• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump asked for options for attacking Iran last week, but held off -source

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
32,266
Reaction score
7,466
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Agan, nobody said anything about justifying terrorism. Nor does it make sense to argue that the ocupation of the Tehran embassy is an act of terrorism. The issue is the DOUBLE standards which people use when they selectively the bar high for Iran compared to other countries. By the way, just recently we had an act of terrorism killing a scientist in Iran. So spare with your nonsense.

Here are some embassy occupations when Kurds were potesting


Kurds leave Greek embassy in London

and here are some indefinite detentions in Israel without charges



Israeli authorities used renewable administrative detention orders to hold Palestinians without charge or trial. Some 4,638 Palestinians from the OPT, including 458 administrative detainees, were held in Israeli prisons as of 30 November, according to the Israel Prison Service. Many families of Palestinian detainees in Israel, particularly those in Gaza, were not permitted entry to Israel to visit their relatives.

Palestinian civilians, including children, from the OPT were prosecuted in military courts that did not meet international fair trial standards.
The storming of the Tehran embassy was a politically motivated act of violence specifically targeting civilians , no different than the dozens of other ones the Islamic Republic has ordered or sponsored over the past forty years. The issue is that you weep and wail whenever anyone points out the systematic terrorism conducted by your favorite regime. Perhaps if the Iranian government hadn’t spent forty years helping happily murder numerous civilians and shown its utter disregard for even the basics of international law people wouldn’t feel the need to ensure that they didn’t have nuclear weapons.

Oh look, more whataboutism. Yawn.
 

pamak

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
7,735
Reaction score
1,811
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
The only “point“ you made was that the ACLU has a laughably broad definition of “kidnapping”.
So now the ACLU is a branch of Iranian fanboys.
And it was not just the ACLU's point.

The same point is derived from Bush's admission of the US practice of holding detainees in undisclosed locations. That is what kidnappers do, and it strkes down your laughable claim that the detainees were treated as Pows! And based on the fact that most were released soon, we can see that the US kidnapped people based in suspicions of their possible ties to terrorism which in most cases was not correct.

Investigation by allies make the same point too


The report of the Commons Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), for all its lawyerly hedging and cautious caveats, could really not be clearer. The British government, through its security agencies, acquiesced in the use of torture during the war on terror after 9/11. It was “inexcusable”. During the subsequent invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, of Iraq and a variety of other military and covert operations, MI5 and MI6 were complicit in what was euphemistically described as “extraordinary rendition” – official extrajudicial kidnappings and illegal detention. The British helped to fund such operations, supplied intelligence to facilitate them, knew more widely about cases of maltreatment, directly witnessed some 13 identifiable examples, and usually did nothing about it, and went along with the American way of war for many years.
 
Last edited:

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
32,266
Reaction score
7,466
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So now the ACLU is a branch of Iranian fanboys.
And it was not just the ACLU's point.

The same point is derived from Bush's admission of the US practice of holding detainees in undisclosed locations. That is what kidnappers do, and it strkes down your laughable claim that the detainees were treated as Pows! And based on the fact that most were released soon, we can see that the US kidnapped people based in suspicions of their possible ties to terrorism which in most cases was not correct.

Like I said..... the ACLU has a laughably loose definition of the term.

The point is that there is no obligation to inform a terrorist group where its members are being held, although I know to a Iranian fanboy the thought of being unable to rescue terrorists captured on the battlefield is heart breaking.
 

pamak

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
7,735
Reaction score
1,811
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Like I said..... the ACLU has a laughably loose definition of the term.

The point is that there is no obligation to inform a terrorist group where its members are being held, although I know to a Iranian fanboy the thought of being unable to rescue terrorists captured on the battlefield is heart breaking.
You cannot make a serious point by just making a claim about the ACLU

Others made the same point


The report of the Commons Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), for all its lawyerly hedging and cautious caveats, could really not be clearer. The British government, through its security agencies, acquiesced in the use of torture during the war on terror after 9/11. It was “inexcusable”. During the subsequent invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, of Iraq and a variety of other military and covert operations, MI5 and MI6 were complicit in what was euphemistically described as “extraordinary rendition” – official extrajudicial kidnappings and illegal detention. The British helped to fund such operations, supplied intelligence to facilitate them, knew more widely about cases of maltreatment, directly witnessed some 13 identifiable examples, and usually did nothing about it, and went along with the American way of war for many years.

The above came from the UK Parliament

 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
32,266
Reaction score
7,466
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You cannot make a serious point by just making a claim about the ACLU

Others made the same point


The report of the Commons Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), for all its lawyerly hedging and cautious caveats, could really not be clearer. The British government, through its security agencies, acquiesced in the use of torture during the war on terror after 9/11. It was “inexcusable”. During the subsequent invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, of Iraq and a variety of other military and covert operations, MI5 and MI6 were complicit in what was euphemistically described as “extraordinary rendition” – official extrajudicial kidnappings and illegal detention. The British helped to fund such operations, supplied intelligence to facilitate them, knew more widely about cases of maltreatment, directly witnessed some 13 identifiable examples, and usually did nothing about it, and went along with the American way of war for many years.

The above came from the UK Parliament

Yawn. Politicians posturing for the sake of bleeding heart idiots and out and out fifth columnists. You posting an editorial is nothing more than someone else’s opinion.
 

pamak

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
7,735
Reaction score
1,811
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Yawn. Politicians posturing for the sake of bleeding heart idiots and out and out fifth columnists. You posting an editorial is nothing more than someone else’s opinion.
Ohh....

Apparently whoever does not agree with you is a bleeding heart idiot and fifth columnist. Before it was the ACLU and now it is the British Parliament.
I judge people' s intelligence based on the arguments they make and thus far your name calling and lack of counterpoints do not constitute serious arguments.
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
32,266
Reaction score
7,466
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Ohh....

Apparently whoever does not agree with you is a bleeding heart idiot and fifth columnist. Before it was the ACLU and now it is the British Parliament.
I judge people' s intelligence based on the arguments they make and thus far your name calling and lack of counterpoints do not constitute serious arguments.
Yawn. More meaningless posturing. Your attempts to justify the storming of the American embassy and torture of the civilians there already wrecked your argument long before you started mewling about my “lack of counterpoints”.
 

pamak

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
7,735
Reaction score
1,811
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Yawn. More meaningless posturing. Your attempts to justify the storming of the American embassy and torture of the civilians there already wrecked your argument long before you started mewling about my “lack of counterpoints”.
More meaningless posts of yours because your claims of what I did durig my previous arguments have not been supported by counterarguments. You just count on distorting my points which you cannot addresss.
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
32,266
Reaction score
7,466
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
More meaningless posts of yours because your claims of what I did durig my previous arguments have not been supported by counterarguments. You just count on distorting my points which you cannot addresss.
I’ve repeatedly addressed your desperate whataboutism.
 

pamak

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
7,735
Reaction score
1,811
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
I’ve repeatedly addressed your desperate whataboutism.

When you cannot be honest enough to present accurately what I am arguing, you cannot address what I am arguing. My claim of double standards by definition require a comparison of how people behave in similar circumstances. When people like you dismiss such comparison as "whataboutism," they show that they are just hypocrites. And the claim of double standards does not by itself say anything regarding the justification or not of the actions that are discussed. One can both believe that terrorism or other state actions that violate international law which harm civilians are evil, and the saem person can and also believe that people are using double standards in the way they treat different countries when such countries violate the international law and harm civilians.
 
Last edited:

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
32,266
Reaction score
7,466
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
When you cannot be honest enough to present accurately what I am arguing, you cannot address what I am arguing. My claim of double standards by definition require a comparison of how people behave in similar circumstances. When people like you dismiss such comparison as "whataboutism," they show that they are just hypocrites. And the claim of double standards does not by itself say anything regarding the justification or not of the actions that are discussed. One can both believe that terrorism or other state actions that violate international law which harm civilians are evil, and the saem person can and also believe that people are using double standards in the way they treat different countries when such countries violate the international law and harm civilians.
I’ve already repeatedly addressed your efforts to defend Iran’s decades of terrorism by using endless amounts of whataboutism, as I already stated.
 

Oborosen

Doctor D
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
21,387
Reaction score
4,840
Location
In your head
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Trump is just plain ffn nuts and knows that an attack would seal the deal on a wider war in the ME

Trump has already taken actions, others planned to lock in the Biden Admin on Iran policy

So we don't actually have confirmation that any of this actually happened?
 

pamak

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
7,735
Reaction score
1,811
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
I’ve already repeatedly addressed your efforts to defend Iran’s decades of terrorism by using endless amounts of whataboutism, as I already stated.
If you quote my posts, put an effort to also addresss the points I make within these quotes.
Even your last response is a clear example of a generic comment which you can articulate without even the need of the quote which you supposedly try to address.
This is clear evidence that you do not bother with actually addressing the other side's points. You are only interested in repeating your claims.
 

iliveonramen

Pontificator
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 23, 2011
Messages
11,242
Reaction score
5,690
Location
On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Why? The deal didn't end Iran pursuit of nuclear weapons. It simply kicked the can ten years down the line.
What action completely eliminates the threat of a nuclear Iran other than an invasion/occupation?

Bombing a nuclear facility pushes back the timeline just like the Iran deal did.
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
32,266
Reaction score
7,466
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If you quote my posts, put an effort to also addresss the points I make within these quotes.
Even your last response is a clear example of a generic comment which you can articulate without even the need of the quote which you supposedly try to address.
This is clear evidence that you do not bother with actually addressing the other side's points. You are only interested in repeating your claims.
I’ve already repeatedly addressed your desperate whataboutism and attempts to justify Iran‘s atrocities.

As I stated before.
 

pamak

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 29, 2019
Messages
7,735
Reaction score
1,811
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
I’ve already repeatedly addressed your desperate whataboutism and attempts to justify Iran‘s atrocities.

As I stated before.
So, you continue with your " whataboutism" and justification of Iran's attrocities claims without addressing the points I made in this thread and which I summarized in a recent post


pamak said:
When you cannot be honest enough to present accurately what I am arguing, you cannot address what I am arguing. My claim of double standards by definition require a comparison of how people behave in similar circumstances. When people like you dismiss such comparison as "whataboutism," they show that they are just hypocrites. And the claim of double standards does not by itself say anything regarding the justification or not of the actions that are discussed. One can both believe that terrorism or other state actions that violate international law which harm civilians are evil, and the saem person can and also believe that people are using double standards in the way they treat different countries when such countries violate the international law and harm civilians.
 

Tigerace117

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
32,266
Reaction score
7,466
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So, you continue with your " whataboutism" and justification of Iran's attrocities claims without addressing the points I made in this thread and which I summarized in a recent post


pamak said:
When you cannot be honest enough to present accurately what I am arguing, you cannot address what I am arguing. My claim of double standards by definition require a comparison of how people behave in similar circumstances. When people like you dismiss such comparison as "whataboutism," they show that they are just hypocrites. And the claim of double standards does not by itself say anything regarding the justification or not of the actions that are discussed. One can both believe that terrorism or other state actions that violate international law which harm civilians are evil, and the saem person can and also believe that people are using double standards in the way they treat different countries when such countries violate the international law and harm civilians.
I’ve already repeatedly addressed your desperate whataboutism and attempts to justify Iran‘s atrocities.

As I stated before.
 

Metric Mouse

Your hi-top sneakers and your sailor tattoos.
Joined
Jan 20, 2020
Messages
6,611
Reaction score
1,275
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Kim has shown that poverty does not slow a determined nation from acquiring nuclear weapons. Hurting the Iranian people with sanctions only strengthens the hardliners who believe aggression is the only way to keep Iran safe from invasion. Inviting Iran to join the league of respectable nations is the only way to take power from those that want war with the west.
Really? Is that the way North Korea should be handled too?
 

Athanasius68

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
16,292
Reaction score
2,658
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What action completely eliminates the threat of a nuclear Iran other than an invasion/occupation?

Bombing a nuclear facility pushes back the timeline just like the Iran deal did.
Its difficult-- no doubt about it.
 

Athanasius68

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
16,292
Reaction score
2,658
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Kim has shown that poverty does not slow a determined nation from acquiring nuclear weapons. Hurting the Iranian people with sanctions only strengthens the hardliners who believe aggression is the only way to keep Iran safe from invasion. Inviting Iran to join the league of respectable nations is the only way to take power from those that want war with the west.
Iran already belongs to various organizations that "respectable" nations are also members.
How is that working out?
 

Athanasius68

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 27, 2016
Messages
16,292
Reaction score
2,658
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
When did this work?

Not to mention the fact that Iran uses an oil thirsty China.

.

Millions of Barrels of Iranian Oil Are Piled Up in China’s Ports

Good luck expecting the Chinese to actually side with your objectives (in the middle also of a trade war)



Defying U.S., China and Iran Near Trade and Military Partnership
The investment and security pact would vastly extend China’s influence in the Middle East, throwing Iran an economic lifeline and creating new flash points with the United States.





For the US, the objective with respect to Iran seems to be (again) regime change to make sure that a new pro-western regime will not develop nuclear weapons in secrecy . Which Iranian leader will accept such objective? On the contrary, developing nuclear weapons will seem as the rational thing to do because nuclear armed rivals are treated with more respect (see N. Korea).
You seem to think that Iran's efforts are about responding the USA.
Its not.
 

iguanaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
46,377
Reaction score
16,035
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Really? Is that the way North Korea should be handled too?
Iran is not N. Korea. Kim's regime will not be toppled from within. There are no "moderate factions" there like there is in Iran. But like with Iran the one term mistake made the most detrimental move humanly possible in N. Korea. He gave China an excuse to continue helping Kim's regime to become a major nuclear power. They even petitioned the U.N. to remove N. Korea's sanctions using Mr. One and done's talks and visits as proof that N. Korea is a legitimate State and not a rogue nation.
 
Last edited:

Metric Mouse

Your hi-top sneakers and your sailor tattoos.
Joined
Jan 20, 2020
Messages
6,611
Reaction score
1,275
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Iran is not N. Korea. Kim's regime will not be toppled from within. There are no "moderate factions" there like there is in Iran. But like with Iran the one term mistake made the most detrimental move humanly possible in N. Korea. He gave China an excuse to continue helping Kim's regime to become a major nuclear power. They even petitioned the U.N. to remove N. Korea's sanctions using Mr. One and done's talks and visits as proof that N. Korea is a legitimate State and not a rogue nation.
The only way North Korea's regime is toppled from within. Much like Iran's. Dealing with two similar terror states should be similar; it just makes sense. Both want nuclear weapons to spread terror; both need to be stopped if possible and strongly handled if not possible.
 

iguanaman

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
46,377
Reaction score
16,035
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The only way North Korea's regime is toppled from within. Much like Iran's. Dealing with two similar terror states should be similar; it just makes sense. Both want nuclear weapons to spread terror; both need to be stopped if possible and strongly handled if not possible.
China is why N. Korea exists and it will always be why it still exists. There is no chance of the N. Korean people rising up unlike Iran which has a very educated and modern population. The one term mistake should never have recognized N. Korea as an independent State. It gave China cover for their continued support of the regime. I believe Putin put him up to it as another way to make us look like ignorant fools to the rest of the world and it worked.
 
Top Bottom