Why A Yes Vote For The Iran Nuclear Deal Is A No-Brainer

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by andymarksman

Big fat lie by a habitual liar.

A blatant lie! That operation never had a chance; because the Cuban populace, whose support was crucial for its success, never went over to the exile fighters.

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1765.html

http://www.prouty.org/bay_pigs.html

http://www.serendipity.li/cia/bay-of-pigs.htm

Wrong, as usual. In order for it to be a lie, it deliberately has to be opposite to the truth. None of your links covers the actual battle from a military standpoint. What I previously said is right on target.

Your sources are wrong in assuming that there was no support from the population. As soon as Castro took power, and as revolutionaries took control, a campaign of terror began. They cracked down on the opposition to his power. The population did not support Castro, they do not support his revolution. So, the population was not a factor.

What was needed, for success, was for the United States military to do its part. Even your sources indicate that planning and preparation for this event took place before Kennedy took power. This plan, to invade Cuba with not just the Bay of Pigs invaders, but with the help of US firepower, was put in place by Kennedy's predecessor. When it was approved, both the US military and Cuban exiles trained together.

The US military was positioned, off the coast of Cuba, to do their part. That's all that was needed to tip the balance. On the ground, if you look at this from a tactical standpoint, approximately 1400 men fucked up a good percent of Castro's military. In fact, the kill ratio was for every Cuban exile killed, 20 Castro soldiers were killed:

http://townhall.com/columnists/humbe...0481/page/full

"When the smoke cleared and their ammo had been expended to the very last bullet, when a hundred of them lay dead and hundreds more wounded, after their very mortars and machine gun barrel had almost melted from their furious rates of fire, after three days of relentless battle, barely 1,400 of them -- without air support (from the U.S. Carriers just offshore) and without a single supporting shot by naval artillery (from U.S. cruisers and destroyers poised just offshore) -- had squared off against 41,000 Castro troops, his entire air force and squadrons of Soviet tanks. The Cuban freedom-fighters inflicted casualties of 20 to 1 against their Soviet-armed and led enemies." -- Humberto Fontova

All that in the hands of trained Cuban exiles, without yet bringing in US military firepower. Kennedy, at the last minute, called off United States portion of the engagement. Remember, the Cuban exiles killed a good percent of Castro's army. Bring in the US firepower and we would have successfully invaded Cuba.

At the moment in time when Kennedy backed out, Admiral Arleigh Burke actually got visibly angry:

This infantile and criminal idiocy had Admiral Arleigh Burke teetering on mutiny. Years before, Admiral Burke had sailed thousands of miles to smash his nation's enemies at the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Now he was Chief of Naval operations and was aghast as new enemies were given a sanctuary 90 miles away!

The fighting admiral was livid. They say his face was beet-red and his facial veins popping as he faced down his Commander in Chief that fateful night of April 18, 1961.

"Mr President, TWO planes from the Essex," His jaw trembled and lips quivered as he sputtered the plea. "That's all those boys need, Mr President. Let me....!"

JFK was in white tails and a bow- tie that evening, having just emerged from an elegant social gathering. "Burke," he replied. "We can't get involved in this."

"WE put those boys there, Mr PRESIDENT!!" The fighting Admiral exploded. "By God, we ARE involved!"

http://www.amigospais-guaracabuya.org/oaghf011.php

Unlike the clowns that you referenced, who are force-feeding you propaganda, Homberto Fontova, a Cuban-American, is an expert on that conflict.

The only liar, between the two of us, is you. My argument is based on the facts; hence, I'm not the one that's lying.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

If you meant that I was a cog in your side of the argument's propaganda machine, then you'd be onto something. You're also wrong if you think that what's going on now is a direct result of our "interventions" over there over the last 70 years. Why, even Osama Bin Laden blamed us for decades of meddling in the Middle East. It's like what I said earlier in this thread. You people are arguing the same argument that is being argued by those who have declared themselves as enemies of the United States.

Place the blame where it should be placed, on Odumba and his failure to exercise proper strategic judgmenet. He failed to support the US military with getting the SOFA needed for troops to remain behind to strengthen the Iraqi forces. Had they been able to do that, they would've repelled ISIS at the Syrian border. Had he capitalized on the Arab Spring, actually siding with our real allies and not those that sided with our adversaries, we'd have multiple countries in the Middle East in various stages of fledgling democracy. They would've been initially fragile, and would've continuously needed engagement.

Obama didn't do that, result? The Middle East "is on fire." His lack of leadership in the Middle East, and in the United States, and elsewhere, have emboldened our enemies and adversaries elsewhere in the world. The Chinese have gotten more aggressive with their neighbors in Asia... The list goes on.

Being a catalyst for change, then not continuing on with what needed to be done after the results of that change became known, is what's biting us in the ass, and you could thank Odumba for that.

You're ignoring what brought us to this point. You gloss over decades of bullshit and pause to pinpoint Obama and what he did wrong. We have been meddling in the middle east for decades. Do you deny this?

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

The fact that you think that's how they do it, is pitiful and indicative of just how brainwashed you are. You were indoctrinated. You were broken down and rebuilt to be part of their machine.

BWAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAA! Good... GHOOOOOOOOHD! Let the desperation FLOW through you!

You are so desperate, and angry, at the fact that you've lost control in this debate, that you are now "striking randomly" at anything that you can strike it. Any other person, with a level head, would see that my "FIXED" efforts was intended at getting under tinfoil hat skin. You are so pissed, that anything involving humor and sarcasm escapes you.

I used to be a conspiracy whack job, like you and CuteOldGuy. No, I do not believe in the "brainwave control" theory. However, things like "false flags" and other visible things that you guys argue about, I too used to argue about. But, you know what? Unlike you, as I grew up and reality mugged me, I grew out of it. I simply cannot defend that position when I gained one fact after another.

In your desperation, you demonstrated desperation. I don't recall a government effort, in the hands of the military industrial complex, to "break me down" and "build me up" to be part of any machine. I do recall being "broken down" and built back up in a basic military training environment. That has to be done to breakdown civilian mentality and to focus people into acting and thinking military when it comes to missions and MOS proficiency. However, nothing in that effort destroyed anybody's personality or opinion.

Again, I was not brainwashed or indoctrinated. This information that I'm using, on this thread, was gained via extensive research and through my experience. I came to these conclusions on my own, nobody told me how to think. However, you keep repeating specific keywords that members of the tinfoil hat Army keep repeating. That is indicative of brainwashing and indoctrination. You mindlessly repeat the same keywords when the facts destroy your argument in a way that even you see that you are wrong.

I hammered you so hard, that it became increasingly difficult for you to see anything other than the fact that you are wrong. This caused you to lose control. Your breakdowns, and these series of posts, demonstrates that. Even your lie about putting me on ignore is an attempt for you to regain control.

The only indoctrination, into a "machine" is the indoctrination that you allowed yourself to go through to become part of the conspiracy whack job community.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by andymarksman

Big fat lie by a habitual liar.

Stop lying again, wouldn't you? You are getting quite disgusting by the hour.

http://wantarevelations.com/wp-conte...-BIN-LADEN.pdf

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/...0/16/rifle.htm

You do realize that even Osama bin Laden stated that he did not meet with the CIA, do you? From factcheck.org:

http://www.factcheck.org/2013/02/ran...is-urban-myth/

1. In a 1993 interview, bin Laden himself said, "Personally neither I nor my brothers saw evidence of American help."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapc...ers/index.html

"The story about bin Laden and the CIA -- that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden -- is simply a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn't have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn't have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently.

"The real story here is the CIA didn't really have a clue about who this guy was until 1996 when they set up a unit to really start tracking him." -- Peter Bergen

https://www.cia.gov/news-information...rism-faqs.html

"Q: Has the CIA ever provided funding, training, or other support to Usama Bin Laden?

"A: No. Numerous comments in the media recently have reiterated a widely circulated but incorrect notion that the CIA once had a relationship with Usama Bin Laden. For the record, you should know that the CIA never employed, paid, or maintained any relationship whatsoever with Bin Laden."

Again, the US government's position was to support local Afghanis, not to support fighters coming from outside Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden was one such fighter. According to Peter Bergen, who wrote a book on his research related to the Afghan Soviet war, Osama bin Laden was stationed in Pakistan. His job was to outfit Arab fighters headed to Afghanistan to fight Soviets.

I was not joking when I said that my statements are based on fact. It's not a lie when you argue based on the facts.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

[STRAWMAN + REPEAT POINT + LIAR]

What kept the terrorists fighting was the anti-war sentiment in the US? Jesus Christ, I've heard it all now. I thought in your earlier bullshit, you stated that they would never quit fighting, that they were driven by ideology. And now, they're apparently driven by anti-war sentiment in the US. You're a fucking liar. And not a good one, at that.

Once again, you demonstrated a colossal lack of understanding of simple English that a fifth grader could understand.

No, I did not change my mind as to what caused them to keep fighting. I argued all of those as part of a joint, larger picture. Just what do you think it is that driving them to keep fighting indefinitely? If you paid attention to what you're reading, when reading my posts, you'd realize that these guys are driven by ideology. This ideology involves spreading Islam the world. A key strategy that they're using is persistence. They will not give up. They've been engaged in this since the end of the dark ages.

Ideology drives their continuing to have this manifest destiny. It drives them into fighting us. Now, as I've repeatedly stated on this thread, and when the sky see their mortality, they ran. We, the United States lead coalition, won the Iraq war with a straight cut victory. Now, why do I mention the fact that they would run when they see their mortality? All of a sudden, when they see their lives flashing in front of their eyes, their ideology is overruled by the will to survive.

This is why you hear all this talk about them "Dying for paradise" in the fight against the infidel, just to have them resort to mortar fires and IED attacks as the majority of their attacks. The terrorists knew that we'd destroy them on the battlefield. What gave them hope, was antiwar sentiment back in the United States. Even one of their key leaders over there referenced Vietnam.

Again, go back and read through every post that I made on this thread. Every single one of those justifications, that you mentioned in your reply, will fit in with my explanation. This is not, in any way shape or form, me changing positions. I've argued all of those throughout this thread. They are all TIED.

No, the only person that is lying here, that is bullshitting left and right, is you. You're deliberately ignoring most of what I said, in order to cherry pick and pull straws. You know, as well as I do, that the only way that you can keep replying to me is if you pull straws, building strawman, and attack the strawman.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

This message is hidden because herfacechair is on your ignore list.

BWAAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAA! Yet another one of Puss in the Boots in the Glory Hole Booth's lies,

Nope, like what I argued before, you do not have me on ignore, as evidenced by your coming back to show me more of your breakdowns. I'm laughing my ass off with reading your replies, as well as that of the others. You're too arrogant to let this go. Sure enough, you came back with your strawman arguments. That's what I predicted earlier. And, once again, through your actions, you proved me right about your actions and you wrong about your actions.

Whatever it is that you hope to accomplish by lying about having me on ignore, it's not going to work. Others have tried it before, by claiming multiple times that they were "done." Same objectives, same outcomes. I keep coming back to hammer the opposition.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

BrAAAAAAHHHHP “internal lick pop noise” UUUURGGHHH!

Sit DOWN puss in boots in the glory hole booth. You weren't asked to burp out all of that nasty cum that you swallowed on the job today, at the glory hole station, that shit is nasty.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by andymarksman

[STRAWMAN]

Care to explain why Reagan kept observing the SALT II unilaterally for five and half years, meanwhile repeatedly accusing Soviet violations of the said pact. If anyone ever got duped, it's Reagan, no way to get around it.

http://fas.org/nuke/control/salt2/index.html

You're comparing apples to oranges. When Ronald Reagan did that, he was being a statesman. He did not; however, trust the Soviets. As you indicated in your post, he kept accusing them of violations of SALT II.

This is a far cry from the libtard mantra that if only we unilaterally disarmed ourselves, the Soviets would follow our example. Do you see the difference? Ronald Reagan did not trust the Soviets with regard to SALT II, whereas the libtards trusted that the Soviets would disarm their nuclear arsenal if the United States were to unilaterally disarm. Apples and oranges.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by andymarksman

[STRAWMAN]

So you want to argue that no one inside the Pentagon and NSA is capable of doing his/her job?

Where, in my statement that you quoted, does it say that? Go back and read that quote again, this time with the intention of understanding what I am arguing. You're inferring something not communicated in the statement. How about addressing the fact that when you look at Google maps, adjacent patches show evidence of being photographed a different parts of the day and daily weather cycle?

Even NASA talks about "composite" maps of the earth, Mars, and and the moon.

In one of the MOS that I had, early in my military career, I operated a display that required satellite feed. I know what I'm talking about.

[herfacechair]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

[STRAWMAN]

You're ignoring what brought us to this point. You gloss over decades of bullshit and pause to pinpoint Obama and what he did wrong. We have been meddling in the middle east for decades. Do you deny this?

Wrong. Go back and read all of the posts that I've generated for this thread. The main topics of this argument center around the Iran Nuclear deal, and the wars that took place there this century. Your statements, of things as they happened over the past few decades, only focuses on bits and pieces, but not on the bigger picture. It's based on conspiracy whack job nonsense, and not on reality.

Now, if you want to see things that include what happened over the decades, I made that argument earlier in the thread. This argument sees the war on terror as a continuum that began in the beginning of the dark ages. However, this thread mainly focuses on events that happened in the 21st Century. The Middle East is the way it is because of failures that this current administration had.

Blaming the current situation in the Middle East to "meddling in the Middle East" over the past few decades is idiotic. We meddled in Central America in the 1980s. Clinton took the right path despite that initially being a Reagan, then Bush, initiative. Odumba failed to do the same thing with regards to the Middle East. Different results. Quit missing the point, and quit sticking to strawmen.

[herfacechair]

Perhaps I'll disappear from ECCIE for a few days, giving the opposition a false sense of relief. Then, come back after those days and destroy their arguments and dash their hopes.

Yes, I'm THAT sadistic when playing with the small minds of the liberals and conspiracy whack jobs that argue with. I have a blast doing this. Why else would I be arguing with libtards for 12 years? IT'S FUN!

Do know this. Even if I don't get back with you guys tonight, tomorrow, the next day, the next week, the next month, the next year, the next decade, etc., I will get back with you guys. A reply from me is almost as guaranteed as death and taxes. When all is said and done, I will still have the same argument I had before jumping into this thread.

So please do continue breaking down. I laugh my ass off when I see you guys reply and show desperation. Arguing with you guys is like in the puppy to chase its own tail.

[WTF]

you'd realize that these guys are driven by ideology.


their ideology is overruled by the will to survive.

[/QUOTE]

herfacechair is a tool. In one breath it is their ideology in the next it is their mortality.

the fact of the matter that is wtf all people are driven by. Jesus don't fall for arguing with this longwinded war monger.

His ideology is to get others to pay for his wars!

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

Perhaps I'll disappear from ECCIE for a few days, giving the opposition a false sense of relief. Then, come back after those days and destroy their arguments and dash their hopes.

Yes, I'm THAT sadistic when playing with the small minds of the liberals and conspiracy whack jobs that argue with. I have a blast doing this. Why else would I be arguing with libtards for 12 years? IT'S FUN!

Do know this. Even if I don't get back with you guys tonight, tomorrow, the next day, the next week, the next month, the next year, the next decade, etc., I will get back with you guys. A reply from me is almost as guaranteed as death and taxes. When all is said and done, I will still have the same argument I had before jumping into this thread.

So please do continue breaking down. I laugh my ass off when I see you guys reply and show desperation. Arguing with you guys is like in the puppy to chase its own tail.

Come back when your syntax is improved. Please.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

BWAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAA! Good... GHOOOOOOOOHD! Let the desperation FLOW through you!

You are so desperate, and angry, at the fact that you've lost control in this debate, that you are now "striking randomly" at anything that you can strike it. Any other person, with a level head, would see that my "FIXED" efforts was intended at getting under tinfoil hat skin. You are so pissed, that anything involving humor and sarcasm escapes you.

I used to be a conspiracy whack job, like you and CuteOldGuy. No, I do not believe in the "brainwave control" theory. However, things like "false flags" and other visible things that you guys argue about, I too used to argue about. But, you know what? Unlike you, as I grew up and reality mugged me, I grew out of it. I simply cannot defend that position when I gained one fact after another.

In your desperation, you demonstrated desperation. I don't recall a government effort, in the hands of the military industrial complex, to "break me down" and "build me up" to be part of any machine. I do recall being "broken down" and built back up in a basic military training environment. That has to be done to breakdown civilian mentality and to focus people into acting and thinking military when it comes to missions and MOS proficiency. However, nothing in that effort destroyed anybody's personality or opinion.

Again, I was not brainwashed or indoctrinated. This information that I'm using, on this thread, was gained via extensive research and through my experience. I came to these conclusions on my own, nobody told me how to think. However, you keep repeating specific keywords that members of the tinfoil hat Army keep repeating. That is indicative of brainwashing and indoctrination. You mindlessly repeat the same keywords when the facts destroy your argument in a way that even you see that you are wrong.

I hammered you so hard, that it became increasingly difficult for you to see anything other than the fact that you are wrong. This caused you to lose control. Your breakdowns, and these series of posts, demonstrates that. Even your lie about putting me on ignore is an attempt for you to regain control.

The only indoctrination, into a "machine" is the indoctrination that you allowed yourself to go through to become part of the conspiracy whack job community.

I don't believe in false flags, shows how much you know, shitbird.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by herfacechair

Wrong. Go back and read all of the posts that I've generated for this thread. The main topics of this argument center around the Iran Nuclear deal, and the wars that took place there this century. Your statements, of things as they happened over the past few decades, only focuses on bits and pieces, but not on the bigger picture. It's based on conspiracy whack job nonsense, and not on reality.

Now, if you want to see things that include what happened over the decades, I made that argument earlier in the thread. This argument sees the war on terror as a continuum that began in the beginning of the dark ages. However, this thread mainly focuses on events that happened in the 21st Century. The Middle East is the way it is because of failures that this current administration had.

Blaming the current situation in the Middle East to "meddling in the Middle East" over the past few decades is idiotic. We meddled in Central America in the 1980s. Clinton took the right path despite that initially being a Reagan, then Bush, initiative. Odumba failed to do the same thing with regards to the Middle East. Different results. Quit missing the point, and quit sticking to strawmen.

So we didn't remove the democratically elected leader of Iran in order to place a dictator who was more favorable to us? Are you fucking nuts?

The middle east and central america aren't the same thing. Now YOU'RE comparing apples and oranges, shitstain. The middle east is the way it is because of decades of meddling along with other factors.