Well I guess Israel and Iran are at war now.

Page 5 of 8 [ 120 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

kokopelli
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,198
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind

Yesterday, 3:30 am

cyberdora wrote:

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

Saddam wasn't a supporter of terrorists. That's just a lie that Bush and his psychopath buddies claimed to help justify the war. He refused to let Al Qaeda anywhere near the country. The crimes his country committed were proper crimes against humanity rather than terrorism. Not that you'd know that, the Israelis have been lying about that stuff for ages.

Saddam was a terrorist. He terrorised and murdered Iranians, Kuwaitis and Kurds. Heck he terrorised his own people.

Not only that, he permitted his son to take the virginity of all the newly wed woman he wanted by raping them on their wedding night.

ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 37,946
Location: Long Island, New York

Yesterday, 7:32 am

Is this war Iran’s October 7th in the sense that the Iranians underestimated what the Israelis were willing to do leading to catastrophic results. A lot of the Iranians who have been assassinated were killed in their own homes. The Israelis took out Hezbollah leaders in their homes. Trump gave a sixty day deadline and on day 61 ordered Americans to evacuate the region.

I assume that after 30 years of Israel and the United States threatening to bomb the Iranian nuclear program and not doing it and all the reports about daylight between Trump and Netanyahu they though the Israelis were bluffing.

_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,358
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

Yesterday, 9:47 am

cyberdora wrote:

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

Saddam was a terrorist. He terrorised and murdered Iranians, Kuwaitis and Kurds. Heck he terrorised his own people.

He wasn't a loss indeed.

MatchboxVagabond
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Mar 2023
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,319

Yesterday, 10:24 am

cyberdora wrote:

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

Saddam was a terrorist. He terrorised and murdered Iranians, Kuwaitis and Kurds. Heck he terrorised his own people.

That's massive goal post moving. You could say most of that about Israel. Saddam wasn't a good guy, but he also kept Al Qaeda out and none of that had anything to do with why he was overthrown. BTW, the results of overthrowing him were far worse than anyone he did. You had possibly a million Iraqis murdered in the subsequent ethnic cleansing and recriminations, Al Qaeda and ISIS running Amok and Iran refocusing their weapons on Israel.

We don't need this sort of misinformation. People were using that to rationalize the war before it even started and yes Saddam was bad, but there was no concern for what happened next.

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,358
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

Yesterday, 11:35 am

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

cyberdora wrote:

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

Saddam was a terrorist. He terrorised and murdered Iranians, Kuwaitis and Kurds. Heck he terrorised his own people.

Iraq's Shia (60%) and Kurds wouldn't agree with you.

Btw, many of the ISIS' key commanders are ex Ba'ath.

I understand why you would be against dethroning Saddam, because you as American probably saw this as not of your business. Fine.

But don't claim that Iraq under Saddam was better than Iraq without Saddam, at least the Iraqi people now can choose their own leaders despite all the problems.

The spreading of ISIS/Qaeda is inevitable in the entire Muslim world because radicalization itself is spreading like cancer; not even Saddam or any other dictator would be able to stop it.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 20 Jun 2025, 11:56 am, edited 2 times in total.

blitzkrieg
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jun 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 20,404

Yesterday, 11:44 am

I saw a video of Iranian missiles being sent into the sky, on course for Israel, earlier today.

It is a sad and sorry situation.

Life is precious. War can be interesting in the abstract, but in real life, the consequences make war a terrible thing.

Mona Pereth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Sep 2018
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,626
Location: New York City (Queens)

Yesterday, 1:47 pm

kokopelli wrote:

Not only that, he permitted his son to take the virginity of all the newly wed woman he wanted by raping them on their wedding night.

What is your source for this story? I tried to find this via Google just now but couldn't, although I did find plenty of other stories about the brutality of Saddam's son Uday (e.g. Uday: career of rape, torture and murder).

Raping large numbers of women on their wedding nights, specifically, is something various tyrants have been alleged to do, ever since the Epic of Gilgamesh. It has even been said that this was an institutionalized custom in some places, including medieval Europe. (See the Wikipedia article on Droit du seigneur.) But historians debate whether this ever actually happened.

_________________
- Autistic in NYC - Resources and new ideas for the autistic adult community in the New York City metro area.
- Autistic peer-led groups (via text-based chat, currently) led or facilitated by members of the Autistic Peer Leadership Group.

Last edited by Mona Pereth on 20 Jun 2025, 2:29 pm, edited 3 times in total.

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,119
Location: Right over your left shoulder

Yesterday, 2:08 pm

cyberdora wrote:

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

Saddam was a terrorist. He terrorised and murdered Iranians, Kuwaitis and Kurds. Heck he terrorised his own people.

It wouldn't be a CD argument if the goalposts didn't get moved.

At first the argument was over whether or not Saddam supported terrorist groups, but when that fails you pivot to trying to claim Saddam himself was a terrorist.

Saddam was a monster, but that doesn't mean American intervention was a good idea.

_________________
The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. —Malcolm X
If you feel useless, just remember the USA took four presidents, thousands of lives, trillions of dollars and 20 years to replace the Taliban with the Taliban.

kokopelli
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Nov 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,198
Location: amid the sunlight and the dust and the wind

Yesterday, 2:18 pm

Mona Pereth wrote:

kokopelli wrote:

Not only that, he permitted his son to take the virginity of all the newly wed woman he wanted by raping them on their wedding night.

It was probably Uday. There were a number of stories that mentioned this in the year or two after 9/11.

MatchboxVagabond
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Mar 2023
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,319

Yesterday, 2:18 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

cyberdora wrote:

Saddam was a terrorist. He terrorised and murdered Iranians, Kuwaitis and Kurds. Heck he terrorised his own people.

This is all a bunch of nonsense. Al Qaeda wasn't in Iraq and ISIS wasn't around there either at the time. The things you're pointing at weren't anywhere near the same scale as what happened after the US overthrew the government there. We're talking a very real million-ish people dead as a result of the ethnic cleansing that followed. Much of the worst of the stuff that Saddam did was in the '80s and prior to the US intervening during the first Iraq War.

The whole idea that the US intervening so late was a net positive represents a shocking level of ignorance about what was going on geopolitically at the time. GHWB didn't finish the job in the early '90s because there was no viable exit strategy. They put an end to the worst of it, but without enough Iraqis supporting a full regime change, that wasn't ever going to be viable.

And again, nobody likes ISIS including the people in those areas. They were willing to gain strength specifically because the US and Israel keep destabilizing countries. The US was literally on the same side of the Syrian civil war with ISIS, so don't spread that crap about how nothing could have been done, a good first step would be not not side with the terrorists.

This is all manufactured consent for illegal wars. Let the Iranian people decide whether or not they want the current regime, not Israel.

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,119
Location: Right over your left shoulder

Yesterday, 2:20 pm

kokopelli wrote:

Mona Pereth wrote:

kokopelli wrote:

Not only that, he permitted his son to take the virginity of all the newly wed woman he wanted by raping them on their wedding night.

It was probably Uday. There were a number of stories that mentioned this in the year or two after 9/11.

You mean while they were manufacturing consent to invade Iraq?

Lemme guess, you still believe the 'Iraqis were dumping newborns out of incubators' BS too.

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,119
Location: Right over your left shoulder

Yesterday, 2:38 pm

Quote:

Iranian missiles have struck high-priority targets in Israel, including military and intelligence headquarters buildings and the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange.

Critical shortages are developing across missile systems of all types in Western defense arsenals, and Pentagon officials have been aware of the problem for months.

Israeli interceptor missiles are also running low, with some estimates at just ten days' supply. These shortages will impel tough decisions at the operations level, to allow some inbound ballistics through.

But the high profile of some of the targets impacted suggests that Iran may be successfully deploying hypersonic missiles, or other ballistics that can evade the IDF's air defense systems.

Boeing is one of the key suppliers for the Arrow missiles, used in Israel's missile defense systems. But Boeing is on China's export sanctions list, and is one of many military contractors who are specifically targeted by China's rare earth metals bans.

Finally, there's a positive impact from T. Diddy's trade war. As long as America isn't able to import rare earth metals from China, Boeing can't manufacture critical components for the Arrow missiles.

No Arrow missiles = no Israeli sense of impunity = less Israeli aggression

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,358
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

Yesterday, 2:46 pm

MatchboxVagabond wrote:

Care to explain what's "nonesense" in what I said? Or you're just like funeralxempire, you get hostile when presented with facts?

None of the things you said dissmiss the facts I mentioned; they are totally not related. Nor I disagree with you: Yes, the US sided with Al-Julani in Syria, yes the dethroning of Saddam did have its repercussions, nor I denied that the war on Iraq was based on false info... I am not arguing about that.

I said facts.

Read carefully this time before throwing tantrum:

- Iraq's Shia (60%) and Kurds wouldn't agree with you. - a FACT, if you give them a time machine, no Iraqi Shia or Kurd would choose to prevent the fall of Saddam.

At least the Iraqi people now can choose their own leaders despite all the problems. - a FACT - they are electing their own leaders, this wasn't possible under Saddam's rule.

The spreading of ISIS/Qaeda is inevitable in the entire Muslim world because radicalization itself is spreading like cancer; not even Saddam or any other dictator would be able to stop it. - a FACT - ISIS/Qaeda and its ilk exist in the entire Muslim world, including in the far south east like Indonesia, Philippines' south and Malaysia. The Islam faith itself is a ground for sprouting such ideologies and groups; it is a far deeper problem than just US doing wrong foreign policies.

Counter-argument those instead.

funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,119
Location: Right over your left shoulder

Yesterday, 2:53 pm

I get hostile when I grow tired of bad faith arguments to excuse inexcusable actions.

Your hatred for the Iranian regime is quite justified, but that doesn't mean Israel or the US have the legitimacy to impose regime change, especially not when they're doing it only to further Israeli interests.

Mona Pereth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Sep 2018
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,626
Location: New York City (Queens)

Yesterday, 3:03 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

The spreading of ISIS/Qaeda is inevitable in the entire Muslim world because radicalization itself is spreading like cancer; not even Saddam or any other dictator would be able to stop it. - a FACT - ISIS/Qaeda and its ilk exist in the entire Muslim world, including in the far south east like Indonesia, Philippines' south and Malaysia. The Islam faith itself is a ground for sprouting such ideologies and groups; it is a far deeper problem than just US doing wrong foreign policies.

Yes, Islam can be interpreted in such a way as to justify mass slaughter. So too can Judaism and Christianity. (See Christian Right Cites Violent Biblical Amalek Trope to Justify Israel’s Tactics: "Many Christian Zionists are backing genocide by likening Hamas to a biblical tribe that God promised to exterminate," Truthout, October 22, 2023.) But most adherents of these religions do NOT interpret them that way. Justifications for mass slaughter are at least a latent tendency in all the Abrahamic religions, but normally it's a tendency kept in check by other aspects of these religions, and by practical realities.

So, what do you think is causing the spread of radicalization in the Muslim world, if not resentment against the history of Western imperialism?

Last edited by Mona Pereth on 20 Jun 2025, 3:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,358
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

Yesterday, 3:14 pm

Mona Pereth wrote:

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:

Yes, Islam can be interpreted in such a way as to justify mass slaughter. So too can Judaism and Christianity. (See Christian Right Cites Violent Biblical Amalek Trope to Justify Israel’s Tactics: "Many Christian Zionists are backing genocide by likening Hamas to a biblical tribe that God promised to exterminate," Truthout, October 22, 2023.) But most adherents of these religions do NOT interpret them that way.

So, what do you think is causing the spread of radicalization in the Muslim world, if not resentment against the history of Western imperialism?

Judaism's violence justification is limited in a small geographic area, because it is an non-converting religion.

Islam was always radical since Muhammad, it had some "progressive phases", but keeps reverting to its roots over the timeline.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 20 Jun 2025, 3:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Page 5 of 8 [ 120 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Jump to:

Well I guess Israel and Iran are at war now. Post Reply New Topic

Well I guess Israel and Iran are at war now.