Trump Enters the US in War with Iran
- Thread starter Frank Underwood
- Start date
- Copy link Copy link
- Awards
- 8
That's a nice thought, but clearly not true. History is filled with leaders who happily led their own troops into battle. Obviously the current crop of fat, effete politicians wouldn't do it, but the military industrial complex would just push a different kind of man into the roles.
- Awards
- 6
Of course history had leaders who lead their troops into battle but that was a time when battle was all they knew back then.
People do still have the power to demand independent politicians whom aren't bought and paid for by big industry. Being a defeatist solves nothing....it only means those who died in battle to fight the noble causes, died in vain.
Democracy should still mean something and be held in high regard.
- Awards
- 19
But those who died in battle to fight those noble causes, mostly did died in vain. And how many of those causes were truly noble?
War is a racket. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. --- Gen. Smedley Butler
War is a racket. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. --- Gen. Smedley Butler
- Awards
- 6
That's true for most wars of choice (sadly like this version of attacking Iran) but I would say the brave men and women who died/fought and survived in WW1 and WWII, didn't die in vain.
I completely agree that war is a racket and/or just a power grab of a selfish dictator though.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 8
That sounds good, but what politicians are independent? Any politician tied to the corrupt two-party system will always be bought and paid for by big industry. Any politician that is truly independent also isn't viable, and that's by design. It has nothing to do with having a defeatist attitude and everything to do with being a realist. I spent two decades believing you could defeat the corporations and the military industrial complex by voting for Democrats, and that democracy would prevail. Unfortunately, it didn't happen.
Last edited:
- Awards
- 20
That would never happen.
- Awards
- 6
We're like, what? Eight billion people strong on this planet now? How do you bring big industry to its knees? Stop demanding what they're selling and start finding alternatives. Boycotts do work slowly but ultimately (with enough wide scale resolve), do work.
Why do you think Trump pulled the US out of every alternate energy program? They know that oil isn't needed but want to convince us otherwise. They can't charge us for wind or sunlight so they deemed those powers to be worthless to them.
Just imagine...your car harnessing electricity generated by the engine fan and the moving tires....then charging while at rest by the sunlight. It's such a shame for those oil companies that would be undercut....isn't it?
Last edited:
- Awards
- 19
Well, if we die tomorrow, you've all been lovely!
- Awards
- 19
They've been claiming Iran was "two weeks from getting a nuclear weapon" since the 1980s. The war on Iran is being done by the U.S. on behalf of a middle eastern country that shall never, ever be named.
- Awards
- 11
I'm hearing more and more young people say they don't to die in a war for that country. Unfortunately, many seem to be buying into a lot of online antisemitic conspiracy theories, which makes having a rational conversation about the issue much more of a challenge.
- Awards
- 8
Only his most devout supporters would believe such propaganda. It's right up there with George W. Bush declaring "mission accomplished" right after the start of the Iraq War.
Exactly. That's why I think it's cute when people say this war wouldn't be happening if anybody else were president right now. Hillary Clinton threatened Iran way back in 2008, and Kamala Harris told 60 Minutes in 2024 that Iran is our greatest adversary. Preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon was even cited as one of her highest priorities. Harris made it clear during the campaign that her loyalty was to Bibi's blood thirsty tendencies, just like Biden and Trump did. Unfortunately, we can't vote our way out of this because AIPAC owns and controls the entire political establishment in Washington DC. That's why both Biden and Trump funded the genocide in Gaza, and it's why Clinton, Harris, and Trump all took a hardline stance against Iran. Despite what some people think, the foreign policy would be the same no matter who the president was right now.
Getting America to go along with a genocide had us primed for this. If a Democratic Administration went along with that, would they have any qualms about attacking Iran?
Last edited:
- Awards
- 8
I remember watching this MADTV sketch when it aired in 2007. It's still funny and it aged very well too: