20 days ago
Which side makes a better case?
1 Comment
  • Filter by:
  • Pro
  • Draw
  • Con
  • 19 days ago

    This is a stereotypical American "boxed" way of thinking. What I mean by that is that Americans seems mentally incapable of thinking "outside" of what they've been indoctrinated to believe. Literally 100% of your arguments would equally apply to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CIA Director, etc. And yet, due to irrationality, you would reject them if applied to your own tribe.

    There is a better case for assassinating the CIA Director than Soleimani. They are probably responsible for more needless death and suffering than the Iranian. And at least the Iranians have the geography argument on their side (this is actually close to Iran, not thousands of miles away across a vast ocean).

    All in all poor case Michael. There is basically zero benefit or upside and lots of risk. There is *already* no point whatsoever for US troops to be in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Syria, and now you've just invited them to be openly attacked in retaliation. You can pretend like that doesnt matter or "they were doing it anyway" but okay, say that when the attacks increase. Keep saying that when you lose control over Iraq completely. Keep saying that when the Kabul government collapses.

    If only we could buy one way plane tickets for all of these pro-war armchair generals.

    All of your arguments against Bernie Sanders and socialism are totally bunk. You're okay with pointlessly wasting trillions of dollars with no benefit to Americans whatsoever so you've already ceded any moral authority on government waste for social programs lol.