The heavyweight champion as a political tool, history repeats itself!

Unforgiven,

So you admit that Iran funds terrorism. Yes, and those they fund invade and try to destroy other nations. Now, just imagine if Iran arms or sells nuclear weapons ( Or a dirty bomb ) to a group they are funding for their dirty work. Its very plausible.

I think I'm going to withdraw from this thread for now as it could quickly divide the board on politics.

 

That's the exact same argument that was used to remove Saddam Hussein - "he's about to give his nukes to Al-Qaeda !" ... (ignoring the fact that he had no nukes and was the sworn enemy of Al-Qaeda) - and the proceed to destroy Iraq and turn it into a hot-bed of USA-Saudi-funded Al-Qaeda !

I'm more worried about the Yanks giving weapons to ISIS ! :deal

For me, it's all fun. :good Makes a change to pick some brains on matters political/historical.
But I too will withdraw simply because this is a boxing forum, and we gone way off topic.

 

Really.

I was under the impression that Reagan did some chest thumping about invading Columbia, and destroying cocaine at its source, to which Pablo Escobar said he would " give " ( NOT SELL ) 5 tons of pure coke to his American contacts. This apparently ended up with Reagan's own advisers telling him to back off because the consequences of cheap cocaine on US streets could be catastophic for them socially.

 

Unforgiven,

So you admit that Iran funds terrorism. Yes, and those they fund invade and try to destroy other nations. Now, just imagine if Iran arms or sells nuclear weapons ( Or a dirty bomb ) to a group they are funding for their dirty work. Its very plausible.

Hussein invaded another country and used WMD's on an ethic group. I think he asked for it. He did not have nukes, but was trying to figure out how to make them.

ISIS is public enemy #1 right now. No way they get arms unless they have say a hidden tracking device in them

I'd settle for our friends across the pond cracking down on people on the streets trying to intimidate others to covert to the ways of Islam ( would never happen in the USA )

 

ISIS might be sold to the public as "enemy #1" but they are actually a useful device created by the US government and its Arab allies. It's the same in Libya.

Don't believe the hype. The reason ISIS exist is to weaken Assad's Syria and to weaken Iran, strengthening Saudi, Qatar, Bahrain etc. - which is US policy. They also give the US a great excuse to re-establish a military presence in the region. How convenient.

ISIS are the same crowd who were fighting Gaddafi and Assad, cheered on by the likes of John McCain.
They are probably trained by CIA operatives, just as the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan in the 1980s that helped spawn Al-Qaeda in the first place.

US policy seems to spread the Al-Qaeda ideolody everywhere it goes. And by this time it should be quite obvious that's what the hidden agenda requires.
Don't just believe what they tell you. Look at what they actually do.

 

I'm not interested so much in having an exhaustive debate regarding this subject (I've done it on other sites as many times as we've all done "Louis vs. Ali" debates here) as having anyone interested read the book I recommended, which offers an interesting counterpoint to the fashionable "witch hunt" pov. We can discuss and debate from there.

Not to dismiss all the time and work you've invested in your posts McVey, which I can see is considerable . It's just that at this juncture of my debating this old topic I'm at a place where I'll only go from a certain jumping-off point. One that requires the reading of and considering of that amazing book.

 

Hmmmm, now where have we seen and heard that before? ( people invading other countries and using WMD's on ethnic minorities )

As someone who is apolitical, I found it nonsensical firstly to hear that goon Bin Laden, claim Allah said it was OK to bomb cities in the West, then secondly that other pair of idiots Bush and Blair, claim that God says it is OK to invade both Afghanistan, and Iraq. Where there were neither WMD's or a solution to hundreds if not thousands of years of tribal feudalism.

 

The body count, which historically makes Nazi Germany look like a drive-by shooting, tends to narrow one's view

 

I'm not an objectivist, but I agree wholeheartedly with Ayn Rand here:

"The Bill of Rights reads: “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press . . .” It does not demand that private citizens provide a microphone for the man who advocates their destruction, or a passkey for the burglar who seeks to rob them, or a knife for the murderer who wants to cut their throats."

And if anyone thinks the communists aren't all about what Ms. Rand-- who LIVED under communist rule-- lists here, then they don't know history and are ignorant of the tactics of communists.

 

I don't know that much about the actual communists in Hollywood stuff, except some of those "Commie"-films, and commie screenwriters, of the era were good movies ! :good

Likewise, a lot of the "anti-commie" inspired movies were pretty entertaining too. :good (though it must be stated that generally, there was more talent on the left. )

Since the Hollywood studios were solid private capitalist institutions, founded and run by solidly capitalistic bosses at the top, the idea of the movie industry being totally saturated and subverted by leftists seems to be more than a little incredible.
The idea that Hollywood or Los Angeles in the 1930s and '40s was on the brink of becoming a Stalinist Soviet seems unlikely.
But I guess I might need to read that book.

 

Would really like to hear your thoughts. :good I'm sure your library has it.

 

These equivelences are always used out of context.

Nazism is, I firmly believe, the absolute worst and most destructive ideology out there.
The fact that it happened in a single country of 70 million, lasted only 12 years in power, and killed ?? millions of people and only ended with the utter defeat of its own country, should be a warning to the world.

As bad and as brutal and bloodthirsty as Soviet Communism was, people need to realise that had it been NAZISM in its place in the era 1945-1991, the nations and peoples who we now say "suffered under the yoke" of Communism, probably wouldn't exist at all.

 

I'll put it on my "To read" list, which is already getting unreasonably long (including books I've bought sitting on the shelf unread atsch).
Interesting subject certainly. :good

 

I'm not making light of Nazi-ism, mind you. But in terms of body count there really is no comparison. Stalin had murdered more than Hitler before Hitler had even died. Russia, Cambodia and the Khmer Rouge.....so many examples. Staggering.

Nazis let you know who and what they are right on the face of it. They hate you and let you know what they want to do to you. Communists come as your "friends" and as people who "care". Though both are despicable, I would rather deal with the former than the latter. I'll take an honest enemy who will stick a knife in my chest over a dishonest or misguided "friend" who will stick a knife in my back.

 

Take it at face value. What is the objective of Isis? Strict muslim law, and they will kill fellow muslims who do not convert to the way they see things. If this group had access to a nuclear weapon or WMD, don't you think they would use them?

If Obama wanted to weaken Assad, he lets him fight ISIS alone. This is not what is going on. The USA is attacking ISIS and Syria is no friend of the USA's.

ISIS is an enemy to the free world and dictators alike which is drawing fighters from people based in Europe, the USA and UK. ISIS is well funded.

They need to be decimated and blocked which is why I think some ground forces are needed in Turkey and Iraq. Letting them gain territory and forceable converting ignorant younger people to their side as they conquer new areas is a bad decision.