actual practical suggestions. Well? What's your actual suggestion in dealing with America's sordid past in undermining Iran's efforts at establishing a secular elected government? What can Barry best do to rectify the blatant intervention and sabotage by American and British forces going back to 1953? What's your practical suggestion? To attack Iran? B-smack asks you straight up and you start weaseling....and we understand that you're "acting out." But it's time to actually start thinking before you weasel. Try it.

It's pretty funny...I can write your posts before you can...

There is no way to deal with what you call America's sordid past. And there is no reason to. The ruling mullahs represent an illegitimate and brutal authoritarian regime. We shouldn't, as Barry does, pretend that's not the case. The problem is that the US has demonstrated that it will abandon democracy as soon as the going gets tough and has demonstrated that it has no will to deal harshly with brutal regimes. Iraq is a major exception to this rule and we know this by how you idiots reacted to the removal of a burtal dictator. Iran knows this. There is no incentive for the mullahs to compromise or otherwise accomodate America's demands.

You've misidentified the symptoms of the Iranian problem. It's not what the US did 40 years ago...it's Iran's continued war against the US, continued support and sponsorship of global terrorism, and Iran's determination to build nuke weapons.

Grow up.

JMak wrote:

BSmack wrote:As I suspected, you have absolutely no constructive ideas as to how the US should be openly engaging Iran.

What do you mean by openly? Oh, I get it...the US should legitimize the brutal mullahs by reestablishing diplomatic relations, right? Look, asshat, the US has been directly engaging Iran for two decades with zero results. What the hell is wrong with you people? You pretend that the US has not been engaged with Iran and you look foolish for doing so...

I mean openly. As within public view.

Now do you have any ideas or not?

BSmack wrote:I mean openly. As within public view.

Now do you have any ideas or not?

No because the US should not be "openly" negotiating with the mullahs. Why do you think the "openly" negotiating with the Iranians would change anything whatsoever?

JMak wrote:

BSmack wrote:I mean openly. As within public view.

Now do you have any ideas or not?

No because the US should not be "openly" negotiating with the mullahs. Why do you think the "openly" negotiating with the Iranians would change anything whatsoever?

Idiot. Have you any idea how soundly you have kicked your own ass? You call out Obama for doing "nothing" and when pressed on exactly what should be done you offer... nothing.

BSmack wrote:

JMak wrote:

BSmack wrote:I mean openly. As within public view.

Now do you have any ideas or not?

No because the US should not be "openly" negotiating with the mullahs. Why do you think the "openly" negotiating with the Iranians would change anything whatsoever?

Idiot. Have you any idea how soundly you have kicked your own ass? You call out Obama for doing "nothing" and when pressed on exactly what should be done you offer... nothing.

I didn't call out Obama for doing nothing. You could at least properly read my comments. I criticized him for sitting on the sidelines and then when he finally did do something he essentially told the pro-democracy folks to go fuck themselves and legitimized the ruling mullahs. I never said that Obama wasn't doing anything.

Jesus, your intellectual dishonesty is approaching Obama and Sotomayor levels now...

JMak wrote:I didn't call out Obama for doing nothing. You could at least properly read my comments. I criticized him for sitting on the sidelines and then when he finally did do something he essentially told the pro-democracy folks to go fuck themselves and legitimized the ruling mullahs. I never said that Obama wasn't doing anything.

Jesus, your intellectual dishonesty is approaching Obama and Sotomayor levels now...

You're making a serious run at Dio for the title of T1B Idiot Semanticist. Sitting on the sidelines? Doing nothing? Is there really a hair's breadth difference between the two?

Kind of like getting BJ isn't considered sexual relations.

BSmack wrote:

JMak wrote:I didn't call out Obama for doing nothing. You could at least properly read my comments. I criticized him for sitting on the sidelines and then when he finally did do something he essentially told the pro-democracy folks to go fuck themselves and legitimized the ruling mullahs. I never said that Obama wasn't doing anything.

Jesus, your intellectual dishonesty is approaching Obama and Sotomayor levels now...

You're making a serious run at Dio for the title of T1B Idiot Semanticist. Sitting on the sidelines? Doing nothing? Is there really a hair's breadth difference between the two?

Dipshit, can you not read? What did I post?

I'm not drawing a distinction, moron. You said I criticized Obama for doing nothing. I criticized Obama for thumbning his nose at pro-democracy Iranians by first hemming and hawing about not meddling and then when he finally did say something his comments legitimized the ruling mullahs and their efforts to fix the election. I'm not sure what you're having trouble with here. I called him out for a range of actions that amounted to telling the pro-democracy iranians to fuck off while being supportive of the mullahs.

Look, I cannot help that you're being deliberately stupid here...

JMak wrote:Dipshit, can you not read? What did I post?

I'm not drawing a distinction, moron. You said I criticized Obama for doing nothing. I criticized Obama for thumbning his nose at pro-democracy Iranians by first hemming and hawing about not meddling and then when he finally did say something his comments legitimized the ruling mullahs and their efforts to fix the election. I'm not sure what you're having trouble with here. I called him out for a range of actions that amounted to telling the pro-democracy iranians to fuck off while being supportive of the mullahs.

Look, I cannot help that you're being deliberately stupid here...

Yes, you do seem quite obsessed over these comments of Obama's. Yet you have never quoted or linked to what it is that upset you. So I just figured you were talking out of your ass.

BSmack wrote:Yes, you do seem quite obsessed over these comments of Obama's. Yet you have never quoted or linked to what it is that upset you. So I just figured you were talking out of your ass.

Obsessed...right. It's always the same with you lefty fools. Someone who disagrees with you is either mentally challenged, racist, obsessed...there's no legit disagreement from your side.

I'm not obsessed with Obama's comments. The problem is that we have a chump in office that's seriously jeaopardizing the security of the US...all so he can appease leftist twits like you and gain popularity among weakling Euro-wimps.

Submit the comments that so offended you for review or STFU.

BSmack wrote:Submit the comments that so offended you for review or STFU.

When you argue in good faith, well, that'll be the day. Until then, go fuck yourself. I am neither obsessed or offended. If you want to have a legit discussion you should try acting like an adult. Until then, just know that your boy is fucking up our security by encouraging folks like the Norks and Iranians to continue pursuing nuke weapons.

JMak wrote:

BSmack wrote:Submit the comments that so offended you for review or STFU.

When you argue in good faith, well, that'll be the day. Until then, go fuck yourself. I am neither obsessed or offended. If you want to have a legit discussion you should try acting like an adult. Until then, just know that your boy is fucking up our security by encouraging folks like the Norks and Iranians to continue pursuing nuke weapons.

Well, aren't we projecting just a little. A good fiath argument on your part would have included a cite of the comments referenced and perhaps some elaboration on said comments by yourself. You skipped the cite and went straight to the elaboration and expected someone to take you seriously. And then you wonder why you are being laughed at?

BSmack wrote:
Now do you have any ideas or not?

Here's an idea for you...

Fuck off and leave Iran alone. Yankee go home...and take your shitwipe, bankrupt Western liberal "values" with you.


Turn your own kids into pill-popping, homicidal homosexuals and leave the Persians alone.

BSmack wrote:Well, aren't we projecting just a little. A good fiath argument on your part would have included a cite of the comments referenced and perhaps some elaboration on said comments by yourself. You skipped the cite and went straight to the elaboration and expected someone to take you seriously. And then you wonder why you are being laughed at?

I don't see anyone laughing...~crickets~

What I do see is you ignorantly wishing for more diplomacy and refusing to acknowledge that the current state of affairs ain't a result of not enough diplomacy.

Carry on, twerp.

Weasel, you're a tedious twerp. You've established that. You also display a childish lack of depth in approaching a situation like the U.S. and its role in the Middle East. To ignore the actions of our government--and Britain's--over the past seventy-five years is simply irresponsible beyond comment. As for your inane suggestion that U.S. administrations have been helpful to repressive dictators, okay...so what's your point? We supported Suharto, for example. He was a repressive dictator who engaged in heinous genocide against his own people. And...Reagan and GH Bush supported him totally. What's your point again? Oh yeah, our Saudi buddies and their enlightened policies of civil rights.

As for dealing with Iran, the mullahs' entire case for holding authority in that nation is based squarely on the role of America in undermining Iran's government back in 1953. You can't pretend to ignore it. Similarly, our lock-step support for Israel is currently fomenting justified hatred for the U.S. influence in the region. And why shouldn't it? As usual, you imply that you've got some idea...but there's nothing there.

You sure like your strawmen, don't you?