The Trump Presidency

any country that preaches the social code to commit social, biological or Spiritual genocide against others, is seeking to regime change.

what is the difference between Totalitarianism, Revolution & Evolution ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

in the context of iran

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Since Trump has no policies or knowledge base of his own, from where does he get his stances?

From guys like Lou Dobbs: https://amp.thedailybeast.com/donal...-him-on-speakerphone-for-oval-office-meetings

Btw:
Remember two years ago, when the potential of hacking of a well-guarded and encrypted private email server was a security concern?
Two months ago, when clandestine meetings of Presidential campaign associates with Russian agents was a security concern?
Two weeks ago when the inability of high level officials with access to classified info to pass a basic security clearance was a security concern?
All that time the low level employees of the studios at Fox News, and anyone else with a mic anywhere near Lou Dobbs, had speakerphone access to the Oval Office during trade and immigration policy meetings.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well I guess we will find out really soon what happens when Iran acquires nuke capacity...and the commonly known angst between it and Israel is tested for it's reality.

just for background have a read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–Israel_relations

On 15 August 2012, during a meeting with veterans of the Iran–Iraq War, Ayatollah Khamenei said that he was confident that "the fake Zionist (regime) will disappear from the landscape of geography."[41][42] In addition, on 19 August, Khamenei reiterated comments made by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which members of the international community, including the United States, France, European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, and United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon condemned,[43] during which he called Israel a "cancerous tumour in the heart of the Islamic world" and said that its existence is responsible for many problems facing the Muslim world
=====
Iran's repeated threats against Israel, particularly in 2012, led Canada, a close ally of Israel, to close its embassy in Iran on September 7, 2012, giving Iranian diplomats 5 days to leave Canada.
=====
Iran's actions, nuclear program, and threats have been viewed by Dr. Gregory Stanton, the founder and director of Genocide Watch, as having taken 6 out of 8 steps on the "path to genocide." Stanton urged the international community to take action against Iran and to isolate it, in order to "curb its genocidal intent." He said that "one of the best predictors of genocide is incitement to genocide ... and I believe that is exactly what Iran is doing today."
​

and so on...

The issue of nuclear proliferation in a region constantly on the brink of war with serious sectarian conflicts, is critical.

Any how, as demonstrated again over the weekend, it all hangs on what Fox news publishes as to what this POTUS says and does.

 

ir you really think your going to convinve me that your right by going poor baby israel what about them i suggest you you go look at my posting history and me geopolitical views. Iran has no genocidal intent. Iran is acting the way it by the countries efforts to attack and destabilize it.

just look at the threats its made to israel which makes it in your mind this violent state that needs to be repressed. yet it has never militarily attacked israel while israel has repeatedly threatened and actually attacked Iran but thats ok be cause... oh thats right their white and judeo christian so their allowed to be violent. you want to end issues with Iran do away with the double standards for violence, terrorism, and war crimes would go a long way. when a country has been attacked and threatened by multiple nuclear powers of course their going to want nukes.

 

I was not discussing the rights and wrongs of either Iran or Israel. I was discussing the insecurity that Iran would present to the world generally if achieving nuclear weapons capacity.

Iran has repeatedly used rhetoric that consistently calls for the destruction of another nation.
Has Israel repeatedly called for Iran's eradication? Nope!
But Iran has called for Israel's eradication.
I don't care why that is so...it is irrelevant to the point that I originally attempted to make.

Are you happy about Iran acquiring Nukes?
If not why not?

btw I am not trying to convince any one of anything..it is sad your think other wise.

 

And why do you think that such a claim about the fate of the state Israel means that Iran would like to nuke Israel? The statement is nothing but a prediction about the political future. Not a statement that one will start any aggressive actions to reach this transformation. The Iranian authorities have clarified often enough that this statement has to be understood in such a general way, as a prediction, and not as a description of what Iran will start to do. But the West continues to use this statement for anti-Iranian propaganda.

This is, instead, an explicit aggressive call to action against Iran. Based on some - in the own words - personal belief.

​

 

right which is why you brought them up? Iran having nukes wouldn't appreciably alter the security of the world.

Iran's rhetoric toward israel is no worse than israel's rhetoric toward iran. the most damaging line ever found even Israeli intelligence admits is due to a translation error. the line actually uttered is along the lines of regime change. and i take actions as far more meaningfull than words.

actualy its central to the point you were making. ie if other countries you deem as being responsible with nukes are acting worse than iran it calls your reasoning and logic into question. and if you don't care about what the facts are you shouldn't be getting involved in conversations.

i would prefer no one have nuke and am generally speaking opposed to nuclear proliferation however i'm not an ideologue or zealot and prefer to react to geopolitical reality. i would much prefer a despotic country with religious issues but is a know rational actor have nukes than a country founded on terrorism. if you want to be taken seriously you need to stop ignoring the 50+ years of provocation against Iran and not refer to it as being irrelevant.

than why the fuck did you bring it up? i have no desire to be apart of anyone's intellectual masterbation

 

Here's an example of what you were demonstrating ignorance about in your silly take on Republican Trump as "less evil" than somebody like Clinton:
https://mikethemadbiologist.com/2018/03/30/aiming-to-misbehave-describing-john-bolton-correctly/

Even from a straight nuclear war perspective, if that were really your worry instead of a handy agitprop cover for squidinking the Republican Trump presidency, Trump is worse than Clinton - much worse. He's a first strike risk.

 

& aside

pjdude1219
My guess is that the first outcome would be that Israel will act aggressively to protect itself and go to war with Iran if necessary.
What happens after that is any ones guess... Iran- Russia vs Israel-USA
Your claim/prediction that Iran gaining nuke capacity would not alter global stability appreciably, is utter nonsense.

In my original post #2591 I posted:

The Iran deal was, I believe, about Iran "voluntarily" limiting it's nuke development in exchange for a lessening of sanctions. This I believe, was to prevent Israel from potentially launching a pre-emptive strike against Iran, if Iran achieved nuke weapons.​

I see no reason to alter this belief.

IMO. Your main complaint is based on your perception of Islamophobia. You believe because I wrote about Islamic fundamentalism that some how Moderate Islam needs your protection and support. An admirable but unnecessary, in this case, reaction.

Islamic fundamentalism and it's potential for Jihad raises all sorts of problems when WMD's are involved. As strongly suggested with ISIL ( Wahhabi ) and other extreme fundamentalist, Shia or other wise, the potential for aggressive use of Nuclear weapons beyond "detente" is quite high. IMO

If Trump withdraws from the current agreement and increases sanctions against Iran, justly or unjustly, Iran will most likely seek to further it's nuclear arms a capacity. This is assuming of course that it hasn't already done so covertly.

As a consequence Israel is on a war footing.

I am confident Trump knows that the powder keg he is building in the Middle East is primed ready to explode.
His anti Islam stance is well evidenced.
....and Israel is stuck in the middle of it all.

The desire to contrive further Islamic secular devastation in the Middle East may very well be an under lying motive.
In case you haven't noticed most of the destruction and casualties in the Middles East have been Muslim fighting Muslim and essentially sectarian in nature.

Middle Eastern Islam appears to have gone into self destruct mode, which I am sure makes certain people very happy indeed.

 

Time to leave Syria

 

Further and my last post on the subject...(in this thread)
If sectarian war between Iran and the Saudi occurs (which is likely due to alleged Iranian support in Yemen), the Saudi would be obliged to close it's borders to those non Sunni, seeking to make the pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina, both of which the Saudi's have control over.
To any Shia Muslim this would automatically incite enormous violence and aggression.
Perhaps talking about any nuclear detente becomes obsolete under such circumstances given the enormous pride and passion of the various sects.

 

Iran ain't our enemy.

 

in a nut shell...

 

I don't see where you would have acquired the idea that Trump knows anything about the Middle East, or is "building" anything there on purpose except hotels maybe.

Re-electing Reagan and W has its consequences. We can only leave Syria, make peace with Iran, etc, at heavy cost - writing off heavy losses.

 

And what follows is an article about Bolton. LOL. My position was that Trump is unpredictable, while Clinton is predictable evil. 50% evil is less evil than 100% evil. Now it looks like the evil Republican forces have won. Whatever, this has given the world at least one year.

The heavy anti-Russian hysteria is now bipartisan. So, the next elections become completely irrelevant for the world. All one could hope for is that the US, predictably playing nuclear chicken games with Russia, appears to be the chicken.

 

And informed people's position was that Trump was obviously and predictably more evil than Clinton, not less.
That included the fact that he would appoint people like Bolton who favored nuclear first strikes, torture prisons, increased drone strikes, military buildup regardless of real threat, and so forth. Republicans, just like himself, just like the last Republican administration (the one that launched the Iraq War).

Old news. Trump won over a year ago. He's Republican, remember?

It's always been bipartisan. And the world never did revolve around it.

 

Fox news perhaps

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Here's another article - about another easily predictable and universally predicted consequence of electing Republican Trump: http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176406/tomgram:_michael_klare,_the_new_"long_war"/#more

That includes, btw, nuclear weapons set up to use in Europe as well as SE Asia and the Middle East.
Now this of course has nothing to do with Trump's geopolitical comprehension and policies, which do not exist, but his easily manipulated incompetence and ignorance - it's just what we expect from a modern Republican administration's incompetence at military oversight, infatuation with weaponry, guaranteed increase in the military budget, and reliance on military over diplomatic approaches in all arenas and globally.

 

Exactly. The idea that Trump was less “evil” than Clinton is absurd. This is a man that takes every bad thing said about him as deeply personal and warranting a nuclear response in return. And now he has surrounded himself with nut jobs that think the same.

After running as anti-war he has now appointed the architect of the biggest blunder in US history, the Iraq War, as national security advisor. These guys never pay for their mistakes nor learn from them instead they are rewarded. Bolton is back in the White House again incredibly.