Tucker Carlson: "The US should preemptively strike, Iran should be annihilated".

[Guzabuza]

Then i completely misunderstood your statement about warmongering. The way you wrote it seemed like you wanted the US to attack but agreeing with Tucker that wants to burn , rape, kill every Iranian child, women and man and now stating you think they are a little bit insane is miles apart, but oh well, ill take it. At least you don't want to pillage and rape as Tucker.

 

[whippoorwill]

Tucker Carlson is young enough to GO.

Hound him, SHAME HIM, play hardball.

Publicly calling people out on BULLSHIT, mercilessly hanging them out to dry with their own vomit caking on the front of their shirt, need not/ought not segue to a Candidate Plug.

Yes! That is the shit! Shove it down his e-mail hole.

 

[randomname]

Tucker got assimilated by the neocon borg... Now that he runs the Daily Caller he's toeing the party line

 

[GeorgiaAvenger]

Tucker got assimilated by the neocon borg... Now that he runs the Daily Caller he's toeing the party line

http://dailycaller.com/

You people are much too critical. Scan the page.

 

[Tudo]

mrearlygold left a very right on reply on that youtube video

 

[Mr. Rapp]

Do people have any idea of the consequences of what they say and do anymore? Attacking Iran is going to start ww3 with Russia and China.

 

[jmdrake]

Two wrongs make a right? Interesting.

Except in this case there wasn't a wrong. Just your misinterpretation of an alleged agreement that you've never produced. There's no real evidence of an agreement about 9/11 truth at the rally for the republic, and even if there was Jesse never made any claims about 9/11 being an inside job. Rather he pointed out the obvious fact that the government should prove its case before going to war and taking away our liberties. That shouldn't have offended T.C. but apparently it did. My point is that T.C. isn't someone of the caliber that I really care about being offended. He hurt Dr. Paul during the campaign by associated him with hookers and now he's shown his true colors as a chickenhawk. And frankly since you were cheering Chris Kyle allegedly assaulting Ventura you have no room to talk about "two wrongs making a right".

 

[jmdrake]

Ayatollahs are even worse than Ahmadinejad. He`s more rationale than the ayatollahs as many university teachers are compared to religious brainwashed zealots.

That's your opinion. But the facts do not back up your opinion. This "crazy" Ayatollah engaged Iran in fighting the Taliban when the U.S. was still sending them financial aid. This "crazy" Ayatollah joined the U.S. led coalition to oust the Taliban from power in Afghanistan. This "crazy" Ayatollah approved various efforts by Iran to reach peaceful accommodation with the Bush administration. You are the one who's been brainwashed. The Iranians are acting rationally. They are trying to insure their own survival. Even Rick Santorum realizes this.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Do people have any idea of the consequences of what they say and do anymore? Attacking Iran is going to start ww3 with Russia and China.

Nah, it would start another Vietnam or Korea. Iran would get supplied with advanced arms, and it would be no cakewalk. We would lose aircraft and ships (probably including an Aircraft Carrier or two. The Chinese might even give them some of the backdoor shut-down codes that they probably have built into all weapons with electronics (including aircraft). Hmmm, I wonder if the Iranians brought down that stealth drone on their own...

 

[puppetmaster]

I just wonder if a war with Iran would create enough world wide conflict that our elections would be postponed.......

 

[jmdrake]

John Hagee is not in charge of US nukes and military.

And Amadenijad isn't in charge of Iran's military. Those who are in charge attempted to make peace on multiple occasions with the U.S. In that regard they showed themselves to be rational actors. When they were rebuffed they decided they needed more reliable partners and they reached out to China and Russia. Again that was a rational decision. (And why war with Iran is really off the table. Are you and Tucker Carlson ready to go to war with China and Russia?) Looking at the fact that Saddam was overthrown after having given up his WMD program, and Ghaddafi was overthrown by Al Qaeda linked insurgents supported by the U.S. after giving up his nuclear program and that nobody has messed with North Korea now that they've exploded a nuke, Iran has come to the rational decision that too much cooperation with the U.S. leads to the U.S. overthrowing you. It's simple geopolitical calculus. With Russia and China's backing there will never be a U.N. security council resolution with regards to Iran's nuke program. But forget the U.N. War with Iran would be a disaster. Our military, capable as it is, would not likely be to stop closure of the strait of Hormuz. Are you ready to pay $10.00 gas just on a hunch? And for what? To stop Iran from getting a nuke that our own intelligence says they are nowhere near getting and that Rick Santorum says they only want for their own protection? I've noticed that neither you nor anyone on your side of the argument has addressed the Santorum admission.

 

[LibertyEagle]

Except in this case there wasn't a wrong. Just your misinterpretation of an alleged agreement that you've never produced. There's no real evidence of an agreement about 9/11 truth at the rally for the republic, and even if there was Jesse never made any claims about 9/11 being an inside job. Rather he pointed out the obvious fact that the government should prove its case before going to war and taking away our liberties. That shouldn't have offended T.C. but apparently it did. My point is that T.C. isn't someone of the caliber that I really care about being offended. He hurt Dr. Paul during the campaign by associated him with hookers and now he's shown his true colors as a chickenhawk.

You are the one who brought this issue up in this thread, Drake. And yes, Ventura broke an agreement he had with C4L and talked about 9-11 during his presentation at the Rally for the Republic.

I don't like Carlson, either. There was no need for you to throw in the little dig that you did and that was what caused me to respond.

Jesse Ventura >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tucker Carlson. I'm bookmarking this thread for the next time some jackass complains about Ventura making Tucker Carlson "uncomfortable" for talking about 9/11 at the rally for the republic.

Both of them were wrong, Drake. The fact that Carlson is a jerk, doesn't magically make Ventura right for breaking his word.

And frankly since you were cheering Chris Kyle allegedly assaulting Ventura you have no room to talk about "two wrongs making a right".

I think this is called a deflection. Not to mention the fact that you are totally misrepresenting the entirety of the discussion.

 

[Jingles]

You can't be a libertarian and advocate for initiating force against a person/country who has not done so to you. I've never liked this guy, so I'm glad to see him show his true colors.

 

[jmdrake]

You are the one who brought this issue up in this thread, Drake. And yes, Ventura broke an agreement he had with C4L and talked about 9-11 during his presentation at the Rally for the Republic.

A) You've yet to produce said agreement.
B) I don't trust your interpretation of said agreement without having a chance to look at it.
C) I sincerely doubt it said "Don't mention anything about 9/11 at all". Ventura didn't talk about 9/11 truth.

I don't like Carlson, either. There was no need for you to throw in the little dig that you did and that was what caused me to respond.

I could care less whether you respond or not. The facts are the facts.

Both of them were wrong, Drake. The fact that Carlson is a jerk, doesn't magically make Ventura right for breaking his word.

The fact is that you've never produced any objective evidence that Ventura broke his word.

I think this is called a deflection.

Deflection my eye. You can't throw around pithy sayings like "two wrongs don't make a right" and then cheer on a wrong like an assault. I think it's called hypocrisy.

Not to mention the fact that you are totally misrepresenting the entirety of the discussion.

What discussion have I misrepresented? Here are the facts:

Fact 1: You've never produced said C4L agreement and you just expect others to take your word on its interpretation.
Fact 2: You cheered the disgraceful Chris Kyle in his alleged assault of Ventura which was probably made up anyway.

So. Please tell me what I've misrepresented. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[JuicyG]

You can't be a libertarian and advocate for initiating force against a person/country who has not done so to you. I've never liked this guy, so I'm glad to see him show his true colors.

So Iran attacking Israel via Hezbollah is not initiation of force?

 

[jmdrake]

So Iran attacking Israel via Hezbollah is not initiation of force?

It's not an initiation of force against the U.S. It's not like Iran every attacked a U.S. intelligence vessel like some country who cannot be criticized did.

http://www.ussliberty.com

 

[Brett85]

I wonder what it would actually take for the American people to start opposing all of these endless, pre-emptive wars overseas? A draft would certainly do it, but that's not something I could support either.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Carlson was never a libertarian IMO.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Tucker got assimilated by the neocon borg... Now that he runs the Daily Caller he's toeing the party line

He's been in Washington DC his entire life... acclimated to the political paychecks and Beltway Bubble lifestyle.

http://dailycaller.com/

You people are much too critical. Scan the page.

The Daily Caller may give some truth in their political print, but that doesn't make Tucker Carlson accurate or correct. Did you know, Billionaire Foster Friess(pronounced FREEZE) financially backs THE DAILY CALLER? Yes, Rick Santorum's Sugar Daddy is one of the bank rollers of The DC, but Tucker denies any influence to The Daily Caller by Frothy's Freeze, though TC speaks personable about FF.

TC gets paid to spew his Hot Air on whatever corporate media station offers him money. He has many paying positions and a main one as a PAID PUNDIT. A career Washington DC bubble boy, who's paid mostly to spew on the Cyclops Zombizing Machines equate to: PUNDITS </= PROSTITUTES

I think Carlson has some sort nervous/attention disorder... here's his appearance on C-SPAN's Washington Journal yesterday morning.

You can view/hear everything TC has to say there: http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/JTu/start/389/stop/687

Tucker Carlson on the 2012 Presidential CSPAN | Washington Journal

Tucker Carlson reviewed the 2012 presidential election, and he responded to telephone calls and electronic communications. He also talked about the possibility of a brokered Republican convention in 2012, Senator Rand Paul as a vice president candidate, the relationship between the Obama administration and progressive watchdog group Media Matters, and Iran.

41 minutes | 553 Views

 

[Marenco]

I believe Dwight Eisenhower said it best here:

All of us have heard this term "preventive war" since the earliest days of Hitler. I recall that is about the first time I heard it. In this day and time, if we believe for one second that nuclear fission and fusion, that type of weapon, would be used in such a war — what is a preventive war?
I would say a preventive war, if the words mean anything, is to wage some sort of quick police action in order that you might avoid a terrific cataclysm of destruction later.
A preventive war, to my mind, is an impossibility today. How could you have one if one of its features would be several cities lying in ruins, several cities where many, many thousands of people would be dead and injured and mangled, the transportation systems destroyed, sanitation implements and systems all gone? That isn't preventive war; that is war.
I don't believe there is such a thing; and, frankly, I wouldn't even listen to anyone seriously that came in and talked about such a thing.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower#Post-Presidency