Everyone is for the non-aggression principle until it’s Israel striking first, and then they do mental gymnastics to rationalize it.
Once we help them do regime change in Iran, they will have total control of the Middle East and won’t need us anymore.
If you think that’s a good thing, think again. They already spy on us, kill our Presidents, and orchestrate false flag attacks like 9/11. What do you think will happen when they no longer rely on us for military support?
Brother, I said nothing of 'NAP'
You have to do some serious mental gymnastics to think I said anything about Israel striking first.
I have said the history is complex, to talk about who did what first is nonsensical. We are here, now, and we can only go forward.
So the question is - what does forward look like, if it isn't repeating the last 80yrs?
My comment was more to the thread in general.
Not true. It absolutely matters who started violence in this case. This is not Israel vs Hamas.
Forward looks like letting Iran and Israel fight their war and not back Israel in a war they started that only serves them and not a America. The idea that Iran could nuke us is laughable.
So it doesn't matter that one side is openly hostile to the other, and doesn't hide the fact that they work toward the day when they can destroy a country?
You think the thing we should be focusing on is who fired the first missile 'this time?'
Yes, it matters that Israel is openly hostile to their neighbors and has been plotting to destroy America for decades. That’s the whole point of the JQ and the America First movement.
The thing we should be focusing on is our country and our people not jews in Israel trying to dominate the region so they can rebuild the temple and carry on their satanic religion
"America first" is a populist meme.
It was a simplistic term that people bought into emotionally to garner a vote. Nothing more. Now people are realising that the term means different things to different people....
I'm pretty sure over the coming years, there will be a lot of disappointed people who start to realise that "America first" might not mean what they thought it meant.
Sure, you can assign meaning to it, but it doesn't change the fact millions are also assigning their own meaning. Some of you are going to be butt hurt.
Now, back to the topic - both sides are openly hostile to each other. That's the entire point of my discussion here.
My entire point is that if you find yourself championing one, and demonising the other, you might want to have a good re-think.
Both sides are the opposite side of the same coin. Pretending otherwise is what keeps us here in perpetual cycles.
Not it doesn’t. It’s pretty clear what it means, and I’m not assigning a meaning to it. America First is about putting American people’s interests first. People changing definitions doesn’t all of a sudden end the movement.
Neither of them is America, so we shouldn’t back either.
You keep telling yourself that, brother.
Lol I know we are controlled by Israel but we are not them.
Sometimes there is an inevitability about outcomes once a path has been started.
It doesn't have to be because of control. Quite often the more bleak outlook is to recognise the control has been lost in a situation.
The question is how do you get control back?
It isn't to pretend a ceasefire and a repeat of the previous 80yrs restores us to 'normality' because the 'normality' is what keeps bringing us back here.
Both sides use every ceasefire to further their own cause. They do it because of the history. We cannot change the history. So what next?
