Why is the MSM and Democrats Allied with Iran?

snowdragon

If you could link some of the articles you are using to refrence this position that would help. I went to their news site and don't particularly feel like reading scads of articles on this particular position.

I will say though that aside from this particular topic these "news" organizations both left and right are essentially looking to feed the information specific demographic groups want that will give them the maximum amount of sponsors. Look no further then russia gate, 99% drivel garbage and tagged and believed by 10's of millions of individuals that wanted to believe it so they continued to propgate said story for ads and eyes.

SquallX

Originally posted by dadudemon
Honestly, it is genuinely due to Trump Derangement Syndrome. They are so opposed to Trump, because Trump hurt their feelings with his mean words, that they will take a position with the devil it means aligning against Trump.

As was stated years ago, if Trump found the cure for cancer, people would run headlines stating Trump put thousands of doctors out of job in corrupt bid to take over healthcare.

But thats just stupid though.

Patient_Leech

Jesus Christ, we don't want unnecessary war and conflict. It has nothing to do with being allied with Iran. That shouldn't be a partisan issue.

Face-fu#king-palm.

Putinbot1

jaden_2.0

Maybe they got Soleimani confused with an 80s action movie terrorist bad guy. That's what he looks in the picture of him they use the most on the news.

https://images.wsj.net/im-72280?width=1280&size=1.33333333

Surtur

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Jesus Christ, we don't want unnecessary war and conflict. It has nothing to do with being allied with Iran. That shouldn't be a partisan issue.

Face-fu#king-palm.

I don't think you or others like you want war. Most people don't. The problem comes from how some are reacting to this. Some have pushed a "Trump is gonna cause WW3!" narrative. They accused him of hypocrisy for saying Obama would try to start a war with Iran, while ignoring that Trump didn't try to start a war...the other side did.

And when the Pentagon came out and said the guy was planning even more attacks? Suddenly it was time to question intelligence agencies again. It's all very convenient. I get questioning the intelligence agencies, but there is something underneath it IMO with some where they are questioning this specific thing because if it's true what Trump did was especially valid and they just don't want him to have anything resembling a victory.

That is a sickness, that is TDS. It is possible for people to worry about what Iran will do while acknowledging there was valid reason for attack given the actions taken by this general and those under him. Unfortunately I do think Iran will retaliate in some way, but I don't think we will see thousands of deaths. Even one will be bad, but it won't be on Trump. Yet we all know he will be blamed because people will ignore what Iran did. Hence TDS again.

Patient_Leech

Stupid thread.

Should be closed.

Surtur

Assuming you're correct and the thread is stupid it wouldn't be an anomaly around here. I've lost count of how many incel threads we've had.

eThneoLgrRnae

In a nutshell: they hate America.

eThneoLgrRnae

Originally posted by SquallX
But thats just stupid though.

Yup, but that's the modern day left.

Robtard

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Jesus Christ, we don't want unnecessary war and conflict. It has nothing to do with being allied with Iran. That shouldn't be a partisan issue.

Face-fu#king-palm.

Bingo

This is the spin that has to be pushed, to try and silence and discredit anti-war and anti-conflict people. Like in early years of the Iraq war, if you had a problem with it and said "we shouldn't be invading Iraq", you either "don't support the troops" or you had alliances to Iraq and/or terrorist groups.

It's why you hear these yahoos scream "TDS!" nigh every time someone brings up an issue with Trump or his admin, new phrases but same old tactics.

dadudemon

Originally posted by Robtard
Bingo

This is the spin that has to be pushed, to try and silence and discredit anti-war and anti-conflict people. Like in early years of the Iraq war, if you had a problem with it and said "we shouldn't be invading Iraq", you either "don't support the troops" or you had alliances to Iraq and/or terrorist groups.

It's why you hear these yahoos scream "TDS!" nigh every time someone brings up an issue with Trump or his admin, new phrases but same old tactics.

Bingo

Wait, what? No. No bingo.

What war? There is no war. The media is pushing a war narrative because TDS.

What are you talking about?

It wasn't cool when the Conservatards did it about Obama. It's certainly not okay with the MSM libtards do it to Trump.

CaveDude33211

Robtard

dadudemon

Originally posted by Robtard
Non sequitur to what I said/my point in regards to PL's point.

Your reply is non-sequitur to my reply to your reply to Patent Leech.

Not kidding.

But actually getting you to respond with seriousness about anything related to Democrats, Republicans, or Trump is nigh impossible. Surtur has broken you.

Robtard

Originally posted by dadudemon
Your reply is non-sequitur to my reply to your reply to Patent Leech.

Not kidding.

But actually getting you to respond with seriousness about anything related to Democrats, Republicans, or Trump is nigh impossible. Surtur has broken you.

This is low energy trolling.

jaden_2.0

Originally posted by dadudemon
Bingo

Wait, what? No. No bingo.

What war? There is no war. The media is pushing a war narrative because TDS.

What are you talking about?

It wasn't cool when the Conservatards did it about Obama. It's certainly not okay with the MSM libtards do it to Trump.

Nobody wants war but my side doesn't want war more than your side doesn't want war. Your side doesn't doesn't want war enough and because you don't don't want war enough you want war so if there's a war it won't be cause my side didn't not want war enough. It'll be cos your side barely didn't even not want war.

CaveDude33211

Democrats very likely had a lot of money tied into Hillary winning the election.

Lots of Leftist donor groups, private donors and supporters spending their own cash just to support Hillary - all for the idea of a first woman president (even though Hillary is a corrupt sociopath who is in Russia's pocket)

When Hillary lost - a lot of Democrat donors lost money, too - they lost big time.

It's a combination of sociopolitical-butthurt and Leftists wasting hundreds of millions of dollars and not getting a penny of their money back.

That's why there is a sociopathic-hatred towards Donald Trump that transcends logic and patriotism for their own country.

- Hell, Obama used to drone-kill enemy targets overseas all the time - notably.

But Trump takes out a leader of a state sponsor of terror and suddenly what started as a routine-operation is turned into Trump "going too far".

It doesn't matter - these delusional retards are going to lose again in 2020 anyway.

Those of us with brains get to sit back and enjoy the meltdown. cool

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Nobody wants war but my side doesn't want war more than your side doesn't want war.

My side? The Christian side who thinks killing even a single innocent is a grave sin and all of our foreign wars and foreign soil military occupations should end immediately?

Highly unlikely you're taking my non-interventionist libertarian, anti-Democrat, anti-Republican side.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Your side doesn't doesn't want war enough and because you don't don't want war enough you want war so if there's a war it won't be cause my side didn't not want war enough. It'll be cos your side barely didn't even not want war.

If you're talking about Trumpers, no, Trumpers are supposed to be Anti-War considering that was one of Trump's talking points and tweeting points (about how he was so much better than the existing Republicans and the warmongering Obama).

dadudemon

Originally posted by Robtard
This is low energy trolling.

Not even close to trolling. When you can't even engage in a single comment exchange without responding with your circular trolling, specifically due to the topic being discussed, it's obvious Surtur broke you. You broke Surtur, as well.

eThneoLgrRnae

Originally posted by CaveDude33211
Democrats very likely had a lot of money tied into Hillary winning the election.

Lots of Leftist donor groups, private donors and supporters spending their own cash just to support Hillary - all for the idea of a first woman president (even though Hillary is a corrupt sociopath who is in Russia's pocket)

When Hillary lost - a lot of Democrat donors lost money, too - they lost big time.

It's a combination of sociopolitical-butthurt and Leftists wasting hundreds of millions of dollars and not getting a penny of their money back.

That's why there is a sociopathic-hatred towards Donald Trump that transcends logic and patriotism for their own country.

- Hell, Obama used to drone-kill enemy targets overseas all the time - notably.

But Trump takes out a leader of a state sponsor of terror and suddenly what started as a routine-operation is turned into Trump "going too far".

It doesn't matter - these delusional retards are going to lose again in 2020 anyway.

Those of us with brains get to sit back and enjoy the meltdown. cool

Generally speaking, leftists were never really patriotic (at least not in decades). In fact, most of them hate America because they've been brainwashed by their teachers and professors to believe America is inherently bad and was "started by a bunch of racist old white guys."

It is true that their hatred of America has actually gotten worse under Trump though. Most of them now have fully embraced the idea of full blown socialism over free market capitalism and support censoring people's free speech as long as it is the speech of their political opponents and seem to want wide open borders as well.

dadudemon

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Generally speaking, leftists were never really patriotic. In fact, most of them hate America because they've been brainwashed by their teachers and professors to believe America is inherently bad and was "started by a bunch of racist old white guys."

It is true that their hatred of America has actually gotten worse under Trump though. Most of them now have fully embraced the idea of full blown socialism over free market capitalism and support censoring people's free speech as long as it is the speech of their political opponents.

4chan needs to, super super badly, do another prank like the "OK" hand sign.

They need to say that things like "I am woke about race" or "I am against racism and for equality" are phrases of racists and it is code spoke for the white supremacists.

Watch as the leftist woke culture implodes as literally all of them are now accusing each other of being racists.

They did it with the OK hand sign so there's no reason to believe they would react appropriately and measured if the 4channers created a hoax with this kind of thing, too.

Robtard

Originally posted by dadudemon
Not even close to trolling.

My comment had nothing to do with " a war with Iran", so yes, you did a non sequitur and then followed it up with trolling.

Now if you want to discuss what I said/point. Cool.

If you don't and want to go with your point about people saying WW3 is coming. That's cool too. LMK which.

dadudemon

Originally posted by Robtard
My comment had nothing to do with " a war with Iran",

...

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Jesus Christ, we don't want unnecessary war and conflict . It has nothing to do with being allied with Iran. That shouldn't be a partisan issue.

Face-fu#king-palm.

Originally posted by Robtard
Bingo

This is the spin that has to be pushed, to try and silence and discredit anti-war and anti-conflict people.

???

Robtard

My comment taken in full is about the same tactics used to silence people who don't want conflicts; that stands. Title of the thread is: "Why is the MSM and Democrats Allied with Iran?"

Originally posted by Robtard
Bingo

This is the spin that has to be pushed, to try and silence and discredit anti-war and anti-conflict people. Like in early years of the Iraq war, if you had a problem with it and said "we shouldn't be invading Iraq", you either "don't support the troops" or you had alliances to Iraq and/or terrorist groups.

It's why you hear these yahoos scream "TDS!" nigh every time someone brings up an issue with Trump or his admin, new phrases but same old tactics.

jaden_2.0

Originally posted by dadudemon
My side? The Christian side who thinks killing even a single innocent is a grave sin and all of our foreign wars and foreign soil military occupations should end immediately?

Highly unlikely you're taking my non-interventionist libertarian, anti-Democrat, anti-Republican side.

If you're talking about Trumpers, no, Trumpers are supposed to be Anti-War considering that was one of Trump's talking points and tweeting points (about how he was so much better than the existing Republicans and the warmongering Obama).

You're not wanting war not enough toactually not want war therefore you actually want war you filthy warmonger.

Robtard

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Maybe they got Soleimani confused with an 80s action movie terrorist bad guy. That's what he looks in the picture of him they use the most on the news.

https://images.wsj.net/im-72280?width=1280&size=1.33333333

He actually does look like a final boss Steven Seagal would have aikido flipped and then neck-snapped wile delivering a snappy line and a mean stare.

Surtur

BrolyBlack

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Stupid thread.

Should be closed.

No you

Robtard

Originally posted by Surtur
Bingo. These people, at this point, are just f*cking dumb. I've yet to hear anyone say we're in an active war with Iran right now. Do you have links?

The concerns/fears I've seen are of the potential in getting us into another war.

The "WWIII" comments are stupid, but seem to be mostly not serious commentary.

BrolyBlack

Indeed they are. We really need to leave the Middle East and let Europe deal with it.

Silent Master

Democrats used to love war, what happened?

carthage

The US routinely commits more acts of terrorism than Iran ever has in the Middle East.

Silent Master

Puff, puff, give.

dadudemon

Originally posted by Robtard
My comment taken in full is about the same tactics used to silence people who don't want conflicts; that stands. Title of the thread is: "Why is the MSM and Democrats Allied with Iran?"

So I'm not allowed to respond to your posts and their actual content and I am only allowed to respond to your posts AFTER I point out something stupid you said, you have time to think about it, then you specify some rules about what I can and cannot respond about concerning your posts?

So next time, just to be clear, when I see a stupid point you made and you don't like it, I have to wait for you to outline the rules about what I can reply with and then apologize afterwards and only operate within the new goal-post box of rules you've moved and made for me, right?

This is by far my favorite waste of time, today.

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
You're not wanting war not enough toactually not want war therefore you actually want war you filthy warmonger.

How dare I.

Guess I'll stop with the PAC I am part of and the anti-corruption chapter I started in Tulsa. I don't want it enough. sad

dadudemon

Originally posted by Silent Master
Democrats used to love war, what happened?

Democrats only love war when a Democrat is in the White House and the Democrats control Capitol Hill.

Edit - TRIPLE POST, because this is not like Discord or Slack.

jaden_2.0

Originally posted by Silent Master
Puff, puff, give.

Is someone ****ing up the rotation?

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Is someone ****ing up the rotation?

It was me.

Being the uncultured Mormon I am, I don't know how to smoke. So I put it in my butt*. Silent Master had to roll another one.

*My butt = your butt, but I am covering for your butt.

Surtur

Originally posted by Robtard
I've yet to hear anyone say we're in an active war with Iran right now. Do you have links?

The concerns/fears I've seen are of the potential in getting us into another war.

The "WWIII" comments are stupid, but seem to be mostly not serious commentary.

Nobody here has, Slate declared us at war with Iran already, if you need an example(and no I won't be digging up more). But it's mostly people being hysterical dumb f*cks and acting like we're going to be going to war with Iran. It's highly unlikely. You can worry about retaliation without thinking we're gonna go to war.

I've seen articles about "how to talk to your kid about the draft". Insanity.

Robtard

Originally posted by dadudemon
So I'm not allowed to respond to your posts and their actual content

No, you are and it's what I prefer, so do that. You didn't do that though, you did a non sequitur and then trolled me when I pointed that out.

Surtur

Originally posted by dadudemon
Democrats only love war when a Democrat is in the White House and the Democrats control Capitol Hill.

Edit - TRIPLE POST, because this is not like Discord or Slack.

Can u just imagine the adulation we'd be seeing heaped on Obama if our embassy had been attacked and he responded by taking out the murderous general responsible? And yes yes I'm sure republicans would complain, but democrats wouldn't. They wouldn't be out there lying and going "he didn't have the authority!".

Robtard

Originally posted by Surtur
Nobody here has, Slate declared us at war with Iran already, if you need an example(and no I won't be digging up more). But it's mostly people being hysterical dumb f*cks and acting like we're going to be going to war with Iran. It's highly unlikely. You can worry about retaliation without thinking we're gonna go to war.

I've seen articles about "how to talk to your kid about the draft". Insanity.

I don't really read Slate, but I googled "Slate Iran War" and I didn't see them saying we're at war right now with Iran. This recent article seems to be arguing about the fear of getting into another war: Are We Dumber Now Than We Were in 2003?

What are the context of those? Cos again, googling lead to me first article and it's benign: "Phrases like "World War 3" have been trending across social media after U.S. airstrikes in the Middle East killed a powerful Iranian general last week.

Whether the posts are meant to be funny, dismissive or serious, they're out there for children to see. So, just how do parents talk to their kids about the conflict with Iran and the fears, and jokes, around the possibilities of war?" -snip

Surtur

Originally posted by Robtard
I don't read Slate, but I googled "Slate Iran War" and I didn't see them saying we're at war right now with Iran. This recent article seems to be arguing about the fear or getting into another war: Are We Dumber Now Than We Were in 2003?

What are the context of those? Cos again, googling lead to me first article and it's benign: "Phrases like "World War 3" have been trending across social media after U.S. airstrikes in the Middle East killed a powerful Iranian general last week.

Whether the posts are meant to be funny, dismissive or serious, they're out there for children to see. So, just how do parents talk to their kids about the conflict with Iran and the fears, and jokes, around the possibilities of war?" -snip

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/01/soleimani-trump-muhandis-iran-iraq.html

First sentence. Any other questions? And No: do not come try to defend Slate. Don't die on that hill lol.

Robtard

Originally posted by Surtur
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/01/soleimani-trump-muhandis-iran-iraq.html

First sentence. Any other questions?

And No: do not come try to defend Slate. Don't die on that hill lol. Thanks, that's an opinion piece and I don't really agree with it. The concern parts are real, but the statement/title as fact is silly.

Calm down Surt, we're having a normal convo, no need to ePuff your chest out cos someone is watching.

Surtur

*yawn* We doing the "u mad" thing again? Okie dokie.

Robtard

My post wasn't a "you mad".

eThneoLgrRnae

Originally posted by Surtur
Can u just imagine the adulation we'd be seeing heaped on Obama if our embassy had been attacked and he responded by taking out the murderous general responsible? And yes yes I'm sure republicans would complain, but democrats wouldn't. They wouldn't be out there lying and going "he didn't have the authority!".

"Bingo."

Surtur

Originally posted by Robtard
My post wasn't a "you mad".

U did the whole "calm down" stuff. Seems like it, don't gas light me.

Robtard

Originally posted by Surtur
U did the whole "calm down" stuff. Seems like it, don't gas light me.

If you only take the "Calm down" part, sure. Take it as a whole; the way it was intended.

Surtur

Originally posted by Robtard
If you only take the "Calm down" part, sure. Take it as a whole; the way it was intended.

So u either did the "u mad" or "u upset" thing.

Robtard

Neither, but whatever. Moving on.

Surtur

So a person who needs to calm down isn't mad or upset? Okay.

dadudemon

Originally posted by Robtard
No, you are and it's what I prefer, so do that. You didn't do that though, you did a non sequitur and then trolled me when I pointed that out.

So you don't like the stupid thing you said when I pointed it out so you moved the goalposts?

Bingo.

But we'll go ahead and play your game for a bit. Because it's very obvious what you said but you are bored and need the game.

What spin and silence about what war with Iran are you talking about? There is no war with Iran.

How can these people that you're referring to have a problem with a war that is not occurring?

FYI, before you try it: military conflict redirects to "War" on Merriam Webster's dictionary definition:

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Military+conflict

https://i.imgur.com/CxCspF3.png

So don't try to lawyer and word game out of the stupid thing you said. smile

And, don't worry!!! The Geneva Convention also defined conflict for us, too! big grin

https://legalanswers.sl.nsw.gov.au/hot-topics-80-international-humanitarian-law/types-armed-conflict

Isn't this great?

So who is trying to silence the war that we are having that doesn't exist?

Or is that war not happening and it is what I said? To refresh your memory, this is what I said:

"What war? There is no war. The media is pushing a war narrative because TDS."

You can't silence opposition to a war that doesn't exist. You can support the killing of those 10 people or you can be against it. But what the MSM is doing, doing the war fearmongering, is typical TDS.

Please, enlighten me, why the MSM is aligning with the Authoritarian Regime of Iran, against Trump, for any reason other than classic TDS?

Surtur

https://media.giphy.com/media/UlqLDtI8Qc0j6/giphy.gif

Eternal Idol

Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Jesus Christ, we don't want unnecessary war and conflict. It has nothing to do with being allied with Iran. That shouldn't be a partisan issue.

Face-fu#king-palm.

Surtur

Originally posted by Surtur
I don't think you or others like you want war. Most people don't. The problem comes from how some are reacting to this. Some have pushed a "Trump is gonna cause WW3!" narrative. They accused him of hypocrisy for saying Obama would try to start a war with Iran, while ignoring that Trump didn't try to start a war...the other side did.

And when the Pentagon came out and said the guy was planning even more attacks? Suddenly it was time to question intelligence agencies again. It's all very convenient. I get questioning the intelligence agencies, but there is something underneath it IMO with some where they are questioning this specific thing because if it's true what Trump did was especially valid and they just don't want him to have anything resembling a victory.

That is a sickness, that is TDS. It is possible for people to worry about what Iran will do while acknowledging there was valid reason for attack given the actions taken by this general and those under him. Unfortunately I do think Iran will retaliate in some way, but I don't think we will see thousands of deaths. Even one will be bad, but it won't be on Trump. Yet we all know he will be blamed because people will ignore what Iran did. Hence TDS again.