|
twistedmentat posted:I always love the rights inability to understand nuance. You can say Black Lives Matter, and cops should stop gunning them down for looking at them funny, and also say its a shame and a tragedy when a policeman is killing the line of duty. That, and they take one single marginal incident (the "pigs in a blanket" chant) and obsessively, incessantly, endlessly harp on it, pushing it as incontrovertable proof that BLM is a hate group no different than the KKK.
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
Was listening to talk radio today and the national AP anchor who reads the news at the top of every hour called the Iran deal "controversial". Maybe I'm misinformed, but aren't the only significant groups who oppose the deal like 50% of US Republicans and some neocon hardliners in Israel? How is something "controversial" when the vast majority of the world's intelligence community is for it while a relative handful of extremists are against it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:Was listening to talk radio today and the national AP anchor who reads the news at the top of every hour called the Iran deal "controversial". Maybe I'm misinformed, but aren't the only significant groups who oppose the deal like 50% of US Republicans and some neocon hardliners in Israel? How is something "controversial" when the vast majority of the world's intelligence community is for it while a relative handful of extremists are against it? There is no daylight between the GOP and anything Bibi/Likud believes, therefore anything Bibi doesn't like is controversial. Read the article in The New Yorker. Edit: ooops New York Magazine not New Yorker radical meme fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Sep 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:Was listening to talk radio today and the national AP anchor who reads the news at the top of every hour called the Iran deal "controversial". Maybe I'm misinformed, but aren't the only significant groups who oppose the deal like 50% of US Republicans and some neocon hardliners in Israel? How is something "controversial" when the vast majority of the world's intelligence community is for it while a relative handful of extremists are against it? Controversial is a word that the press uses to avoid taking a stand on facts
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 02:10
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:It's totemic. He's wearing it to show he's a good, humble, christian white guy from the Real America. Not some communist metrosexual from the big city. He knows exactly what he looks like and that's why he's wearing it. Absolutely, which is what makes the green visor in the brim of his hat hilarious. There are limits to 'rugged', after all. Minghawk fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Sep 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Controversial is a word that the press uses to avoid taking a stand on facts
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:Controversial is a word that the press uses to avoid taking a stand on facts Is it really "taking a stand" to not be needlessly inaccurate about something that's so easily discernable? beatlegs fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Sep 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 04:22
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:Is it really "taking a stand" to not be needlessly inaccurate about something that's so easily discernable? Do... do you not know what thread you're in?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 04:45
|
|
|
It just seems like AP radio "headline news" at the top of every hour should be part of that last remaining vestige of "boring', just-the-facts journalism. But admittedly, who am I kidding.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I always love the rights inability to understand nuance. You can say Black Lives Matter, and cops should stop gunning them down for looking at them funny, and also say its a shame and a tragedy when a policeman is killing the line of duty. Conservatives live in a black and white world of Good Guys and Bad Guys and anyone who isn't 100% ideologically pure is a Bad Guy. Saying racism is still a problem is both an attack on America and on our white dominant culture and makes you a Bad Guy. beatlegs posted:Was listening to talk radio today and the national AP anchor who reads the news at the top of every hour called the Iran deal "controversial". Maybe I'm misinformed, but aren't the only significant groups who oppose the deal like 50% of US Republicans and some neocon hardliners in Israel? How is something "controversial" when the vast majority of the world's intelligence community is for it while a relative handful of extremists are against it? Because those extremists control at least half of the the American political narrative and the media doesn't want to be branded as biased by them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 04:55
|
|
|
 Magnificent. Literally saying, "Oppose death to gays and oppose Kim Davis, or support Kim Davis and support death to gays."
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 05:42
|
|
|
Aaand there's the pitch... wow, magnificent. It's sailed right over her head, Bert. Yes, Dick, by about three feet, looks like. You have to duck to miss some of those by that much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 05:59
|
|
|
Hazo posted:
That woman's twitter is all Islamocolypse
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
Hazo posted:
I read that like ten times and can't parse it. I know what she's trying to say, but she's not doing it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
nm
beatlegs fucked around with this message at 07:17 on Sep 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 07:14
|
|
|
There's a lot of Opposing Kim Davis = SHIARA LAW ISLAM ABDUL AKBAR!!!! stuff floating around. I'm trying to find it but there were tweets a friend reposted that were basically "Muslims want to force people do what they say, Christians like Davis stand up against them" and "Only Christians like Kim Davis can stand against the increasing Muslim control of the US". What Muslim control? I guess when you live in a town of 1200 people and ever go outside visual range of your own house, or live in a gated community cowering in your mcmansion, you can assume the entire country is overrun by guys in robes and beards waving scimatar's around beheading everyone who won't kiss pictures of Obama and rainbow flags, but that's not everyone. By the way, that's something that really bugs me; all the Hawks calling for war with Iran, do they know that Iran is like, a fully modern country with a professional military with fully up to date weapons and tactics? Invading them would be like invading Spain. They seem to think its as I said, guys in beards and robes in camels trading dates between oasis like a cartoon. A US Invasion of Iran would be a real war, the US has not had to fight in a long time. Drones and aircraft would be useful, but the Iranians have prepared for that. Sending in troops would get real expensive real fast.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
Some hawks do: the Dick Cheney war profiteer types understand what a fantastically expensive boondoggle it would be and are cumming themselves at the thought of profits rolling in year after year as the bodies pile up and the President gets on TV and grimly reminds us we need to stay the course now so the lives of our dead soldiers won't have been spent in vain. The rest of them think exactly what you said: the Red Chinese/Vietnamese/Iraqis/Iranians are just a bunch of barefoot/straw-hatted/be-turbaned/be-turbaned primitives who will throw down their weapons, embrace democracy, and beg us to loot their resources when they see our mighty planes so we can invade on the cheap and wave victory flags in a few months,, unless of course the liberals stab us in the back again and turn it into a bloody endless quagmire.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 07:39
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:There's a lot of Opposing Kim Davis = SHIARA LAW ISLAM ABDUL AKBAR!!!! stuff floating around. I'm trying to find it but there were tweets a friend reposted that were basically "Muslims want to force people do what they say, Christians like Davis stand up against them" and "Only Christians like Kim Davis can stand against the increasing Muslim control of the US". its projection, they spend so much time thinking about getting god back in the schools and courthouse that they don't immediately assume that others aren't trying to do the same to them
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 07:52
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:There's a lot of Opposing Kim Davis = SHIARA LAW ISLAM ABDUL AKBAR!!!! stuff floating around. I'm trying to find it but there were tweets a friend reposted that were basically "Muslims want to force people do what they say, Christians like Davis stand up against them" and "Only Christians like Kim Davis can stand against the increasing Muslim control of the US". Thats a lie, Spain would fold like a rotten cardboard box.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 08:44
|
|
|
AtomikKrab posted:Thats a lie, Spain would fold like a rotten cardboard box. Exactly. The better analog between Iran and another country's military standing would be S. Korea. No European nation is half-way prepared for any sort of conventional war. I'm not counting Russia as a European country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 08:53
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Some hawks do: the Dick Cheney war profiteer types understand what a fantastically expensive boondoggle it would be and are cumming themselves at the thought of profits rolling in year after year as the bodies pile up and the President gets on TV and grimly reminds us we need to stay the course now so the lives of our dead soldiers won't have been spent in vain. It really is the same old feverish, nationalist morons over and over again throughout history isn't it. Talking about pride and will like it can provide a military advantage. Fat rear end Hermann Göring level poo poo, pure idiocy. They either drag their nations to war while guffawing and eating from a pig with an apple in its mouth, or their nations wise up and hang them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 09:00
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:By the way, that's something that really bugs me; all the Hawks calling for war with Iran, do they know that Iran is like, a fully modern country with a professional military with fully up to date weapons and tactics? ... A US Invasion of Iran would be a real war, the US has not had to fight in a long time. Yes, they do. At least some of them do. That's the loving point. It's the kind of war that would justify every multibillion dollar weapon purchase in the last 30 years (well, every purchase that actually works to an acceptable extent). Hardly anything in the US arsenal has actually been used in the role for which it was intended, against enemies that weren't comically outmatched. It's hard to say "we need this hundred billion dollar superweapon" with a straight face when you're almost exclusively bombing guys with AK-47s and Toyota pickup trucks. Iran would be the next best thing for defense contractors to China. Better, even, since it wouldn't be as much of a sure loss if it turned into a ground war. A US invasion of Iran would be a real war, the kind the US has wished it were fighting for as long as most of us have been alive. At least at first.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 09:05
|
|
|
An actual shooting war with Iran would be almost as nasty as war with Russia minus nukes. Like there isn't actually any precedent for such a war, Iran is basically in the top tier of world powers militarily, right below the US. The US would obviously win, but I sure as poo poo wouldn't want to be on the ground fighting it, and the postwar situation in Iran itself and the ME at large would make the current situation look downright peaceful Like that's what's so insane about this whole situation, these are basically uncharted waters and the hawks and neocons want to march into war with loving parade floats and music icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 09:09 on Sep 10, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 09:06
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Like there isn't actually any precedent for such a war, Iran is basically in the top tier of world powers militarily, right below the US. I agree with a lot of your post, but I think this is an exaggeration. Iran does well with what they have, but the economic and military sanctions they're under have limited their ability to maintain and develop modern equipment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 10:14
|
|
|
beatlegs posted:It just seems like AP radio "headline news" at the top of every hour should be part of that last remaining vestige of "boring', just-the-facts journalism. But admittedly, who am I kidding. "Boring just-the-facts journalism" is biased and left-wing by its very nature.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 12:06
|
|
|
I think South Korea is also a little generous. The Iranians, for the obvious historical reasons, have a completely schizophrenic array of equipment. But due to sanctions they're all pretty old. To just look a tanks for example, they've got old model T72s, Type 59's, Chieftains, Pattons, plus their own homegrown knock-offs. None of those are going to have a good day against Abrams. Don't get me wrong, it'd still be incredibly bloody and a bad idea to invade. As Saddam found, the Iranians are not reluctant to fight. Any pro-American feelings amongst the young, would evaporate the moment the bombs started to fall. It's be like fighting the Second gulf war, only against a much stonger opponent, who was much more willing to fight. America would probably 'win' in the end, after which I don't want to even speculate how bad the insurgency would get.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 12:46
|
|
|
Also would we have any non-Israel international support for that boondoggle? I can't see how we wouldn't be universally seen as the warmongering invaders by everyone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 12:49
|
|
|
Radish posted:Also would we have any non-Israel international support for that boondoggle? I can't see how we wouldn't be universally seen as the warmongering invaders by everyone. Saudi Arabia and other majority sunni states. Here's an interesting article on how ridiculously easy it would be to kick the poo poo out of the U.S. Navy in the Persian Gulf. quote:The Iranians can destroy the 5th Fleet with nothing more than fishing boats, private planes, anti-ship missiles and a few patrol craft. That’s not a guess. It’s a fact, demonstrated at the expense of American taxpayers by our own forces. Back in the summer of 2002, the US armed forces staged Millenium Challenge 2001, the biggest and most expensive war game in history, in the Gulf. The scenario was a war against an unnamed “Red” country, but everyone knew that the red country in question was Iran. At a cost of $250 million, the US Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Army planned to showcase their new HLA (“High Level Architecture”) program, allowing complex logistical and tactical planning among all the services in a joint attack on the “Red” nation. It goes into detail about what Van Riper did which was basically utilize an enormous number of civilian small ships and aircraft to buzz and shadow and generally become a nuisance to our mighty military allowing the real threats to get up close.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 13:11
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:An actual shooting war with Iran would be almost as nasty as war with Russia minus nukes. Like there isn't actually any precedent for such a war, Iran is basically in the top tier of world powers militarily, right below the US. The US would obviously win Uh you sure? You didn't win the Vietnam war, or the Korean war, and you didn't really win the Iraq war either. On home soil Iran would push your poo poo in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
radical meme posted:Saudi Arabia and other majority sunni states. Here's an interesting article on how ridiculously easy it would be to kick the poo poo out of the U.S. Navy in the Persian Gulf. He also pulled a bunch of kinda sketchy moves to get that done, like declaring that he was using couriers to deliver messages that were both instant and impossible to disrupt, and claiming to fire antiship missiles bigger than the boats that were supposed to be shooting them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 13:22
|
|
|
lmaoboy1998 posted:Uh you sure? You didn't win the Vietnam war, or the Korean war, and you didn't really win the Iraq war either. On home soil Iran would push your poo poo in. He means the actual conventional combat part, which we do excel at it. Like every half educated moron will remind you, we "won" the Tět Offensive. Thinking that it's some how not fair that the media showed we were lying to outsources ourselves about how beaten the VC and the NVA were. Same poo poo happened in Iraq. We're just complete poo poo at the whole nation building thing, the whole peace part of the war.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 13:34
|
|
|
radical meme posted:Saudi Arabia and other majority sunni states. Oh yeah I totally forgot about that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 13:40
|
|
|
radical meme posted:Saudi Arabia and other majority sunni states. Here's an interesting article on how ridiculously easy it would be to kick the poo poo out of the U.S. Navy in the Persian Gulf. I don't have the sources to back it up available to me right now but Riper also cheated pretty blatantly if I recall, including saying that his motorcycle messengers could move impossibly fast and were undetectable and similar shenanigans. The story makes for a good story about the hubris of the American military but it's built on a lot of half-truths.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 14:18
|
|
|
Hazo posted:
Shep just wants to hang ten, bruh. Also, wasn't Pam Gellar one of the shitlords doing the whole "draw Muhammad and call Muslims Moslems" bit in Texas?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
Phone posted:Also, wasn't Pam Gellar one of the shitlords doing the whole "draw Muhammad and call Muslims Moslems" bit in Texas? Yes, she runs what basically amounts to a hate group.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 14:20
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Yes, she runs what basically amounts to a hate group. I believe you mean a freedom group, brother. :910:
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:He also pulled a bunch of kinda sketchy moves to get that done, Nyyen posted:The story makes for a good story about the hubris of the American military but it's built on a lot of half-truths. I don't have the knowledge or background so I'll defer to war geeks on whether or not Van Ripper cheated, which is kind of comical in itself imagining a bunch of high level officers sitting around a table screaming, "nuh uh, you cheated, you don't get to win". Still though, I can't imagine the U.S. military even recommending an invasion of Iran. We've got evidence of Russian involvement in Syria right now, just imagine what they'd do too help Iran bleed the U.S. dry if we started a ground war in Iran.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
To the milhist thread then!  
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
Steven Crowder is losing it Trump said following about Stevens GF quote:“Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?! I mean, she’s a woman, and I’m not s’posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?” 
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 10:07 |
|
|
radical meme posted:Saudi Arabia and other majority sunni states. Here's an interesting article on how ridiculously easy it would be to kick the poo poo out of the U.S. Navy in the Persian Gulf. Van Riper is an idiot who cheated throughout his own game to fit his established narrative. Look into that exercise more, it was a joke. Also, Iran's conventional forces are quite limited. The hundreds of thousands of paramilitary forces are not, and the insurgency and assymetric attacks they could wage are the primary threat. Invading Iran would be pointless and the aftermath would be incredibly bloody.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2015 14:51
|
|
