Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Frank Underwood" data-source="post: 425289" data-attributes="member: 35">In 2012, Patrick Clawson, who heads the Washington Institute’s Iran Security Initiative, answered a question at as to what should be done if negotiations with Tehran fail:“I frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough. And it’s very hard for me to see how the United States President can get us to war with Iran.&nbsp; Which leads me to conclude that, if in fact compromise is not coming, that the traditional way America gets to war is what would be best for US interests. Some people might think that Mister Roosevelt wanted to get us into World War II. You might recall that we had to wait for Pearl Harbour. Some people might think that Mister Wilson wanted to get us into World War I. You may recall that we had to wait for the Lusitania episode. Some people might think that Mister Johnson wanted to send troops into Vietnam. You may recall that we had to wait for the Gulf of Tonkin episode. We didn’t go to war with Spain until the Maine exploded.&nbsp; And may I point out that Mister Lincoln did not feel he could call out the federal army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which is why he ordered the commander at Fort Sumter to do exactly that thing that the South Carolinians said would cause an attack. So, if, in fact, the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war.&quot;[MEDIA=youtube]y1gZaxJZ8vw[/MEDIA]The reason we&#039;re at war with Iran now is because Israel attacked them earlier this month.&nbsp; We likely would have got dragged into this regardless of who was president.All presidents ultimately end up being huge war mongers, but they often pretend to be doves on the campaign trail to placate the war weary public.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Frank Underwood, post: 425289, member: 35"] In 2012, Patrick Clawson, who heads the Washington Institute’s Iran Security Initiative, answered a question at as to what should be done if negotiations with Tehran fail: “I frankly think that crisis initiation is really tough. And it’s very hard for me to see how the United States President can get us to war with Iran. Which leads me to conclude that, if in fact compromise is not coming, that the traditional way America gets to war is what would be best for US interests. Some people might think that Mister Roosevelt wanted to get us into World War II. You might recall that we had to wait for Pearl Harbour. Some people might think that Mister Wilson wanted to get us into World War I. You may recall that we had to wait for the Lusitania episode. Some people might think that Mister Johnson wanted to send troops into Vietnam. You may recall that we had to wait for the Gulf of Tonkin episode. We didn’t go to war with Spain until the Maine exploded. And may I point out that Mister Lincoln did not feel he could call out the federal army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which is why he ordered the commander at Fort Sumter to do exactly that thing that the South Carolinians said would cause an attack. So, if, in fact, the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, [B]it would be best if somebody else started the war.[/B]" [MEDIA=youtube]y1gZaxJZ8vw[/MEDIA] The reason we're at war with Iran now is because Israel attacked them earlier this month. We likely would have got dragged into this regardless of who was president. All presidents ultimately end up being huge war mongers, but they often pretend to be doves on the campaign trail to placate the war weary public. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Who played JR Ewing?