ANTIWAR ROLL CALL! Board the ANTIWAR WAR WAGON!!

[HomerThompson]

then you might as well go against Iran and yes saudis and pakistan. If that your justification all those 3 countries do what you complain about. Again i dont care but be consistent at least

Most of Africa, etc.

 

[VivaRevolution]

There is no lie here. Assad definitely gassed those people. But, I've yet to see @Trotsky advocate for a military intervention. You're clearly not intelligent enough to see nuance.

I mean, you think you work for a collective bargaining agreement. It's embarrassing to me as a progressive that people like you are on "my side".

Have you seen the MIT study that debunks the 2013 attack?

 

[Rational Poster]

then you might as well go against Iran and yes saudis and pakistan. If that your justification all those 3 countries do what you complain about. Again i dont care but be consistent at least

Saudi Arabia and Iran are not failed states.

 

[Seaside]

There is no justification based on available facts. You've got nothing. ISIS operating in Syria isn't a threat to the U.S.. Based on that justification, it would be OK for us to invade virtually every country on the planet. Your understanding of international law, and politics, is pleb-tier. Please go back to trolling Alt-Right idiots, because you're not cut out for grown up conversations.

you could invade all of africa. actually based on that justification you could argue to starve off africa, and the entire middle east and india. why? because terrorist are there and the growing population is threat to ámerica´and resource control.

no people= no threat!

boko haram and other isis cells are throughout west africa, african horn, and radical christian militiats in central africa might threaten control of mineral resources!!!

 

[Rational Poster]

Most of Africa, etc.

UN and US forces are deployed in most of Africa so...

 

[HomerThompson]

Have you seen the MIT study that debunks the 2013 attack?

Yes. It doesn't debunk shit. And I swear to god, if your bring up Seymour Hersh, I'll throttle you through the internet.

 

[Seaside]

Saudi Arabia and Iran are not failed states.

no but the justification i think exists more for them being threats to the US then syria or libya ever was.

why? because they have strongier militaries and are financially very rich. also other things

 

[VivaRevolution]

Yes. It doesn't debunk shit. And I swear to god, if your bring up Seymour Hersh, I'll throttle you through the internet.

Team madmick in the house!

 

[SBJJ]

I do find it weird that Neotsky and Co consistently find themselves attacking Anti interventionists

I had a feeling this thread would further expose them

I can only imagine what Homer is posting. Sometimes wish he wasn't on ignore. But at least I have the Danny Devito twin in Neotsky to read

 

[HomerThompson]

you could invade all of africa. actually based on that justification you could argue to starve off africa, and the entire middle east and india. why? because terrorist are there and the growing population is threat to ámerica´and resource control.

no people= no threat!

boko haram and other isis cells are throughout west africa, african horn, and radical christian militiats in central africa might threaten control of mineral resources!!!

It's madness. I've got beef with you too though, Venezuela. Iran is not even close to as bad as Saudi Arabia. You need to read more history books, and stop parroting that stupid claim.

 

[Rational Poster]

you could invade all of africa. actually based on that justification you could argue to starve off africa, and the entire middle east and india. why? because terrorist are there and the growing population is threat to ámerica´and resource control.

no people= no threat!

boko haram and other isis cells are throughout west africa, african horn, and radical christian militiats in central africa might threaten control of mineral resources!!!

And we're already there fighting them... and have been since the 90s at least.

 

[SBJJ]

Waddle your baby nuts out on strike and see what happens, genius.



Go fuck yourself, you turncoat posing piece of shit.

You're not being attacked for being a union worker. You're being attacked for (a) working for the death machine you falsely claim to oppose, and profiting wildly from it (Boeing pays excellently, I happen to know, from actually working in labor law), (b) trying to cover up your hypocrisy by saying "but I'm in a uuuuunion and unions are good!" and (c) not knowing how the fuck a union operates, despite you apparently deriving so much false sense of virtue out of it.

Every time you post anything on this board that is even slightly condemning of military violence, you are being a hypocritical piece of shit. If you want to be in a union, join one that doesn't kill innocent people for profit.

Thee old gunmakers kill children argument

 

[SBJJ]

no but the justification i think exists more for them being threats to the US then syria or libya ever was.

why? because they have strongier militaries and are financially very rich. also other things

Agreed.

 

[HomerThompson]

UN and US forces are deployed in most of Africa so...

Yeah, and they shouldn't be.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Yes. It doesn't debunk shit. And I swear to god, if your bring up Seymour Hersh, I'll throttle you through the internet.

Have you seen the American conservative article on a threatened mass resigning of intelligence officials if their dissent to the intelligence finding on the 2013 attack wasn't publicly recorded?

 

[Rational Poster]

no but the justification i think exists more for them being threats to the US then syria or libya ever was.

why? because they have strongier militaries and are financially very rich. also other things

I would argue those elements when present in a failed state pose a more immediate threat that is much more easily targeted.

 

[HomerThompson]

Anyway, what needs to happen will probably never happen(Complete rearranging of our stance in the ME.). I really hope we don't kill too many civilians this time around.

 

[Rational Poster]

Yeah, and they shouldn't be.

Why not? They are UN members and request our aid.

 

[Seaside]

It's madness. I've got beef with you too though, Venezuela. Iran is not even close to as bad as Saudi Arabia. You need to read more history books, and stop parroting that stupid claim.

i dont think it stupid claim. I am in here defending syria and against majority of American imperialist missions, british and french and nato. But I think it just the truth.

Syria= iran in many ways. Syria would not use gas without Iran approval if they did use gas, Iran is responsible for pro syrian hezbollah being so strong and for saving assad (before Russians and russian allies financials) helped them.

I just not see how you can separate syria from Iran but i do think you can separate iran from syria. Basically I not saying US should confront Iran but you could confront iran and leave syria alone to be stable. Whereas confroting syria will mean confronting iran most likely.

 

[HomerThompson]

Why not? They are UN members and request our aid.

Because we don't need to be there. That's why. We're killing people in Africa for corrupt governments so we can get our business interests a seat at the head of the table. Fuck off with that shit.