DireWolfSpirit Posted June 22, 2019 Author Share Posted June 22, 2019 Trump probably hasn't got permission from his Commander Putin to engage the Iranians militarily. That's my theory on why he called off his retaliatory strikes. He won't do anything without Heil Putin's permission. This is the ultimate "bitch owned" Presidency occupying Washington D.C. And we will never see it do anything that upsets its paymaster in the Kremlin. It's a occupational by a puppet regime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Balstroko Posted June 22, 2019 Share Posted June 22, 2019 21 hours ago, HoodedCrow said: Anyone think the US didn’t retaliate because the drone actually was in Iran’s space, and that Trump and his hawk pals are grooming the American people to accept a TV ready war with Iran without Congressional oversight? The goal is to win the next election and distract from his family corruption? The Saudis would likely pay up too. Trump said publically that he thought Obama would cause a war with Iran to win a second term, so its an idea clanking around his noggin. I don't think there's any international space in the strait of Hormuz. It's either Iranian or Omani water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Balstroko Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 15 hours ago, Which Tyler said: Doesn't basically everyone think that? Trump's poking at the Iranians until he has an excuse his domestic audience will accept, or he gets enough of a ratings boost to feel secure that he'd get a second term. We've known for 3 years that this was going to happen, the k of question then was NKorea, Venezuela or Iran True, but I wouldn't discount the Iranians trying to get the US in a war either in order to boost the governments ratings. The Islamic Republic was losing a lot of support in the past decade, which is why it was silly of Trump to pull out of the deal. Trump's actions have only enhanced the regime's power. It's possible that they want the US to attack in order to create a scenario where they can "defend the country". As for Trump, if he goes to war, he can kiss his reelection chances goodbye. Many who voted for him did so because they believed he would scale down foreign intervention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House Balstroko Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 On another note, and apologies for posting three times in a row, I want to bring up another topic. What's the deal with the downing of the flight MH17 over Ukraine? Who do you think is responsible? Was it really Russia or was it Ukraine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A wilding Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 13 hours ago, House Balstroko said: On another note, and apologies for posting three times in a row, I want to bring up another topic. What's the deal with the downing of the flight MH17 over Ukraine? Who do you think is responsible? Was it really Russia or was it Ukraine? Has anyone ever seriously suggested that it was anyone other than Russian backed Ukrainian rebels? They were using weaponry supplied by them by the Russians and thought they were shooting at a Ukrainian military plane. As I understand it even the official Russian line is that the Ukrainians are at fault only because they should have declared the area a no go zone for all international civilian flights. Though who knows what propaganda they have put out under the radar ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varysblackfyre321 Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 16 hours ago, DireWolfSpirit said: Trump probably hasn't got permission from his Commander Putin to engage the Iranians militarily. That's my theory on why he called off his retaliatory strikes. He won't do anything without Heil Putin's permission. This is the ultimate "bitch owned" Presidency occupying Washington D.C. And we will never see it do anything that upsets its paymaster in the Kremlin. It's a occupational by a puppet regime. Wouldn’t Putin have wanted the US to have never backed out of the nuclear agreement in the first place? That would possibly be the easiest/best way to avoid the type of military confrontation he’s now warning against. I would think Putin wouldn’t like the appoint of neo-cons like Bolton or Pompeo in positions of power. Who are actively plotting to overthrow governments in the America continent that are pro-Russia, such Venezuela, Cuba and niguagra. I’ll be honest I find this idea of Trump being entirely beholden to anyone dubious. I don’t doubt he welcomed Russian interface in 2016, and would welcome it in 2020 but I don’t see him remotely hesitating to do something if he thinks it’ll benefit him Putin or really anyone be damned. Like Trump has a history of screwing over the people he has debts to. Why should Putin be any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 16 hours ago, House Balstroko said: I don't think there's any international space in the strait of Hormuz. It's either Iranian or Omani water. Sort of. At the narrowest point there aren't any international waters, but as it widens there are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 3 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said: Wouldn’t Putin have wanted the US to have never backed out of the nuclear agreement in the first place? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted June 23, 2019 Author Share Posted June 23, 2019 What can I say, Trump is shit on his word and is being rogue to his benefactor. He's still Putin's little toy that he will manipulate again in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 On 6/22/2019 at 2:30 PM, HoodedCrow said: Anyone think the US didn’t retaliate because the drone actually was in Iran’s space, and that Trump and his hawk pals are grooming the American people to accept a TV ready war with Iran without Congressional oversight? The goal is to win the next election and distract from his family corruption? The Saudis would likely pay up too. Trump said publically that he thought Obama would cause a war with Iran to win a second term, so its an idea clanking around his noggin. Didn't the USA initially deny that Iran had even shot down one of its drones? I was half asleep listening to my radio alarm clock when the first report of a drone being shot down came out, but I do recall the US response being along the lines of "they didn't shoot down one of our drones, because none of our drones was operating in the area." So one lie following another is not surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 23 hours ago, House Balstroko said: Trump's actions have only enhanced the regime's power. It's possible that they want the US to attack in order to create a scenario where they can "defend the country". Yeah no, it's not really. It's certainly possible and indeed at this point quite likely that an inflammation of tensions might help them gain support (though to be honest my understanding from my dad's dealings with people from there and his visit there is that most Iranian people tolerate rather than accept the regime and that's always been true) but for your theory to work they'd have to believe they can actually win a shooting war with the United States, and we've seen no indication ever that they're that foolish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toth Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 I know that the thought of imminent war with Iran is drawing attention, but why is it that the Istanbul election this Sunday barely makes any headlines? Read here for example: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48744733 So Erdogan's great strategy of "repeating the vote until I like the results" backfired horribly this time, causing the opposition to harvest the public outcry about the dubious call for a repeat. Erdogan put his entire weight into this election and still lost, making it hopeful that the next national elections will at the very least hurt him, if not remove him from office entirely. In many ways I suspect it is more the economical crisis that is riling up the population, but I take it anyway. Especially from a German perspective I would very much appreciate a Turkish president who doesn't use his bloody puppet newspapers to foster resentments among Turkish-Germans against Germany with ludicrous agitation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 The problem is Erdogan and his party have never been popular in the rather cosmopolitan Istanbul. His base is everywhere else int he country, where provincial types think a theocratic Turkey would be just marvelous, with no downsides whatsoever. Such an egregious betrayal of Mohammad Ataturk. Though pretty impressive that Ataturk's vision for Turkey held together for so long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik of Hazelfield Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 I wouldn't say he's never been popular there. Erdogan was born in Istanbul, and was the mayor of the city before becoming prime minister and later president. His party has held Istanbul since 1994 and he's always talked about the importance of Istanbul - until now. So this is a big deal even if rural Turkey is still more Erdogan-leaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2019/06/nudists-dive-into-brawl-over-pool-burkini-ban.html Quote Hundreds of French nudists are planning to take on a group of Muslim women fighting for the right to swim in public wearing burkinis. What the actual? There is something weird about France. Not because nudists, but because there's a dress code for public pools about what kind of swimwear you are allowed to wear. Ban street clothes from being worn in pools for hygiene reasons, sure. But banning some kinds of swimwear, crazy. I would have actually thought nudists would support the right to wear (or not wear) whatever a person wants when swimming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted June 28, 2019 Author Share Posted June 28, 2019 ^^^Yeah gotta agree, especially in light of how there are many examples of fashionable and attractive burkini and hijabs. The latest Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition has a model wearing hers in a few of her poses and she looks very nice. I don't get how anyone should feel threatened by it, it's someone else's body so mind your own business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said: ^^^Yeah gotta agree, especially in light of how there are many examples of fashionable and attractive burkini and hijabs. The latest Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition has a model wearing hers in a few of her poses and she looks very nice. I don't get how anyone should feel threatened by it, it's someone else's body so mind your own business. Depends if you view a Burkini as a symbol of religious freedom or patriarchal oppression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted June 28, 2019 Author Share Posted June 28, 2019 I don't think I view it as either (I abhor most religion), its a harmless fashion assesory for many, a personal choice like Nike shoes. If the individual wearing it attaches some superstition to it, it's firmly there problem and still not offensive for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartofice Posted June 28, 2019 Share Posted June 28, 2019 12 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said: I don't think I view it as either (I abhor most religion), its a harmless fashion assesory for many, a personal choice like Nike shoes. If the individual wearing it attaches some superstition to it, it's firmly there problem and still not offensive for me. Do they generally have a choice in wearing it? I mean, could they just wear a bikini if they wanted to? Is it a personal choice or something forced upon them by religion / community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted June 28, 2019 Author Share Posted June 28, 2019 11 minutes ago, Heartofice said: Do they generally have a choice in wearing it? I mean, could they just wear a bikini if they wanted to? Is it a personal choice or something forced upon them by religion / community. The muslim model in S.I. poses in suits both with and without, so I would say she definitely makes a personal choice. Not everyone wearing those are forced, just as not all of any religion's are fundamentalist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.