Trump MAGAthread VII

[The East Marches II]

http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/07/10/the-iran-factor-in-afghanistan/
Reminder that Iran was aiding the US in Afghanistan under Khatami's government until Bush out of nowhere declared Iran an axis of evil and the US started aggressing their policy on Iran.

Daily Reminder: Pursuing a nuclear program is a bad thing and should be restricted to civilized countries only

Daily Reminder: They had ties to the Taliban before that and fed them arms

The ME is built on deception and double games.

[The East Marches II]

So how does Caterpillar benefit from higher taxes to fund a war in a shitheap overseas? I am not getting it, perhaps you can help.

You're a smart guy, you should know how arms sales and government contracts work.

I've a degree in Economics. Thats why what you are telling me seems to make no sense. I don't subscribe to the economic logic of Republicans. War objectively doesn't grow the economy.

[Dushan]

The United States have become oil independent at least since the Obama administration and his heavy investments in fracking and alternative energy. All developments that have significantly reduced the dependence of the US on foreign oil reserves in the middle east. The Bush era and its political implications are over. Also oil prices are around 40 USD per barrel, so people can care even less.

Oh and of course globalresearch.ca is known as mouthpiece for propaganda from the iranian Regime.

Really, the only mistake was that the Shah didn had Khomeini killed when he had the chance to do so. Hell Saddam Hussein even offered it to him, while Khomeini was in Iraq.

[Kvatchdom]

Where? Hezbollah hasn't done a suicide attack since the 80s, and the Christians in Lebanon love them. And you seem to not understand what the IRGC of Iran is. It's autonomous, free of government bonds. They do whatever they want, and try to influence elections constantly. The Iranian parliament and presidency speak against them quite frequently, Hassan Rouhani even implied banning them from working abroad or funding electoral groups.

It's ridiculous to focus on Iran with worse countries right next to it, but those are giving America an oil cumshot to the eye every now and then so it's okay.

>Christians in Lebanon love them

Oh yes, thats why they fought so hard against them. Hiring one or two singers is good propaganda but not the truth friendo. Its a bit like relying on global research as a website for a source. Yes, they are the ones in control of Iran's foreign policy and external stance at the moment. Iran has a dual power structure, the Ayatollahs still run the show.

Its perfectly reasonable to concentrate on a sponsor of terror that uses the Trashcanistan equivalent of Salafis to destabilize countries. Iran is no different than Saudi Arabia. Infact, they are more dangerous. The Saudis didn't and don't send children across minefields like Iran has and does. :^)

Maybe in the 80s, but the organization has changed, providing aid and healthcare to countless Christian communities and protecting them from Sunni assaults.
All in Iran is likely to change as the Supreme Leader dies. I suspect a power grab from the reformist majority.

It's not reasonable to ignore the country that flew a plane into your buildings, wouldn't say so no. The Saudis instead starve children in Yemen, much better

[Kvatchdom]

You're a smart guy, you should know how arms sales and government contracts work.

I've a degree in Economics. Thats why what you are telling me seems to make no sense. I don't subscribe to the economic logic of Republicans. War objectively doesn't grow the economy.

Objectively, no, but individual companies profit off of it, obviously. I've a degree in being the emperor of China

[AiliailiA]

meanwhile,privatized colonialism

>Salon

[/quote]

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/10/world/asia/trump-afghanistan-policy-erik-prince-stephen-feinberg.html

[Kvatchdom]

http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/07/10/the-iran-factor-in-afghanistan/
Reminder that Iran was aiding the US in Afghanistan under Khatami's government until Bush out of nowhere declared Iran an axis of evil and the US started aggressing their policy on Iran.

Daily Reminder: Pursuing a nuclear program is a bad thing and should be restricted to civilized countries only

Daily Reminder: They had ties to the Taliban before that and fed them arms

The ME is built on deception and double games.

Either everyone should have one or no one should.

Need a source on that.

[The East Marches II]

>Christians in Lebanon love them

Oh yes, thats why they fought so hard against them. Hiring one or two singers is good propaganda but not the truth friendo. Its a bit like relying on global research as a website for a source. Yes, they are the ones in control of Iran's foreign policy and external stance at the moment. Iran has a dual power structure, the Ayatollahs still run the show.

Its perfectly reasonable to concentrate on a sponsor of terror that uses the Trashcanistan equivalent of Salafis to destabilize countries. Iran is no different than Saudi Arabia. Infact, they are more dangerous. The Saudis didn't and don't send children across minefields like Iran has and does. :^)

Maybe in the 80s, but the organization has changed, providing aid and healthcare to countless Christian communities and protecting them from Sunni assaults.
All in Iran is likely to change as the Supreme Leader dies. I suspect a power grab from the reformist majority.

It's not reasonable to ignore the country that flew a plane into your buildings, wouldn't say so no. The Saudis instead starve children in Yemen, much better

>Organization has changed

Oh yes, we should trust the Arab and Persian word. You've sold me!

Better to starve the enemy than send your own with plastic keys of heaven over minefields. Iran is a troublesome state. There is no reason to treat it as an equal or nontroublemaker until the Ayatollahs lose power. Which I don't see happening even if the Supreme Leader dies.

[The East Marches II]

Daily Reminder: Pursuing a nuclear program is a bad thing and should be restricted to civilized countries only

Daily Reminder: They had ties to the Taliban before that and fed them arms

The ME is built on deception and double games.

Either everyone should have one or no one should.

Need a source on that.

Already provided them :^)

No, not everybody. Big kid weapons are for big kids. Not all countries are equals.

[Kvatchdom]

Either everyone should have one or no one should.

Need a source on that.

Already provided them :^)

No, not everybody. Big kid weapons are for big kids. Not all countries are equals.

Then why do Pakistan and India have big kid weapons? And the US seems a lot more volatile than Iran, which hasn't started a war in 300 years.

[The East Marches II]

I've a degree in Economics. Thats why what you are telling me seems to make no sense. I don't subscribe to the economic logic of Republicans. War objectively doesn't grow the economy.

Objectively, no, but individual companies profit off of it, obviously. I've a degree in being the emperor of China

So what if individual companies profit? That doesn't grow the overall economy, those companies are like a leach from the rest.

>mfw emperor of China

[Kvatchdom]

Maybe in the 80s, but the organization has changed, providing aid and healthcare to countless Christian communities and protecting them from Sunni assaults.
All in Iran is likely to change as the Supreme Leader dies. I suspect a power grab from the reformist majority.

It's not reasonable to ignore the country that flew a plane into your buildings, wouldn't say so no. The Saudis instead starve children in Yemen, much better

>Organization has changed

Oh yes, we should trust the Arab and Persian word. You've sold me!

Better to starve the enemy than send your own with plastic keys of heaven over minefields. Iran is a troublesome state. There is no reason to treat it as an equal or nontroublemaker until the Ayatollahs lose power. Which I don't see happening even if the Supreme Leader dies.

Unreasonable and a childish response.

Better to do anything to survive a war during a crisis than to starve children to keep your proxy government in place. Iran hasn't really caused trouble in the west, at all actually.

[The East Marches II]

Already provided them :^)

No, not everybody. Big kid weapons are for big kids. Not all countries are equals.

Then why do Pakistan and India have big kid weapons? And the US seems a lot more volatile than Iran, which hasn't started a war in 300 years.

Ah yes, thats why they just fund things under the table, because they are so peace loving. It is because they are weak and to compensate they do things shadily. If confronted openly, they would be smashed as Saddam did smash them in Iran-Iraq.

Pakistan and India are big kids :^)

[Kvatchdom]

Objectively, no, but individual companies profit off of it, obviously. I've a degree in being the emperor of China

So what if individual companies profit? That doesn't grow the overall economy, those companies are like a leach from the rest.

>mfw emperor of China

I never said it did, but they play into the overall infinite growth of the economy just like all other companies.

hehe

[The East Marches II]

>Organization has changed

Oh yes, we should trust the Arab and Persian word. You've sold me!

Better to starve the enemy than send your own with plastic keys of heaven over minefields. Iran is a troublesome state. There is no reason to treat it as an equal or nontroublemaker until the Ayatollahs lose power. Which I don't see happening even if the Supreme Leader dies.

Unreasonable and a childish response.

Better to do anything to survive a war during a crisis than to starve children to keep your proxy government in place. Iran hasn't really caused trouble in the west, at all actually.

Thats why they help fund propaganda fronts like Global Research of course, because they don't want trouble. Sending children across minefields isn't really all that effective, still didn't accomplish any of the late war objectives in Iran-Iraq. It was just fanaticism for fanaticism's sake.

[The East Marches II]

So what if individual companies profit? That doesn't grow the overall economy, those companies are like a leach from the rest.

>mfw emperor of China

I never said it did, but they play into the overall infinite growth of the economy just like all other companies.

hehe

They don't, they are a drag on that growth. Going back to my point that our overseas commitments do not benefit us and are bleeding us white of money.

[Kvatchdom]

Then why do Pakistan and India have big kid weapons? And the US seems a lot more volatile than Iran, which hasn't started a war in 300 years.

Ah yes, thats why they just fund things under the table, because they are so peace loving. It is because they are weak and to compensate they do things shadily. If confronted openly, they would be smashed as Saddam did smash them in Iran-Iraq.

Pakistan and India are big kids :^)

Funding things under the table is smart when you've got a thousand missiles aimed toward you. They are at a weak state, yeah. They've been under sanctions for quite a long time, and need to open up to the world economy and and the country needs to westernize as it's people already have.

But the war ended in status quo

[The East Marches II]

The United States have become oil independent at least since the Obama administration and his heavy investments in fracking and alternative energy. All developments that have significantly reduced the dependence of the US on foreign oil reserves in the middle east. The Bush era and its political implications are over. Also oil prices are around 40 USD per barrel, so people can care even less.

Oh and of course globalresearch.ca is known as mouthpiece for propaganda from the iranian Regime.

Really, the only mistake was that the Shah didn had Khomeini killed when he had the chance to do so. Hell Saddam Hussein even offered it to him, while Khomeini was in Iraq.

That was really his only mistake tbh and good post. Its good to see you back. I hope you have been doing well.

[Kvatchdom]

Unreasonable and a childish response.

Better to do anything to survive a war during a crisis than to starve children to keep your proxy government in place. Iran hasn't really caused trouble in the west, at all actually.

Thats why they help fund propaganda fronts like Global Research of course, because they don't want trouble. Sending children across minefields isn't really all that effective, still didn't accomplish any of the late war objectives in Iran-Iraq. It was just fanaticism for fanaticism's sake.

>"everything I don't like is propaganda" :^ )

Well they ended up keeping their country.

[The East Marches II]

Ah yes, thats why they just fund things under the table, because they are so peace loving. It is because they are weak and to compensate they do things shadily. If confronted openly, they would be smashed as Saddam did smash them in Iran-Iraq.

Pakistan and India are big kids :^)

Funding things under the table is smart when you've got a thousand missiles aimed toward you. They are at a weak state, yeah. They've been under sanctions for quite a long time, and need to open up to the world economy and and the country needs to westernize as it's people already have.

But the war ended in status quo

Irritating bigger powers is not a wise move. One day, they may lose patience and smash it to bits. Which is unfortunate but I can't control things at the national level.

Iran had it in the bag but then it let the religious leaders lead the war and disbanded the professionals of the Shah's Army. It kept them from getting the Shia section of Iraq and let Saddam become popular as defender against the Persian menace. It is actually pretty sad tbh.

[Kvatchdom]

Granted the military-industrial complex in America has shrunk quite a lot.

[The East Marches II]

Thats why they help fund propaganda fronts like Global Research of course, because they don't want trouble. Sending children across minefields isn't really all that effective, still didn't accomplish any of the late war objectives in Iran-Iraq. It was just fanaticism for fanaticism's sake.

>"everything I don't like is propaganda" :^ )

Well they ended up keeping their country.

Their ties are well known. Its the same as trusting Al-Jazeera when it is funded by the Qataris. Propaganda companies will always say what the state backer wants.

[Kvatchdom]

Funding things under the table is smart when you've got a thousand missiles aimed toward you. They are at a weak state, yeah. They've been under sanctions for quite a long time, and need to open up to the world economy and and the country needs to westernize as it's people already have.

But the war ended in status quo

Irritating bigger powers is not a wise move. One day, they may lose patience and smash it to bits. Which is unfortunate but I can't control things at the national level.

Iran had it in the bag but then it let the religious leaders lead the war and disbanded the professionals of the Shah's Army. It kept them from getting the Shia section of Iraq and let Saddam become popular as defender against the Persian menace. It is actually pretty sad tbh.

Thinking that you can control countries that are thousands of years old ain't very wise either. Best would be to deal with them so that the fundamentalists never win an election again, which seems to be happening right now actually. I just hope Trump's Saudi friendship doesn't stop that.

The Shah was not good. Neither is the current regime, but it was not a democracy. People were being murdered still. It hasn't been itself since 1953.

[Kvatchdom]

>"everything I don't like is propaganda" :^ )

Well they ended up keeping their country.

Their ties are well known. Its the same as trusting Al-Jazeera when it is funded by the Qataris. Propaganda companies will always say what the state backer wants.

I know, was doing a thing on you. The creator is a 9/11 truther

[The East Marches II]

Irritating bigger powers is not a wise move. One day, they may lose patience and smash it to bits. Which is unfortunate but I can't control things at the national level.

Iran had it in the bag but then it let the religious leaders lead the war and disbanded the professionals of the Shah's Army. It kept them from getting the Shia section of Iraq and let Saddam become popular as defender against the Persian menace. It is actually pretty sad tbh.

Thinking that you can control countries that are thousands of years old ain't very wise either. Best would be to deal with them so that the fundamentalists never win an election again, which seems to be happening right now actually. I just hope Trump's Saudi friendship doesn't stop that.

The Shah was not good. Neither is the current regime, but it was not a democracy. People were being murdered still. It hasn't been itself since 1953.

-Been memed on-