Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[CGVT]

[hack]

True. But the personal attack on Kapture is uncalled for. Just state what you believe and post supporting articles. Don't just attack the person.

You're one to talk...

[Jeff Buchanan]

It didn't, you are hallucinating.

Fair enough. Meant no offense. I respect what you post here. Your views represent an important insight to your side of the issues.

[Kapture1]

Hell of a long time to keep up a sock puppet account. That would take some serious commitment, im impressed Geezer.

Btw, i said your side makes me ill, not anyone here in particular. Start standing for liberal principles where Islam is concerned and i will gain a greater deal of respect.

[Ghengis Jon]

.

[Kapture1]

You're intelligent. Don't let anyone ever tell you otherwise lol

[hack]

Jeff you're a decent person and so perhaps you bend over backwards to be fair to Kapture and Geezer whether they deserve it or not, but that's not doing this forum any favors. You know what he's talking about regarding unfrozen end-of-sanctions assets, as do I. Trump intentionally misrepresented the nature of that payment.

Broadly though, Kapture attempts to offend people on a daily basis and it would be preposterous to imagine him affording others the respect you have just shown him. Geezer likes to spread around the insults too, though not always. Most of us are decent enough to laugh off that crap, and do our best to have a good discussion here in spite of what Kapture (always) and Geezer (sometimes) do to degrade it. It's your forum to run and not mine, but it will be a better place if what's good for one is good for all. If Geezer and Kapture want to dish out that shit they should take it too, and IMO it's your job as a moderator to make that clear. The next time either one complains I hope you will direct them to examples of their own similar behavior.

[Kapture1]

Pallets of cash not sanction assest release.

Im also talking about knowing Hezbollah is selling cocaine in the US, and using that money to fund terrorism and not doing anything about it because it would upset the Iranians. At least this oppressive regime that your president ass kissed isn't funding terrorism in Syria, Isreal and Jordan against US and her allies. Because that would be really bad. Not nearly as bad as allowing them to get a nuke in ten years, but bad enough.


This and making healthcare unaffordable are the lasting legacy of the worst president in US history.

[CGVT]

But Obaaaaaama...

[Da Geezer]

equal justice under law:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455020/hillary-clinton-server-emails-erased-technician-should-be-pressured

[Jeff Buchanan]

Pallets of cash not sanction assest release.

Right. I think there are two separate events involving a lot of money that went to Iran. (1) Asset release that was part of the Nuclear Arms deal with Iran. (2) $1.7 billion from the settlement of a decades-old arbitration claim settled in the Hague between the U.S. and Iran. The circumstances surrounding the Nuclear Arms deal with Iran are immensely complicated.

Here's where I have a problem and it's the same one that I voiced earlier. The narrative from the Trump Campaign, the Freedom Caucus and now that this issue is coming to light again, by the Trump administration. The circumstances are not fully disclosed and explained. Instead wild claims are made that have no basis in the facts.

Unlike DJT is wont to do, you cannot frame it as a bad deal without fully understanding what was obtained by all interested parties within it and that doesn't happen in Trumps world. I can't claim that I've studied it but if I were framing a fair narrative about it, you can bet I would take the time to do so.

Moving on from there ....... the position of the the right in this country is that Iran is bad; the kind of Islam practiced by the Mullahs in Iran stifles freedom and democratic principles, they're state sponsors of terrorism (Hezbollah), they cooperate with Syria and the Russians in destabilizing activities in the ME.

Would you advocate for military action against Iran? Do you have a workable operational plan to carry that out? Have you considered the potential for blow-back should such an operation be undertaken and fails or if it succeeds, what next? Talking tough about Iran is easy. Understanding them, their interests and how to make them conform with ours and ours with theirs is hard.

You ask the left to "start standing for liberal principles where Islam is concerned and i (you) will gain a greater deal of respect." With respect to "liberal principles," what brand of Islam should the left be ok or not ok with? Do you mean the entirety of the Islamic faith or only the extremist factions of it? What brand of Islam is practiced in Iran? What is the relationship between the practice of Islam in Iran and it's governance?

The point here is that, once again, the right tends to make these broad brush strokes implying that Islam is not a religion that embodies liberal principles and therefor it is bad. You'll find a whole lot of practitioners of Islam who would disagree with that. Certainly, there are factions of Islam that are draconian in their approach to daily life. We know some of them are dangerous and a threat to global and US security and order. The US and its interested allies are doing something about that. It's working.

Nuking Iran into an asphalt parking lot or threatening it for it's evil doing (a) is not going to produce acceptable outcomes and (b) ain't gonna happen. We live in a very different world from the 1930s when the Nazis were threatening to rule a world of Aryans only and were already taking steps to do so. So, options of dealing with states that limit freedom of choice and democratic principles, abridge human rights, those that threaten the US and it's allies with military force and likewise endanger our democratic, strategic and economic interests, are better dealt with using a reasonable multilateral carrot and stick approach.

We can go on about how to do that but I categorically reject the black and white simplicity, the sloganism, the memes by which the far right and particularly the Trump administration's narrative tries to frame otherwise complex things.

[hack]

No religion embodies liberal principles, but Islam does stand out as a particular problem. It's scaled up the progression from believer to death-cult member in a way that no other has. It's awfully hard to reconcile "religion of peace" with facts on the ground. But the behaviour on the right is awfully hard to reconcile with genuine concern about this. It should be asking a whole lot of questions about the current administration's Saudi Arabia policy.

Happy New Year, everyone. I hope each and everyone of you have a wonderful '18, and also STFU.

[Kapture1]

plenty of polling data on Islam, to be clear the issue isn't just the radical minority that would strap a bomb to their chest, it's also about the % that are just as fanatical about the caliphate but choose to change governments and systems around the world through political means and not violence. The problem is also with those in support of Sharia Law as law of the land. Those that believe that women can not drive, or vote, or educate themselves, that death is the appropriate punishment for leaving the faith, that being gay should be illegal. that tiny tiny radical Muslim minority isn't so tiny... or a minority of radicals if/when you consider something like death for apostates a radical concept.

you should understand that I am well enough educated on the subject of Islam to be making the claims that I do about the religion, and this isn't just a "I hate Islam because they is brown" assumption the left tends to make about the right. and the left should be aware the damage aligning the feminist movement with pro Sharia groups does to the overall credibility of the feminist message. that's all. "Women in Iran? if they think they're oppressed, they think they have it rough, they should know that the first female candidate of a major political party just lost an election (because she was a shitty candidate, and corrupt as all hell)... that's REAL oppression. He said Pussy once, now let me strap on a hijab and show how tolerant and empowered I am"

Sorry, but if you wanted me to take you seriously about the clown in the white house, you shouldn't have shown up in DC on 1-21 dressed as a giant vagina. I digress.

[Da Geezer]

I find them reflective of a superficial understanding of complex issues and moreover reflective of a lack of willingness to try to thoughtfully understand them.

Well, here is what Kapture said in reply:
Pallets of cash not sanction assest release.

I'm also talking about knowing Hezbollah is selling cocaine in the US, and using that money to fund terrorism and not doing anything about it because it would upset the Iranians. At least this oppressive regime that your president ass kissed isn't funding terrorism in Syria, Isreal and Jordan against US and her allies. Because that would be really bad. Not nearly as bad as allowing them to get a nuke in ten years, but bad enough.

I haven't heard anything from you progs about Obama stopping the investigation/prosecution of Hezbollah in order to curry favor with the Iranians in order to induce them to take the deal.

Could you name something beneficial to the US in the Iran deal?

Anyway, this is probably just my "superficial understanding" of the issue. Kap, you will see a pattern with Jeff. When he is losing a debate he always resorts to the "I'm superior intellectually and you are stupid and superficial..." statement. Watch for it. It just means he you are winning.

And when he starts hallucinating posts which never happened......

[Da Geezer]

A perfect issue for 2018:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-big-beautiful-trump-2018-issue-1514499989?shareToken=st4eb1c14a7cc245b9a57fac952057be9d&reflink=article_email_share

If that is paywalled, I got it from Real Clear Politics:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2017/12/31/a_big_beautiful_trump_2018_issue_430328.html?ref=hvper.com