Bolton: I wanna war, I wanna war, I wanna war with Iran!

[Giovenith]

me nazi but

trump has a small penis

*** Warned for Trolling ***

Yet I know many who left just because of war and say Assad was alright. Assad needs to stay. What you are doing is shilling for Israel trying to stop middle eastern leaders. If any middle eastern nation should get treatment. It should be Israel and Palestine and they should get a nuked. I'm not even western. I come from post-war Serbia

*** 10 day Ban For Trolling ***

It's been a week and a half since your last seven-day-ban, right on the heel of several other bans in a row. You need to get this together now.

[Ansarre]

Is there anything actually conservative about "neocons?"

Honestly i'm not the biggest fan of the name. It was originally used disparagingly by Harrington to refer to Kristol & those ideologically aligned with him, but its stuck. I self describe as a Neoconservative because that's the popular term, but something like Straussian Idealism - an alternative name used in Political Philosophy circles - is much more accurate for a lot of us.

[The Sovereign Realist State]

You see this is why I think it is important to separate things...
I will repeat, it is one thing for you to say you defend democracy, it is another to say democracy promotion and the national interest are intrinsically connected. You only say that because you are American and your country has been around for just a handful of generations.
My friend, ideologies and regimes come and go but identity is much more perennial. Do you think anyone in Armenia, for example, would stop considering themselves armenian if tomorrow the government became dictatorial? What an absurd! They have been around for at least 3000 years and they have seen many regimes; they care about the nation, not the regime.

Kissinger would not have been able to secure a western sphere of interest were it not for his diplomatic coup in China which put soviets against maoists.
The US would not have been able to secure containment without such dictatorships as Portugal, Greece, Turkey, Iran or Pakistan.
The petrodollar would not exist without Saudi Arabia.
And since neocons are so fond of WWII analogies, if the US had had to fight both the III Reich and the USSR, WWII would not have been an absolute victory.

It is of course, complete BS for anyone who knows the least bit about History to say democracies don't go to war with each other. Democracies are NOT more likely to be at peace. Even forgetting about ancient Greece or the renaissance Mediterranean, in the recent History alone you've seen the US overthrow numerous banana democracies in Latin America, the British conquer the Boers, UK and US go to war with each other, the Allies bomb Finland during WWII, crush pro-Nazi Indians and Arabs, etc etc etc.

Iraq was most certainly NOT in the US national interest as indeed has been amply proven. It empowered Iran, did not spread democracy in the region, emptied US coffers and put it into debt. Many regimes have sponsored terrorist groups, including the US by the way. Not saying I love Saddam but I could see the benefit in a smooth little coup to put a more pro-Western general in place. Debaathification however was a complete imbecile move which precipitated civil war.
Since you are so keen to defend the Iraq debacle, you might want to research a little on COIN and how Petraeus defeated the insurgency with very much anti-democratic tactics, learnt from the Europeans in their colonies...

[Cisairse]

Just finished Bolton's book.

It's pretty good. I do recommend it.

[The Sovereign Realist State]

Just finished Bolton's book.

It's pretty good. I do recommend it.

...if one enjoys propaganda and fiction

[Cisairse]

Just finished Bolton's book.

It's pretty good. I do recommend it.

...if one enjoys propaganda and fiction

Who doesn't?

[The Sovereign Realist State]

Is there anything actually conservative about "neocons?"

Excellent question!

The answer is obviously 'no'.

These were JFK fans afterall and they would much more quickly work on behalf of a foreign power against the US if the regime was not to their liking. In fact, the recent coup attempt on Trump proves exactly that: they conspired with other progressive regimes and interests and betrayed their own government and nation.

Much like marxists, their allegiance is internationalist, not national. They are progressives, not conservatives. They should have no role to play in PUBLIC policy.

They are subversives and should be kept under surveillance, much like jihadist extremists are.

[Cisairse]

Is there anything actually conservative about "neocons?"

Excellent question!

The answer is obviously 'no'.

These were JFK fans afterall and they would much more quickly work on behalf of a foreign power against the US if the regime was nto to their liking. In fact, the recent coup attempt on Trump proves exactly that: they conspired with other progressive regimes and interests and betrayed their own government and nation.

Much like marxists, their allegiance is internationalist, not national. They are progressives, not conservatives. They should have no role to play in PUBLIC policy.

They are subversives and should be kept under surveillance, much like jihadist extremists are.

I'm curious what you believe "the recent coup attempt on Trump" was.

[Diopolis]

Excellent question!

The answer is obviously 'no'.

These were JFK fans afterall and they would much more quickly work on behalf of a foreign power against the US if the regime was nto to their liking. In fact, the recent coup attempt on Trump proves exactly that: they conspired with other progressive regimes and interests and betrayed their own government and nation.

Much like marxists, their allegiance is internationalist, not national. They are progressives, not conservatives. They should have no role to play in PUBLIC policy.

They are subversives and should be kept under surveillance, much like jihadist extremists are.

I'm curious what you believe "the recent coup attempt on Trump" was.

The impeachment trial turned into partisan nonsense too quickly to be a serious coup attempt.

[The Sovereign Realist State]

The impeachment trial turned into partisan nonsense too quickly to be a serious coup attempt.

Oh I think that kind of concerted pressure and subversion would have led any other establishment politician to either capitulate or resign.

Annoyingly to them, Trump gives zero Fs.

Which is why this time an actual colour revolution with storming of the White House or smth, is going to have to be tried.
No more room for subtlety.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

The impeachment trial turned into partisan nonsense too quickly to be a serious coup attempt.

Oh I think that kind of concerted pressure and subversion would have led any other establishment politician to either capitulate or resign.

Annoyingly to them, Trump gives zero Fs.

Yeah? Bill Clinton was investigated longer (much longer in fact) and the Senate part of impeachment came much closer to removing him.

Yet he didn't resign. He just counted his fucks and went "mmm, not bad".

[The Sovereign Realist State]

Yeah? Bill Clinton was investigated longer (much longer in fact) and the Senate part of impeachment came much closer to removing him.

Yet he didn't resign. He just counted his fucks and went "mmm, not bad".

Absolutely and I am not a strong believer that a POTUS should be impeached over a BJ... but at least he had in fact committed the crime.

He would be excused for thinking that the whole thing was ridiculous and no where near at the level of watergate and not resigning.
I bet Trump himself would say the exact same thing.

However, forging evidence to try and remove a recently elected POTUS, THAT is worse than watergate

[Cisairse]

Yeah? Bill Clinton was investigated longer (much longer in fact) and the Senate part of impeachment came much closer to removing him.

Yet he didn't resign. He just counted his fucks and went "mmm, not bad".

Absolutely and I am not a strong believer that a POTUS should be impeached over a BJ... but at least he had in fact committed the crime.

He would be excused for thinking that the whole thing was ridiculous and no where near at the level of watergate and not resigning.
I bet Trump himself would say the exact same thing.

However, forging evidence to try and remove a recently elected POTUS, THAT is worse than watergate

Tbh the Ukraine shit was also definitely worse than Watergate.

[Myrensis]

Yeah? Bill Clinton was investigated longer (much longer in fact) and the Senate part of impeachment came much closer to removing him.

Yet he didn't resign. He just counted his fucks and went "mmm, not bad".

Absolutely and I am not a strong believer that a POTUS should be impeached over a BJ... but at least he had in fact committed the crime.

He would be excused for thinking that the whole thing was ridiculous and no where near at the level of watergate and not resigning.
I bet Trump himself would say the exact same thing.

However, forging evidence to try and remove a recently elected POTUS, THAT is worse than watergate

Trump did exactly what the Democrats accused him of. His defense, and that of his Republican cronies, was that nowhere is it written in the Constitution that a President can't pressure foreign governments to investigate his domestic political rivals for him, therefore everything was totally fine and they couldn't believe the Democrats would impeach over something so trivial.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

However, forging evidence to try and remove a recently elected POTUS, THAT is worse than watergate

I didn't get your meaning until I saw Myrensis's reply. Seriously, you think the evidence was forged? Trump admitted to it!

Get your fake news straight!

[The Sovereign Realist State]

Tbh the Ukraine shit was also definitely worse than Watergate.

What Ukraine thing? That the POTUS asked the Ukrainian government for assistance in investigating corrupt practices of a proeminent US politician? How is that problematic?

[The Sovereign Realist State]

Trump did exactly what the Democrats accused him of. His defense, and that of his Republican cronies, was that nowhere is it written in the Constitution that a President can't pressure foreign governments to investigate his domestic political rivals for him, therefore everything was totally fine and they couldn't believe the Democrats would impeach over something so trivial.

But the Biden scandals date back many years. They were brought up by Trump simply because Ukraine had a new president.

The only abnormal thing about the entire affair is that Presidents usually stay out of such investigations, and assign them to the Attorney General whereas Trump mentioned it to the Ukrainian President himself.
Either way, it was the DUTY of the Admin to investigate

[The Sovereign Realist State]

I didn't get your meaning until I saw Myrensis's reply. Seriously, you think the evidence was forged? Trump admitted to it!

Get your fake news straight!

No, he was talking about Ukraine. I am talking about Russiagate.

The evidence against Flynn were forged, the Steele dossier was forged, the FISA court submissions were completely dishonest.

And we still don't know who put Mifsud up to incriminating Papadopoulos...................................................

[Cisairse]

Tbh the Ukraine shit was also definitely worse than Watergate.

What Ukraine thing? That the POTUS asked the Ukrainian government for assistance in investigating corrupt practices of a proeminent US politician? How is that problematic?

What you say wouldn't be problematic. However, what you say is also, plainly, a lie.

[The Sovereign Realist State]

What you say wouldn't be problematic. However, what you say is also, plainly, a lie.

Oh? do tell?

[West Leas Oros 2]

The thread title immediately made me think of this