Lobbyist Advocates False-Flag To Justify Iran War

Submitted by: sr3nity 4 years ago in

Patrick Clawson gives us a brief history lesson and suggests America use familiar tactics with Iran.
There are 30 comments:
Male 134
Remember that some of these things that led to 100`s of thousands of US and foreign citizens/soldiers dying did not actually happen or were ambiguous: Gulf of Tonkin, USS Maine from his examples. Be careful.
0
Reply
Male 334
andrew153.. Funny enough the second and lesser so the firts world war, the usa had a decent reason to jion in, even though they didnt want to.. There is something werong with a society as a whole if they see war as a primary way to end conflicts. It becomes worse if they start wars.

the usa isnt the policeforce of the world, they portray themself that way though.. The UN should have that place.

The usa may be a world power, just like Russia was once and china seems to become now. The UN was created to prevent `world powers` to `police` the smaller countries.

Now, i wil not say that the usa didnt do anything good for the world, cause in a lot of situations they did.. but in recent history, i cant name one war that they were actually the good side..

Oh and for sake of argument, 60+ years ago isnt recent
0
Reply
Male 15,186
OK I have a plan. The CIA can drop a nuke in downtown Manhattan. When the fallout settles, you`ll be at war. Make sure the prevailing wind is blowing from the East so the fallout dosn`t fall anywhere that matters
0
Reply
Male 5,811
[quote]Nobody else would dare start a war while we are around, or else you`ll end up like Serbia.[/quote]
So that`s why you tip-toe around China?
0
Reply
Male 14,331
"I also don`t, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that, when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say. "
- Obama

The Dems and repubs do agree on something!
0
Reply
Male 13,630
Never quite work out how the feck the world is basically penniless. But we always have enough stuffed down the back of the sofa to start wars??
0
Reply
Male 15,832
It would never work. If the Iranians started raining down missiles on Israel and blowing up US ships in the Gulf, Obama would apologize to them.
0
Reply
Male 2,345
This guy is a Lobbyist for Israel...pretty damn scary when you think about it.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]The isolation will be relative, it won`t be exactly like before 1945, but it won`t be so hyper-interventionist like today. And trade will be completely open, but that`s not what I refer to in "isolationism".[/quote]

It`s called non-interventionism, and yes it is policy we need to adopt.
0
Reply
Male 10,855
[quote]“Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation`s fury,”
-Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Wonder what this fire is he speaks of lets wait and see![/quote]

"I promise to deliver affordable Healthcare to all Americans."

-Barack Obama

See a pattern here?
0
Reply
Male 10,855
YAY let`s blow more money out of asses on a war we don`t need started on false pretenses.

Moron.
0
Reply
Male 4,854
"Markust - These wars are Bush era logic?"

The two wars I listed are the direct result of Bush era logic. We do not need another preemptive strike.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
`Some are doing this, as voices like Ron Paul are becoming accepted. However, leftists need to listen to Kucinich more than Obama.`

I agree that Kucinich is voice of reason. Unfortunately he lost his seat to redistricting. And to be fair, Obama has been tougher on Israel than most presidents, although the bar has been set pretty low on that.

It would really benefit our standing in the region for the U.S. to approach Israel from more of a neutral position. Unfortuately, there is a strong lobby in congress against that principle.
0
Reply
Male 2,578
The isolation will be relative, it won`t be exactly like before 1945, but it won`t be so hyper-interventionist like today. And trade will be completely open, but that`s not what I refer to in "isolationism".

However, I think for the American public to get to this point, there has to be a significant confrontation that turns America off from this ideology. Iraq and Afghanistan did this pretty well, but not completely. Unfortunately, I think the next will be Iran.

It`s important for people on the right to accept that attacking Iran is pointless - even if it is just. Some are doing this, as voices like Ron Paul are becoming accepted. However, leftists need to listen to Kucinich more than Obama. They seem keen on intervening in places like Libya, as well all those drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen....and "helping" Syrian Rebels. All pointless and counterproductive.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
`When we go back into isolation similar to that before 1945, something I predict to happen soon`

What makes you think that will happen? I`m not sure it`s possible for the U.S. to go into isolation in today`s world. The rest of the world is too close, and we have much more of a "world economy" than we did pre-WWII.
0
Reply
Male 2,578
Modwain - there is a reason we have started all the major wars in the past few decades. We are the world`s superpower, the world`s policeman. Nobody else would dare start a war while we are around, or else you`ll end up like Serbia. We wiped them out with basically no casualties.


When we go back into isolation similar to that before 1945, something I predict to happen soon, I think we will see the world return to state it was in before World War 2. We keep the peace. Sometimes with war, ironically. Europe could not exist in its current form without us in this role. Already, as we are receding as the world superpower, Europe is ripping at the seems.
0
Reply
Male 2,578
Markust - These wars are Bush era logic? What about Clinton getting involved in Muslim nations? Or Bush 1? Or how about LBJ and Kennedy in Vietnam? Or Truman in Korea? All of these wars have a common theme, they`re not unique. Watch Full Metal Jacket, it is perfect commentary on these Bush wars, even though it`s talking about LBJ and Kennedy`s war.

We should not attack Iran, those scum are not worth a single American life. If they do try to kill all the Jews - which is likely and is an attack plan that has more historical precedent than anything else in history - then we invite them all to live in America. We could use them, they are educated immigrants who could help use in future innovations.

However, if we did attack Iran, we wouldn`t be starting WW3 anymore than the UK did by declaring war on Germany.
0
Reply
Male 37
The U.S. will start WW3, that nation will be the end of freedom as we know it, wake the fug up people, question your government
0
Reply
Male 3,445
`Ya there scientists mysteriously exploded must`ve been all that radiation! I myself don`t want to see us involved there but see no need to hold Isreal back.`

Not sure what you`re referring to. There is even conflicting evidence about whether they even have a weapons program. Earlier this year, Sec. Panetta even said that Iran does not have a weapons program "at this point" (said that around January/February).
0
Reply
Male 14,331
[quote]Iran does not have nukes at this point. [/quote]

Ya there scientists mysteriously exploded must`ve been all that radiation! I myself don`t want to see us involved there but see no need to hold Isreal back.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
"If you were in Isreals shoes you`d want the US to attack Iran before they nuked you too."

Iran does not have nukes at this point. Israel does have nukes. Any strike would at this point be unjustifiable, and would further our already shaky reputation in the Middle East. It would also cause serious harm to a shaky world economy.

In short, a strike against Iran would be stupid. The former head of Mossad agrees. Link
0
Reply
Male 14,331
“Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation`s fury,”
-Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Wonder what this fire is he speaks of lets wait and see!
0
Reply
Male 334
so, after having started most major wars in the last 40 or 50 odd years, he advocates that the usa should start another one? not overtly but for all intents and purposes ,start another one?

what makes these people so war hungry.. i dont get it. people die all the time, dont they die fast enough? do we need another war?

And though i am no fan of extremism, wether it be religious or any other way, and i may disagree with the theocratic government of Iran, i have to admit that they havent started a war in 200 years.. what makes you think they will start now mcgovern?
0
Reply
Male 92
He is a evil, evil man!!!
0
Reply
Male 59
starting a war is insane...
0
Reply
Male 1,243
go to the little white house, gather in numbers and chant "DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! DEATH TO THE PRESIDENCY!!! ...."

and don`t stop until it`s turned back over to the people.
0
Reply
Male 14,331
If you were in Isreals shoes you`d want the US to attack Iran before they nuked you too. Oh you thought their nuclear program was for hugs and kisses to Isreal....
0
Reply
Female 2,525
Well that was unsettling.
0
Reply
Male 4,854
We do not need another war. Your Bush era logic did not work for Afghanistan, it did not work for Iraq, and it will definitely not work against a country as civilized as Iran. Is this some kind of end of days plan? Why do conservatives want to get us into WWIII? WTF?
0
Reply
Male 53
Link: Lobbyist Advocates False-Flag To Justify Iran War [Rate Link] - Patrick Clawson gives us a brief history lesson and suggests America use familiar tactics with Iran.
0
Reply