You condescend me and call me a friend? Are all your friends subservient to you and your ego? I don't roll that way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txdwc_HkG5o
You condescend me and call me a friend? Are all your friends subservient to you and your ego? I don't roll that way.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txdwc_HkG5o
Dude, let's lighten up a little. Annoyed = me. Let's not get into this "care" stuff. If you "care" about me then you've got way more energy and capacity for caring than I've ever seen in the entire world. Let's not throw that **** around so willy nilly. You don't have to care about me. I don't expect you to.
I'm not going through anything. I honestly have very strong feelings about sanctions. It's nothing personal between you and I. Just when you brush it off like maybe some sort of underling will explain it to me, that's dick move ****. You pull that and it absolutely ruffles my feathers. Welcome to me. I've been that way my whole life. Ask any one of my "real" friends and they'll tell you that. Not that I expect you to know that, even as much of a "real" friend as you are and as much as you "care" about me.
Just stop with the ********. You're using words that I take seriously.
I don't understand opposition to Cuba but Iran. Jesus dude, you want nuclear weapon capabilities in the hands of radicals in the most unstable region on earth? Really!!
First of all, won't weapons inspectors figure into things?
Secondly, what would be so wrong with Iran having nukes? It would be probably the most stabilizing force in the entire region. No longer would Israel be the only country with them. No longer will Israel be able to bully everyone as much. I think gaining nukes also helps a country realize it's own destructive force. That's why Russia and the USA never actually pushed the red button because they knew that by doing so there was no turning back.
Likewise, I think if Iran were to have nukes tomorrow, it would force all parties involved to act as adults finally. You're not going to "win" Iran with more threats, American supported puppet dictators, or invasions. You're going to win Iran by engaging them and treating them as equals.
Listen folks, we created the Ayatollah in Iran. We built that. So if we don't like the ultra conservative extremist government that they currently have, then maybe we should change our strategy with them? Since the end of WWII we've tried to control them. needless to say it hasn't worked.
So maybe actually growing up and treating them as adults might work? And if that means them gaining nukes then so be it.
Hell; I truly don't understand the mistrust. The only country that has ever used a nuke on another country is us. We have no room to accuse Russia or Iran of a using the atomic bomb as a weapon.
Sanctions do work. This deal is evidence of that. Iran doesn't come to the table if sanctions were never imposed. I think you're wrong that sanctions just effect the poor and that that is the goal. It effects the finances of a nations elites drastically. It also makes it harder for a government to fund itself.
I thought for a long time that we should mind our own business and withdraw but I have softened to a certain extent. I think that I have been lazy in my thinking and sometimes intellectually dishonest with myself. It is too easy to blame the American government for all the worlds problems. I think if we are truly being honest, we have to conclude that if the US was less engaged the world would likely be much worse than it is in many ways.
The US sometimes makes mistakes, oversteps, or does some straight up ****ed up **** but on the whole the net effect of American engagement around the world has been positive.
Well, at least most people the world over came up positive with the US after WWII.
Could've been more positive with the likes of Stillwell and Patton getting elected President instead of Eisenhower.
Did Patton try to get the nomination?
Good postI don't like the idea of Iran having nukes because I take them at their word. They say they want to destroy Israel and America and I believe they do. I'm not so sure that they would use a nuke on Israel but it is a power symbol for them. It draws others to their way of thinking (for example Iraq).
But sanctions at this point, sorry Mrs. Fiorina, is a failed policy. It will never work. Why? Because there is a growing group of nations that are breaking rank with America, for various reasons, all over the world. Russia and China are doing business with Iran and as an extension their lackeys would be willing as well. For sanctions to work you would need to cut Iran off entirely. Not simply block off one of two roads...
So all that is left is either ignore Iran completely (horrible idea), go to war with Iran (even worse idea) or talk to Iran (decent option).
...But sanctions at this point, sorry Mrs. Fiorina, is a failed policy. It will never work. Why? Because there is a growing group of nations that are breaking rank with America, for various reasons, all over the world. Russia and China are doing business with Iran and as an extension their lackeys would be willing as well. For sanctions to work you would need to cut Iran off entirely. Not simply block off one of two roads...
So all that is left is either ignore Iran completely (horrible idea), go to war with Iran (even worse idea) or talk to Iran (decent option).
yeah, it was better when the Communist block countries were still communist because then they couldn't afford to trade anything with anyone other than each other - - besides, their goods were so poorly made that very few wanted them anyhow - - so they couldn't take any actions that would have much effect on any sanctions or embargo
now that we're trading with them, they can then turn around and trade with others and it's just not the same as it was during the "Cold War" years