The Real timschochet

That will never happen. Your kind of ugly bigotry will never disappear but it will also never take hold of this country.

You’re wading into a cesspool of ugly bullsh!t here.

Your description of Gaines is accurate.

And? Seems pretty likely to me. She’s also a huge whiner. Blaming others for her own mediocrity.

I still think he’s mostly trolling.

You’re almost 100% wrong. I can’t say you’re lying because I sense that you honestly believe the garbage you spew, which is arguably worse. However it’s almost all lies.

You haven’t written anything to indicate that you hate Jews in this post. But when you say you agree with Frozen, do you agree when he writes “who owns the banks?” Do you agree with his nonsense about the Talmud? Because that’s the anti-Semitic part.

For the record: these are the anti-Semitic parts of the post. 1. I strongly doubt @Frozenbeernuts has read the Talmud. What he has no doubt read is anti-Semitic descriptions of the Talmud that misrepresent both language and meaning. These are typically a few centuries old and unfortunately they pervade the internet. 2. The part about Jesus and the chickens also comes directly from anti-Semitic literature. 3. “Who owns the banks?” is of course as old as any hatred of Jews. FTR though of course it shouldn’t matter: there has never been a time when the majority of world banking was owned by Jewish families, and today it’s almost 100% corporate. These are the sort of telltale signs that allow the reader to distinguish between legitimate criticism of Israel (which I partake in plenty myself) and anti-Semitic nonsense. The writer of the above post indulges strongly in the former, as do a few others in this forum.

Not really no. It was an ugly and stupid statement by @EternalShinyAndChrome a year ago, and it hasn’t gotten any better. Your comment isn’t interesting either.

I think he’s making the right decision here by waiting. I have no complaints about his current actions with regard to this situation (at least based on what I know now.)

That whatever actions Israel takes from this point forward will have long range implications for the security of Israel. That not all Islamic countries feel the same towards Israel, with the same attitude. That there are deep nuances, that this a complicated situation, and there is no simple solution.

This is correct and I don’t think any reasonable person disagrees with you. But while it’s true it’s not the only truth. There is more to the story.

The answer is yes and no. Yes at first always. But eventually the smart religions, the ones that last, accept the science and find a way to work it in. Of course sometimes there’s a lot of drama in between, people get murdered, etc. Heretics are put to the stake. Eventually though it gets absorbed. Christianity brilliantly solved this dilemma with something called the Enlightenment which basically means “hey if the scientists say it’s true, God must have wanted it all along! When we thought differently it wasn’t God who was wrong; we just misunderstood Him.” This excuse cleverly allows everyone but the absolute literalists to adopt every discovery no matter how much it might contradict Scripture. Islam didn’t have any Enlightenment and so they’ve struggled a little more with this.

Pretty much. As we’ve seen they give him info and he ignores it.

I wrote last night that Trump doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing and that is true. He doesn’t think things through, he acts by whim and at the spur of the moment. All true and really scary. At the same time it’s not necessarily bad in this particular situation. Sure it would be better if he thought things through and had a plan but he’s probably going to reach the right decision anyhow if the news reports are true: which is either a negotiated solution or a limited air strike that avoids a larger military commitment. During his time as President Trump has been consistent about very few things, but one of them is trying to avoid war. This is a commendable attribute IMO.

God sometimes you are so dense. I don’t change a thing. I used the word “say” in both posts. Trump doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing. As usual you defend him like some slobbering dog. It’s really pathetic.

I understand all that. So why is Trump hesitating?

The brown shirts are on back order.

Which law? The last one passed was just after 9/11 for the purposes of defending us from 9/11. It’s a bit of a stretch to claim that bombing Iran is related to that.

I meant Iraq but you knew that.

The point is Trump is hesitating because he wants Iran to agree to stop this on their own. But how can we take their word for it? Even international inspectors wouldn’t be proof, especially since Iran is such a large country and can hide stuff underground (as they are.) So what’s the point of hoping Iran says they will stop?

Wasn’t that part of the Obama deal that Trump killed? And didn’t we have the same deal with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq but we became convinced they were cheating anyhow?

The other question is one that I have been asking for about 20 years now with no satisfactory answer: should the President be able to commit the use of force against another nation without the prior consent of Congress?

The point is that Trump is supposedly hesitating because he wants to see if Iran will give up their nuclear weapons quest. But since Iran pursues them in secret (underground which is why we would end up using the special “bunker buster” missile) I don’t know what would be convincing evidence of this. Trump had already rejected what the intelligence services have told him about this (which is that Iran is still years away.)

No I don’t think it but that’s their official line: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran