| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 7:51 pm Post subject: The Last Time a liberal Democrat was president |
 |
|
he became the Supreme leader.
If you think that was a good thing you ought to vote for the Democrats in 2008.
Anyone see how the US kept Al Qaeda from coming to power in Somalia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I love how the world "liberal" is used like a dirty word. The pictures are a nice touch. Are they suppose to scare us?
They don't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Milwaukiedave wrote: |
I love how the world "liberal" is used like a dirty word. The pictures are a nice touch. Are they suppose to scare us?
They don't. |
Well I didn't expect it to have much of an effect on anyone who wasn't too interested in US national security.
The fact is the US is still suffering the consequences of Khomeni coming to power. For the record Khomeni was every bit as oppressive and cruel as the Shah if not more so. So there would have been nothing wrong with preventing Khomeni and his followers from coming to power.
If the US had had a president that wasn't clueless on national security Khomeni could have been stopped. But that is why happens when liberal democrats are in charge of national security.
It was one of the worst strategic losses for the US ever. If you don't care about national security then you are not going to care much that . But that tells alot about anyone who doesn't care about them event. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It was too bad the US and Britain overthrew the legitimate government in Iran back in '53.
By the way, how do you know that US would have won a war with Iran? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| If the US had had a president that wasn't clueless on national security Khomeni could have been stopped. |
Joo: this is too U.S.-centric. And remember: Reagan did not have much better luck with the Iranians than Carter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm a little puzzled. It seems your version of 'protecting national security' is focused on overthrowing foreign governments. I think it's a bit more complicated than that. Anyway, we haven't been all that successful in our current MidEast adventure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Milwaukiedave
Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Location: Goseong
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| If the US had had a president that wasn't clueless on national security Khomeni could have been stopped. |
Joo: this is too U.S.-centric. And remember: Reagan did not have much better luck with the Iranians than Carter. |
I think you are talking to a brickwall. Because remember, if you don't agree with Joo 100%, then you don't care about America. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Milwaukiedave wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| If the US had had a president that wasn't clueless on national security Khomeni could have been stopped. |
Joo: this is too U.S.-centric. And remember: Reagan did not have much better luck with the Iranians than Carter. |
I think you are talking to a brickwall. Because remember, if you don't agree with Joo 100%, then you don't care about America. |
I guarantee you Joo's knowledge of foreign affairs is much deeper than the average Dave's poster. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 01, 2008 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Milwaukiedave wrote: |
| I think... |
I disagree. Joo listens and responds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:15 am Post subject: Re: The Last Time a liberal Democrat was president |
|
|
As far as Khomeini, it is easy to blame Carter for Khomeini coming to power. The democrats did not overthrow Mousaddak in the 1950s to have the unpopular shah of Iran installed and then have Khomeini take over in a revolution. The revolution was not Carter's fault. There were limited options available to Carter. Don't forget what Iranian-backed Hezbollah did to the marines under Reagan in Lebanon.
It seems your picture thing was a cheap shot. The republicans created problems of their own as you well know like Osama Bin Ladin. It was not only the democrats. Who abandoned Afghanistan? It was America under the GOP. The point is to fix the problems, and no party has shown itself as much better than the other. Do you really think Bush has been better than Bill Clinton on security matters and foreign policy? I am not so sure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| catman wrote: |
It was too bad the US and Britain overthrew the legitimate government in Iran back in '53.
By the way, how do you know that US would have won a war with Iran? |
Get rid of Khomeni & help the Shah. He was no worse than Khomeni so the US is in the clear. With Khomeni out of the picture (and he was certainly very vunerable while he was in France ) the Shah can win. Later on there a peaceful transition to democracy in Iran similar to what happened in Korea.
The US was with out a doubt wrong in 1953 but when someone like Khomeni comes along who tells everyone what he is going to do before he comes to power the US ought to get'em. Should have stopped the Khomeni followers before they got the ball rolling. Very possible. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Joo listens and responds. |
I'll go along with this. He doesn't change his overall opinion much, but when you read his debates, it's usually apparent that he reads and absorbs the arguments of others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Joo listens and responds. |
I'll go along with this. He doesn't change his overall opinion much, but when you read his debates, it's usually apparent that he reads and absorbs the arguments of others. |
I agree. But,
Shame on Ron Paul. If the bathists, khomini lovers and al queda would end their war Joo wouldn't have to argue his point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 3:09 am Post subject: Re: The Last Time a liberal Democrat was president |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
As far as Khomeini, it is easy to blame Carter for Khomeini coming to power. The democrats did not overthrow Mousaddak in the 1950s to have the unpopular shah of Iran installed and then have Khomeini take over in a revolution. The revolution was not Carter's fault. There were limited options available to Carter. Don't forget what Iranian-backed Hezbollah did to the marines under Reagan in Lebanon.
It seems your picture thing was a cheap shot. The republicans created problems of their own as you well know like Osama Bin Ladin. It was not only the democrats. Who abandoned Afghanistan? It was America under the GOP. The point is to fix the problems, and no party has shown itself as much better than the other. Do you really think Bush has been better than Bill Clinton on security matters and foreign policy? I am not so sure. |
Get Khomeni before he gets strong. Assassinate Khomeni & support the Shah.
Brezinski bragged he got the Soviets to invade Afghanistan. Google it if you wish.
The Republicans certainly screwed up in Afghanistan. Then again so did the Democrats
Who let Osama Bin Laden go from the Sudan to Afghanistan. It was the opinion of the Clinton adminstration that Osama Bin Laden could not be convicted in a US court. Of course 9-11 was in the planning before Bush was president. In fact the terrorists were in the US before Bush was president. Did you see the Democrats take interest in Afghanistan during the 90's? Who was in charge after 1993? So 9-11 was a 50% -50% screw up .
I am not anti Bill Clinton. In my opinion he was a good president. He just made mistakes Bill Clinton is a good guy in my opinion. Jimmy Carter on the other hand allowed the US to get pushed around cause he didn't have clue.
When certain people in the US government warned Carter about Khomeni Carter reportedly said " you don't touch a holy man" .
Before Khomeni came to power he was easy to get to.
Bin Laden and Khomeni were both there for the taking and the US didn't close the deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 3:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| thepeel wrote: |
| On the other hand wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Joo listens and responds. |
I'll go along with this. He doesn't change his overall opinion much, but when you read his debates, it's usually apparent that he reads and absorbs the arguments of others. |
I agree. But,
Shame on Ron Paul. If the bathists, khomini lovers and al queda would end their war Joo wouldn't have to argue his point. |
Shame on Ron Paul for not supporting alternative energy.
As for the rest you are 100 % correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
