James Corbett totally destroys the LIE that Soleimani was responsible for 600 American deaths

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: muzzleflash
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Why are you suddenly insulting everyone who challenged your views?

That from you is delightful. Mirrors, does your house possess them?

You're calling Corbett a hoaxer - something no one ever calls him because he doesn't do hoaxes, he just questions everything the MSM presents and does research.

He never pushed the No Plane theory of 911 you probably just contrived that because it sounds great as an insult.

www.corbettreport.com...
The entire panel at this conference are noted "no plane" theorists. Corbett, while not specifically saying "no plane hit the Pentagon" clearly supports the idea that he believes it was impossible for a pilot to direct a 757 into the Pentagon.

Calling the OP a dweeb and spineless for just saying the Pentagon lied about some Iran stuff?

A dweeb is a studiously inept person who over-analyzes something to the point of being offputting to their peers. I called the position spineless, which it absolutely is. There is zero backbone supporting the idea that Suleimani wasn't a walking piece of crap who was directly responsible for hundreds of US soldiers killed in Iraq.

Y'all are literally foaming at the mouth with hate and anger - wanting ppl banned for life - just for QUESTIONING YOUR MSM OFFICIAL STORY.

This is the lowest of the low.
I am so disappointed in how mad and venomous everyone became over this.

There you go again, projecting while tossing around buzz words. I'm not the one writing every third word in full caps "cyber yelling" like a raving madman. You seem to feel attacked because people are questioning your narrative. Should be sad, but actually "amused beyond belief" is a more accurate description of my thoughts on that.

They can’t see the irony.

A poster on the internet states another poster should be banned.

ReeeeeReeeeeReeeee

And in the same breath the Reesters scream

POTUS should be banned from Twitter.
POTUS should be banned from being POTUS through impeachment.
POTUS “will not be re-elected, one way or another” paraphrasing Nancy.
The voters of the USA should be banned from realizing their wishes of having POTUS carry out his term as he was elected to do.

Crickets....

originally posted by: muzzleflash
a reply to: pexx421

Which is ironic because these are the same people just last month calling it all "fake news", yet now they want ppl banned for challenging the veracity of that same source of fake news.

It's unbelievably ironic!!

That’s just how sheep behave. They attack anything, science, video, etc that goes against their programming as lies and partisan Extremism. But anything that supports their programming they have extremely low standards for proof or fact checking. I come in here all the time laying down history, facts, etc, and their usual response is personal attacks, name calling etc. The best part, is when I respond in kind, after multiple personal attacks, I may call them a bunch of bitches or to F off, and they cry like little babies. I don’t really understand at this point. I try facts, and they can’t handle that, so then I respond in kind to the kind of arguments they seem to prefer, and they can’t handle that either. Apparently they just have no tolerance for people disagreeing with them in any form.

a reply to: muzzleflash

Did you even read the thread beyond the tongue-in-cheek 100-strong popular post about banning on page 1, or was your inept furor so ravenous that you simply threw fingers to keyboard on the spot and have a 9 page gap in comprehension on the thread? I argued the validity of the claim here I will gird myself for some hyperbolic and emotional reaction accusing that argument of trying to censor someone with facts or whatever nonsense now so it won't come as a surprise when it is met with such.

If your tolerance levels are breached I have no idea why that's my worry or my problem. Sounds like something you should do a personal inventory on and resolve on your own. We are all rooting for you to succeed in climbing that mountain!

Leftists: "We're not defending terrorists! That's just a right-wing talking point!"

Also Leftists: -blatantly and obviously defends terrorists-

Seriously, at this point, I think these people are secretly working for the GOP.

I haven’t had he opportunity to do any independent research on this subject. It seems to be unquestioned the man was a terrorist responsible for the deaths of innocents. The point you’ve put fwd is to clear him of the charge of being responsible for the death of 600 Americans.

I don’t support needless military action, in your opinion was the actions by the US here needless?

a reply to: Willtell

I mean the whole “terrorist groups” thing is crap. We have one group, supposedly arming and fighting occupying forces in their region. And they’re “terrorists “. Then we have another group, fighting and killing people on the other side of the world. But they’re not “terrorists “, oh no. They’re innocent folk doing the lords work. Hm. Sorry, but we have two groups here. Sure, one group is saying we shouldn’t be over there, killing people who are not attacking us here. And we have another group here, ardently supporting our innocent folks who go over there and are killing people in their own countries, stealing their oil and gold, and so on. Seems reasonable.

a reply to: Rob808

I don’t support needless military action, in your opinion was the actions by the US here needless?

Absolutely. And all part of a US propaganda effort to try to entice Iran to start a war.

Great the US congress is trying to stop Trump from starting a war.

These defenders of this on this OP are just neocons who are all probably in support of the Iraq war from the start and agree with the US destructive ME policy that Putin mentioned.

The fact is they never offer any proof of the charge of killing 600 Americans. Just as they offered no proof of the WMDs Iraq is supposed to have had which started the war 17 years ago.

The YoutUbe refers to the reporter asking the defense dept spokesman for proof and the spokesman admitting THEY HAD NO PROOF


Its called the BIG LIE

originally posted by: Willtell
The fact is they never offer any proof of the charge of killing 600 Americans.

You can lead a blind man to Lenscrafters, but even they cannot make him see. www.abovetopsecret.com...

The rest of the world sees, though. Even the one eyed see this clearly.

a reply to: Willtell

This is the crown Jewel of the Project for a New American Century strategy.

It's got Dick Cheney, William Kristol, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz, etc all over it.

I can't believe people aren't educated about imperialism, govt tyranny, etc.

They are so convinced they are the good guys yet desire murder. It's a logical contradiction, you can't be both.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Willtell
The fact is they never offer any proof of the charge of killing 600 Americans.

You can lead a blind man to Lenscrafters, but even they cannot make him see. www.abovetopsecret.com...

The rest of the world sees, though. Even the one eyed see this clearly.

I see. So, because Iran was helping Iraq fight the US, they’re terrorists. But what does that make the us soldiers over there killing Iraqis? Noble saviors of Iraq, no? Hm. Nice that you can take two people, doing very similar things, call one by a different name, and that makes it ok to hate and kill them. Funny, we gave a very similar group a different name just 20 years before, and that name allowed us to hail them as freedom fighters and heroes. Hm. The power of names is amazing.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Blah blah blah.
Y'all lost me.
Don't care.

Lol.

originally posted by: pexx421

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Willtell
The fact is they never offer any proof of the charge of killing 600 Americans.

You can lead a blind man to Lenscrafters, but even they cannot make him see. www.abovetopsecret.com...

The rest of the world sees, though. Even the one eyed see this clearly.

I see. So, because Iran was helping Iraq fight the US, they’re terrorists. But what does that make the us soldiers over there killing Iraqis? Noble saviors of Iraq, no? Hm. Nice that you can take two people, doing very similar things, call one by a different name, and that makes it ok to hate and kill them. Funny, we gave a very similar group a different name just 20 years before, and that name allowed us to hail them as freedom fighters and heroes. Hm. The power of names is amazing.

Yes the power of names is insanely dangerous.

For example "Nazi".

That stupid word's been used endlessly to vilify anything or anyone. Dems call Reps Nazis, Reps call the Dems Nazis. Etc etc.

And it's magically ok to hate hate even though that fills you with hate and now you're hate too? Yeah don't think so lol.

They're all Nazis now apparently.

The power of names indeed.

originally posted by: pexx421
I see. So, because Iran was helping Iraq fight the US, they’re terrorists. But what does that make the us soldiers over there killing Iraqis?

Listen, Nationalism actually means something to me. I have ancestors who fought and died for this country, I have relatives right now who are in the military, you can essentially take anything that attempts to paint American soldiers with the same brush as terrorists form some cat box in the middle of hell and stick where the sun doesn't shine. The strong run this world and that is as it always has been. Ultimately that's what's behind the hand wringing and crocodile tears we're seeing over the execution of a terrorist piece of crap in the first place. Some have this pie in the sky impression that life doesn't have winners and losers, strong and weak, etc... but to demonstrate that these dichotomies don't exist, it requires the winners to restrict themselves and not win and the strong to weaken themselves and not flex, in other words this dream of "equality" isn't based on the losers upping their game or the weak strengthening themselves. Iraq slapped the biggest dude at the bar and spit some bloody chicklets because of it and no matter how much you'd love to see that biggest guy piss himself and kiss the little guy's ass, it isn't happening... so change your world view or continue to deal with the disappointment of reality.

originally posted by: muzzleflash
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Blah blah blah.
Y'all lost me.

...in the same vein as my house "loses" bags of waste every Friday morning when the garbage truck takes them from my house, I agree with you. It's the definition of no great loss, but I reckon it's losing something none the less.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: pexx421
I see. So, because Iran was helping Iraq fight the US, they’re terrorists. But what does that make the us soldiers over there killing Iraqis?

Listen, Nationalism actually means something to me. I have ancestors who fought and died for this country, I have relatives right now who are in the military, you can essentially take anything that attempts to paint American soldiers with the same brush as terrorists form some cat box in the middle of hell and stick where the sun doesn't shine. The strong run this world and that is as it always has been. Ultimately that's what's behind the hand wringing and crocodile tears we're seeing over the execution of a terrorist piece of crap in the first place. Some have this pie in the sky impression that life doesn't have winners and losers, strong and weak, etc... but to demonstrate that these dichotomies don't exist, it requires the winners to restrict themselves and not win and the strong to weaken themselves and not flex, in other words this dream of "equality" isn't based on the losers upping their game or the weak strengthening themselves. Iraq slapped the biggest dude at the bar and spit some bloody chicklets because of it and no matter how much you'd love to see that biggest guy piss himself and kiss the little guy's ass, it isn't happening... so change your world view or continue to deal with the disappointment of reality.

Way off. I was in the military. No one knew why we were going to Iraq. Or actually, they did. We were going to kill people that had nothing to do with 9/11.....because it suited our agenda.

So Iraq didn’t slap the biggest guy in the bar. The biggest guy in the bar decided to go rob a small, defenseless guy with no power to fight back.

The reality isn’t “the strong rule, the weak die” or whatever you say. In nature there’s balance. There’s strong animals thriving, and there’s weak animals thriving. Or, they were until the anthropocene extinction began, now they’re just all dying. Regardless, human nature is extremely malleable, which is why you have so many different people from so many cultures and ages behaving so differently. We have the ability to largely make the world what we want it to be..... and we’re destroying it and making it a wreck. At any rate, I have the ability to go rob and murder or frighten my neighbors and steal their stuff. But I don’t. Because we have found that laws and social contracts are greatly beneficial. So strong and weak can coexist side by side. Except when it comes to us policy and international law, apparently.

You can come up with whatever excuses you like for the us being justified in breaking international law, murdering millions in their own homes, and robbing nations all over the world. But all the justification in the world doesn’t make us any less a rogue state, with no respect for our laws, international laws, or any nations other than our own.....and Israel.

And let’s be clear. Us “terrorist sympathizers” recognize that Iran’s military are likely brainwashed and inundated with propaganda, and likely do some terrible things. We know that. But we also recognize the US military is largely the same. That’s the difference between us and you, apparently.

A “terrorist” has a specific definition. It’s “targeting civilian populations in order to force changes in govt policy”. Now.... is Iran doing that? Or are we? How many civilians have died due to Iran? And black water doesn’t count. Now, how many civilians have died because of the US? It’s not even comparable. You’re talking maybe 1-200 vs millions. What does Iran do, that we don’t, that classifies them as “terrorists” and us as “freedom fighters”??

I expect the difference is not to be found in the soldiers, but in the media.

originally posted by: pexx421
You can come up with whatever excuses you like for the us being justified in breaking international law, murdering millions in their own homes, and robbing nations all over the world. But all the justification in the world doesn’t make us any less a rogue state, with no respect for our laws, international laws, or any nations other than our own.....and Israel.

We were literally in Iraq to enforce international law. As for the bar analogy, I was specifically talking about Iran, not Iraq. What the hell was Iran doing in the bar to begin with? When we removed Hussein from power we removed Iran's biggest enemy in the region for them. Iranians were not visiting Iraq prior to his removal because they usually ended up gassed... Iranian civilians, killed merely for being Iranians.

So let's not pretend we're dummies by convoluting this conversation about the US removing an Iranian general who had overseen action that killed hundreds of troops not actively at war with Iran and not on Iranian soil with the Iraq war in general. You can disagree with *why* we were in Iraq to begin with until the cows come home, chances are I won't disagree with you as much as you might expect... but the fact is that we are in Iraq and, as such, it's asinine for an American to shrug off the deaths of US troops in deference to a sniphole like Iran. When Iran turned the focus of the little militant groups they've supplied and supported towards US embassies, set up and operated with the intention of diplomacy rather than military, then it went well beyond the standards of war and the US took their shot. It hit the intended target and Iran has but two choices now.
1. Do nothing and like it
2. Strike back in a meaningful way and burn

a reply to: pexx421

I don't accept any of these excuses to justify mass murder either.

What's wrong is wrong no matter how they slice it.

originally posted by: pexx421
And let’s be clear. Us “terrorist sympathizers” recognize that Iran’s military are likely brainwashed and inundated with propaganda, and likely do some terrible things.

So why wax poetic about it when the US removed one of the primary brainwashers in Suleimani?

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: pexx421
You can come up with whatever excuses you like for the us being justified in breaking international law, murdering millions in their own homes, and robbing nations all over the world. But all the justification in the world doesn’t make us any less a rogue state, with no respect for our laws, international laws, or any nations other than our own.....and Israel.

We were literally in Iraq to enforce international law.

We were there to enforce the profits of the military industrial complex and play chess with Russia.

And hundreds of thousands of real ppl died.

How lawful.