Iran vs US/Israel conflict escalating

Here we go ...

"no iranian representation in the court."

yup.

Uh, I'm not an international lawyer, but I'm reasonably sure that you can't bring leaders of nations to trial in foreign courts of law.

Obama requests drone return

  Quote

Former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday criticized Obama's decisions on the drone, but for an entirely different reason. He said that, after the aircraft went down, the president should have ordered an airstrike over Iran.

"The right response to that would have been to go in immediately after it had gone down and destroy it," the Republican, who served with President George W. Bush, told CNN's Erin Burnett. "You can do that from the air ... and, in effect, make it impossible for them to benefit from having captured that drone."

Instead, "he asked nicely for them to return it, and they aren't going to," Cheney said.

Well, could be worse.

Syria is the next place they be invadin'. By proxy already.

  On 12/18/2011 at 10:48 AM, DerWaschbar said:

Obama requests drone return

 

  Quote

Former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney on Monday criticized Obama's decisions on the drone, but for an entirely different reason. He said that, after the aircraft went down, the president should have ordered an airstrike over Iran.

"The right response to that would have been to go in immediately after it had gone down and destroy it," the Republican, who served with President George W. Bush, told CNN's Erin Burnett. "You can do that from the air ... and, in effect, make it impossible for them to benefit from having captured that drone."

Instead, "he asked nicely for them to return it, and they aren't going to," Cheney said.

 

Well, could be worse.

Holy shit his programming is really out of whack.

Yeah, definitely Syria. I think if the US has learned anything in the past 10 years its to at least be more opportunistic in its imperialism.

  On 12/18/2011 at 11:17 AM, chenGOD said:

Holy shit his programming is really out of whack.

Yeah, I personally don't really care for Obama, but at least he isn't a fool cowboy like those in the previous administration.

  On 12/18/2011 at 10:56 AM, delet... said:

Syria is the next place they be invadin'. By proxy already.

you and your "they" again..there's no unified "they" in our world, why can't you get it already ?

i think baby assad would love to start some shit with israel to direct the nation against the old enemy, not the other way around. it's already something resembling a civil/ethnically based war in there. his regime will crumble soon without anyone's involvement.

  On 12/18/2011 at 12:37 PM, eugene said:

  On 12/18/2011 at 10:56 AM, delet... said:

Syria is the next place they be invadin'. By proxy already.

you and your "they" again..there's no unified "they" in our world, why can't you get it already ?

i think baby assad would love to start some shit with israel to direct the nation against the old enemy, not the other way around. it's already something resembling a civil/ethnically based war in there. his regime will crumble soon without anyone's involvement.

t feels as though media here in the west tends to focus on civil unrest that we then become directly/indirectly involved in, while other conflicts that run parallel are hardly reported on.

ermm .. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16376072

  Quote

US President Barack Obama has signed into law a major defence bill including tough new sanctions against Iran.

  On 12/18/2011 at 11:27 AM, DerWaschbar said:

  On 12/18/2011 at 11:17 AM, chenGOD said:

Holy shit his programming is really out of whack.

 

Yeah, I personally don't really care for Obama, but at least he isn't a fool cowboy like those in the previous administration.

this is true, he just has spent the last 3 years bending over backwards so that his group of fool cowboy friends keep their trampling on the constitution permanent while making sure the law never touches them for the war crimes they committed

  On 12/18/2011 at 12:37 PM, eugene said:

  On 12/18/2011 at 10:56 AM, delet... said:

Syria is the next place they be invadin'. By proxy already.

you and your "they" again..there's no unified "they" in our world, why can't you get it already ?

i think he just meant America dude, chill out

nope, he didn't.

Yo Awepittance, I think you should definitely vote for Ron Paul. I would love to see America get the president they so richly deserve.

i don't believe in the binary of the lesser of two evils, i just find it fascinating that a republican in the race is significantly more liberal on key issues than the first black president of the united states who used to hang out with a communist guy who bombed a police station in the early 70s

change that "on key issues" to "on some issues" and I'll be right with you.

well that's were you and i differ, for me civil liberties and our foreign policy our the most important issues at the moment. Obama and every single other republican candidate running right now fails equally and miserably on both counts.

I don't see any independents being able to challenge the GOP/Dems, who have both moved farther to the right the past decade and slowly but surely chipped away civil rights and liberties and let corporations expand their influence. And if anyone steps up and looks to challenge the status quo, they can always detain them indefinitely as a "terrorist".

If you think Ron Paul is significantly more to the left of Obama on civil liberties, please read the actual articles the GG links to. Where Paul discusses his opposition to the Civil Liberties Act, how he thinks that stores should be able to discriminate at will, etc...

  On 12/12/2011 at 4:00 PM, Gary C said:

 

The stars are US controlled military bases.

  On 12/12/2011 at 6:11 PM, chenGOD said:

http://www.nytimes.c...indicators.html

 

you can forget about bases in Afghanistan - troops there barely control the bases, they're scared to go outside them. Even Kabul is seeing increasing attacks.

To continue what Chen pointed out, the vast majority of those are not permanent bases, but airports and air bases the US is allowed to operate from, sometimes just for logistics and refueling, not actual combat operations. Also, the US left Prince Sultan in 2003 per Saudi requests. Ganci and Manas are the same facility. Incirlik is the closest thing to a permanent USAF base on this map.

That said, we're still very much deployed in the area beyond Afghanistan - particularly in Qatar and Bahrain, but I had to clarify that most of those stars aren't "US controlled bases."

  On 1/1/2012 at 10:11 PM, chenGOD said:

If you think Ron Paul is significantly more to the left of Obama on civil liberties, please read the actual articles the GG links to. Where Paul discusses his opposition to the Civil Liberties Act, how he thinks that stores should be able to discriminate at will, etc...

you mean the civil rights act? he believes that if you own private property you should be allowed to do whatever you want with it including being a racist asshole. I don't agree with him on this count, it's allowing slightly more freedom of the individual than i am comfortable with. to me him opposing this does not diminish and individual's freedom, but i do think the civil rights act has an overall benefit for society clearly

i just finished reading an article in foreign affairs written by an obvious hawk/ex pentagon general.

the crux of the biscuit from his vantage is that it would be better to attack now before they have the bomb rather than wait until they do and he feels this is inevitable-that they will have a working missile mounted nuke within 1-2 years.

furthermore it seems the majority of the Iranian populace are sick of the mullah's antiquated religious totalitarian bullshit and a regime change is also inevitable-either from within or from a US/Israeli invasion.

My feeling is that the Iranians would rather keep the leadership they have than let some outside monitor come in and take over, essentially ruining their culture. I think that played a large role into why he was reelected and why most iranians were ok with that.

It wouldn't be the first time a foreign power messed with their leadership. Hadn't that happened it's quite possible that Iran would be quite different today.

  On 1/9/2012 at 5:39 PM, essines said:

My feeling is that the Iranians would rather keep the leadership they have than let some outside monitor come in and take over, essentially ruining their culture. I think that played a large role into why he was reelected and why most iranians were ok with that.

Oh you and your "cultural sensitivity" Don't you realize these people are savages?