Jump to content
Thailand Forum

ilostmypassword

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    8,134
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6,806 Excellent

About ilostmypassword

Recent Profile Visitors

2,695 profile views
  1. Defying Trump, Iran says will boost missile capabilities

    Really? This kind of lie is Trumpworthy. Such a massively ignorant and dishonest statement.
  2. Iran says it does not expect U.S. to leave nuclear deal

    "For example, the United States and the UK blocked condemnation of Iraq's known chemical weapons attacks at the UN Security Council. No resolution was passed during the war that specifically criticized Iraq's use of chemical weapons, despite the wishes of the majority to condemn this use. On March 21, 1986 the United Nation Security Council recognized that "chemical weapons on many occasions have been used by Iraqi forces against Iranian forces"; this statement was opposed by the United States, the sole country to vote against it in the Security Council (the UK abstained).[43]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction And no the UN security council resolution 620 does not condemn Iraq for using weapons agains Iran for their use even though it was Iraq that initiated their use and used them against its own civilian population. It condemns both Iran and Iraq. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_620 I went and looked up resolution 582 and it doesn't condemn either side for using chemical weapons, It just reminds both of them that they are parties to treaties outlawing their use. https://undocs.org/S/RES/582(1986) Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran The U.S. knew Hussein was launching some of the worst chemical attacks in history -- and still gave him a hand. http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/exclusive-cia-files-prove-america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran/
  3. U.S. Senate backs massive increase in military spending

    OH, the USA is a minor player, is it? WASHINGTON—The Trump administration has significantly increased military support for Sunni Arab states fighting al Qaeda and Iranian-backed militias in Yemen, said U.S. and Arab officials, drawing the U.S. deeper into the two-year civil war there. American support now includes greater intelligence and logistical support for the militaries of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, these officials said. The Trump administration also is moving to resume the sale of precision-guided weapons to Saudi Arabia, which were frozen during the final months of the Obama administration due to concerns about the rising numbers of civilian fatalities in Yemen. https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-boosts-military-backing-for-saudi-led-coalition-in-yemen-1490651993 Glad to see you don't just reflexively defend the USA without checking your facts. And speaking of being reflexive, what do terrorist groups have to do with the war in Yemen? Pavlovian much? Who exactly are the terrorists the Iran is sponsoring in Yemen? "The irony, of course, is that one of Saudi Arabia’s stated objectives for intervening in Yemen in March 2015 was to roll back a mostly fictitious Iranian influence. The intervention, however, is having the opposite effect: The Houthis are a small non-state actor attacked by a regional power with deep pockets and advanced weaponry. It is then only rational for the Houthis to seek assistance, albeit only small amounts, from the only external power willing and able to support them — Iran." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/05/16/contrary-to-popular-belief-houthis-arent-iranian-proxies/?utm_term=.29faa8368a41
  4. Do you think Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?

    "Recounting his decision to dismiss Comey, Trump told NBC News, “In fact, when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, ‘You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story, it’s an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.’” https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-says-fbi-director-comey-told-him-three-times-he-wasnt-under-investigation-once-in-a-phone-call-initiated-by-the-president/2017/05/11/2b384c9a-3669-11e7-b4ee-434b6d506b37_story.html? Clearly it's just an obvious coincidence that Trump was thinking of the Russian investigation when he fired Comey. He might just as well have been thinking about an extra scoop of ice cream for dessert or a round of golf. Clearly the 2 are not connected. Here's another piece of evidence that has absolutely no significance WASHINGTON — President Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved “great pressure” on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting. “I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/19/us/politics/trump-russia-comey.html?_r=0 McMaster does not deny details of Trump’s discussion with Russian officials White House national security adviser H.R. McMaster on Sunday did not deny that President Trump discussed his motivation for firing FBI Director James B. Comey in an Oval Office meeting with Russian officials this month. McMaster would not directly address details of the meeting, but he did not deny reports that Trump revealed classified intelligence information in that meeting and told the Russian officials that Comey’s firing eased “great pressure” on the White House. McMaster said only that Trump was speaking about his desire to find common ground with the Russians. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/05/21/mcmaster-does-not-deny-details-of-trumps-discussion-with-russian-officials/?utm_term=.ed95e0b59c10 It's just another coincidence. It happened to ease "great pressure" on him but in no way could it be inferred that this easing of pressure had been in any way an incentive to fire Comey..
  5. Iran says it does not expect U.S. to leave nuclear deal

    Saddam Hussein didn't invade Iran on orders from the USA.. But it is a fact that the USA did provide invaluable operational intelligence, third party weapons, and upgraded its diplomatic relations with Iraq. It also vetoed a security council resolution condemning Iraq for its use of chemical weapons. In fact, as I recall, Senator Alan Simpson, a close friend of George H.W. Bush, sent Saddam a letter consoling him for being a victim of the press in regards to the chemical weapons reports. Roughly 200,000 Iranians died in that war of aggression waged by Saddam Hussein.
  6. says the guy with the chozen avatar.
  7. Which are you referring to? The ACA (Obamacare or projections about the effects of the Republicans' proposed legislation? Because the latter actually would result in over 20,000,000 losing insurance.
  8. Next thing you know they'll be chanting "Lock him up, Lock him up." Nah, who out there could sink that low?
  9. Do you think Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?

    May have what? Admitted that he fired Comey on account of the Russia investigation? Or asking everyone to leave the room?
  10. Defying Trump, Iran says will boost missile capabilities

    The civilized nation and US ally Saudi Arabia agrees with you. As do all Sunni extremists.
  11. It's so bad that the Republican leadership tried to persuade Lisa Murkowski to support their bill by allowing Alaska to keep Obamacare.
  12. Do you think Trump will be impeached or forced to resign?

    I agree with you. Why would Donald Trump pay 25 million to settle a lawsuit brought against him for fraud?
  13. U.S. Senate backs massive increase in military spending

    Since you've already gotten off the track, it's simply not true that the main players in Yemen are saudi arabis and iran. Iran is a minor player compared to what the Saudis, the UAE and the USA are up to there.
  14. I'm not denying he's done good things. Particularly on the run-up to the Iraq War. But it's a fact that he was not a supporter of the Iran nuclear agreement and has since been much more skeptical than most other experts. And since ISIS is his baby, how can you discount the relevancy of that? And you still haven't established the IAEA to ISIS connection regarding the source of the allegation in the headline.
  15. Does it get its info from the IAEA? I didn't see anything in the article that tied info from the IAEA to the headline. Did you know that the institute is headed by David Albright who has been consistently at the least very skeptical of the Iran agreement before it was signed and afterwards? http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/albright_david/ And most damning of all, the acronym for the institute is ISIS.
×