If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   So, just how would Mitt Romney have arrested Ahmadinejad? Here's a look at his plan, which requires a wily coyote, some ACME products, and a suspension of disbelief   (2012.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 130
    More: Amusing, Ahmadinejad, Mitt Romney, ACME, ongoing conflicts, provocations, International Criminal Court, President of Iran, U.N. Security Council  
•       •       •

5392 clicks; posted to Politics » on 24 Oct 2012 at 3:45 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



130 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-24 04:34:44 PM

Arkanaut: John Bolton is one of Mitt's foreign policy advisers.


Vote Republican 2012: Fool Me Twice.
 
2012-10-24 04:35:05 PM

kbronsito: Ahmadinejad is guilty of crimes against humanity against his own people. His nation's military has cracked down against peaceful protests and killed a bunch of people


Under Iran's government, the President is not in command of the nation's armed forces.
 
2012-10-24 04:38:41 PM
Just send Mitt over to arrest him personally. What could possibly go wrong?
 
2012-10-24 04:41:02 PM

jcooli09: mney probably has no idea what this would entail, and little clue what would happen if he did it. If he is elected and fails to get this done, it won't be a lie it will be a failure much like Obamas failure to close Gitmo.

If he does know what it entails and still says he'll do it, it's a lie.


What is even becoming more terrifying is the general ineptitude of the people surrounding Romney with regards to military knowledge and overall understanding of the world. Heck, the Syria "path to the sea" comment (or whatever it was), was an odd comment and deserving of a meme. However, in context of Romney's hard-on to start blowing up stuff, it is of a true concern. This is a man who is completely out of his element in the area of military operations yet has such a myopic view of the world he apparently does not even feel it important to consult a map before spewing threats.

He didn't even know enough to keep his mouth shut after meeting with MI5 in the UK this summer. How he can voice an intention like this before the election is childish, short-sighted and downright dangerous. But given his penchant for babbling military promises (as evidenced in his Israel trip where so blithely decides that service members are basically resources he can throw around on whim) this particular Ahmadinejad Plan is par for the course.

So in a Romney world, while other people's children are being sent off to do Mitts bidding and fulfill the election contracts he entered in to so he could get elected, the Romney clan will be safe at home on their jet-skis and motoring between their lavish homes. If challenged he will be happy to label you anti-American and remind you the world is a dangerous place and that he knows that the rest of the world is clamoring for the US to lead them to the light. And this justifies blowing up everything he does not agree with.

Oh and how do we get the human capital for our military? Why by dangling the citizenship carrot in front of immigrants. It's so simple: enlist and if you stay alive, we might let you in. If you die, well, heh heh, at least you gave it the old, GED Degree Class try. And thanks for the taxes you paid before you bit the dust in a far off land. Rafalca appreciates it.

Romney: I'd make the sole path to citizenship military service (rawstory.com | June 21, 2012)
 
2012-10-24 04:43:21 PM

Bf+: Mugato: It's scary how much people care about bullshiat social issues when Romney sucks so much on foreign policy, the issue that could actually get us all irradiated.

"Romney can't locate the country he plans to invade on a map but gays are allowed to see their partners in the hospital! WTF is up with that?"


this.

In the final debate... on foreign policy... He showed he didn't even know the location of the countries involved while at the same time reversing his Afghanistan exit strategy stance 180 degrees from what he held only two weeks ago. (Not to mention promising to ramp up battleship production.)

How is this not the worst presidential-race-ending debate ever?


Soshulism, and the President is near.
 
2012-10-24 04:43:24 PM
It's okay Mitt you have Boca sewn up. You can stop slobbing Bibi's knob now.
 
2012-10-24 04:43:36 PM
Actually, it may not be as complicated as TFA makes it out to be. I don't see them going the UN Security Council route. Any member state can bring a case to the ICC. Sure, the US isn't a member, but Canada is. Mittens would just get Harper to do it.

/to be clear, I do not approve of this plan
 
2012-10-24 04:44:10 PM
A smash-and-grab SEAL mission might work, but they should get some practice in with Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld first.
 
2012-10-24 04:45:03 PM

Dafatone: Dafatone: Mugato: It's scary how much people care about bullshiat social issues when Romney sucks so much on foreign policy, the issue that could actually get us all irradiated.

"Romney can't locate the country he plans to invade on a map but gays are allowed to see their partners in the hospital! WTF is up with that?"

I'd like to think that America's more than just a bunch of soldiers and diplomats keeping us from getting bombed. That's to say, rights matter.

/Sick and tired of people talking about how social issues aren't a "big deal" because they don't affect them.

Addendum: I'm pretty sure we're agreeing here, in terms of stances. But I've met a bunch of people who think Obama sucks because we're bombing Pakistan, or because of some economic position, while completely ignoring that they agree with him on civil rights issues.


Obama does suck on account of Pakistan and economics; it's just that Romney is far far worse.
 
2012-10-24 04:45:40 PM

Bf+: Mugato: It's scary how much people care about bullshiat social issues when Romney sucks so much on foreign policy, the issue that could actually get us all irradiated.

"Romney can't locate the country he plans to invade on a map but gays are allowed to see their partners in the hospital! WTF is up with that?"


this.

In the final debate... on foreign policy... He showed he didn't even know the location of the countries involved while at the same time reversing his Afghanistan exit strategy stance 180 degrees from what he held only two weeks ago. (Not to mention promising to ramp up battleship production.)

How is this not the worst presidential-race-ending debate ever?


Ah hem, Well, Romney just *looked* so presidential, and Obama was rude.
 
2012-10-24 04:49:29 PM

vernonFL: So Romney supports the United Nations and the International Criminal Court?


Yeah, I'm a little foggy on this, too. I thought the UN and ICC were just part of some conspiracy to make us slaves to the rest of the world? We already refused to acknowledge the authority of the ICC when Bush was in office, with the Seekrit Mooslim Kenyan Socialist in office, don't "Red Blooded Americans" distrusted the ICC even more?

Oh wait, NOW I get it. This is another one of those 'We respect 'X' when it is politically expedient, the rest of the time you can't trust 'em as far as you can throw the whole group at once.' things.

I guess in some ways, the Right is consistent as Hell...
 
2012-10-24 04:53:49 PM

vernonFL: So Romney supports the United Nations and the International Criminal Court?


Yes but he is having trouble finding them on a map.
 
2012-10-24 04:54:29 PM
And the Iranians could indict Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld and then we could work out a trade, our war criminals for theirs.
 
2012-10-24 04:57:24 PM
Yeah. I'll back arresting and trying Ahmadinejad for genocide for sabre-rattling against Israel when the teabaggers are rounded up wholesale, sent to Guano, CIA black sites, and extraordinarily rendered for high treason, assassination of a president, and in some cases ethnic cleansing.

If words equal actions, then let's see consistency.
 
2012-10-24 04:58:13 PM
Step One: Fashion giant slingshot from the elastic from two-dozen pairs of magic underwear.

Step Two: Come within 300 miles of a Muslim. Wait for him to fulfill his daily prayer towards Mecca, indicating the direction of everything totally bad forever. Point giant slingshot in that direction.

Step Three: (Crucial!) Outsource American jobs.

Step Four: Hire illegal immigrants to pull the strap back and hold it, scold them for not being born American.

Step Five: Denounce Step One.

Step Six: Have the illegals self-deport and ride the strap on an arc directly into the middle east.

Step Seven: Apologize to the Qatari family whose home you just crushed on landing, promise them to end the horrible hold of Muslimisicism infecting them.

Step Eight: Locate Iran, update campaign aides that there are actually different countries in the middle east and it's not just a desert full of dark skinned cliches

Step Nine: Hire limo to drive to Iran.

Step Ten: Stand at border, shout meek warnings, demand the arrest of ...umm...who? Ah, just say Mohammed. They;re all Mohammed.

Step Eleven: Discover that the authoritarian theocracy is exactly what you were looking for, stay.
 
2012-10-24 05:04:15 PM

Holocaust Agnostic: Dafatone: Dafatone: Mugato: It's scary how much people care about bullshiat social issues when Romney sucks so much on foreign policy, the issue that could actually get us all irradiated.

"Romney can't locate the country he plans to invade on a map but gays are allowed to see their partners in the hospital! WTF is up with that?"

I'd like to think that America's more than just a bunch of soldiers and diplomats keeping us from getting bombed. That's to say, rights matter.

/Sick and tired of people talking about how social issues aren't a "big deal" because they don't affect them.

Addendum: I'm pretty sure we're agreeing here, in terms of stances. But I've met a bunch of people who think Obama sucks because we're bombing Pakistan, or because of some economic position, while completely ignoring that they agree with him on civil rights issues.

He's having a bunch of people murdered, but its OK because gay people are allowed to help with the murders now?


Roughly, yes?

There isn't a major (D or R) candidate out there who wasn't going to commit semi-atrocities in Pakistan.

People are way too comfortable putting a value on something like gay rights and then saying they're not that big a deal.
 
2012-10-24 05:05:38 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: You mean the same ICC that the GOP refused to use at all to prosecute the folks behind 9/11, instead opting to hold them in indefinite detention on US soil and torturing them, in violation of the Genevea convention?


That would be the one.
 
2012-10-24 05:08:32 PM
Okay, I know the reporters are running out of new things to talk about, but must they keep writing about the least likely scenarios even vaguely mentioned in the election? This is less probable than an "OMG ELECTORAL VOTE TIE" happening.
 
2012-10-24 05:10:27 PM

Dafatone: Roughly, yes?

There isn't a major (D or R) candidate out there who wasn't going to commit semi-atrocities in Pakistan.

People are way too comfortable putting a value on something like gay rights and then saying they're not that big a deal.


Sorry but the fact that Romney is in Sheldon Adelson's pocket and will probably invade most of the Mideast is more important than his stance on gay right. Not that it matters anyway because he's on the wrong side of both issues but priorities are important.
 
2012-10-24 05:16:03 PM

Katolu: Vodka Zombie: Fark Israel. Let them fight their own wars.

They have a very capable military. Why we feel the need to coddle them is beyond me. Sure, back them up, but fight their wars THEY want to start?


Because of Jesus.

Seriously.

The big reason that supporting Israel is so popular, no matter what, is that to many/most Evangelical Christians, they see the modern State of Israel as being the same Israel prophesied in Revelations.

According to Revelations, Israel will always be victorious, and is the Good Guy, and whoever stands against them is opposing Jesus and God.

So, no matter what Israel says or does, they believe it's right because the Bible says so. They are a large voting bloc with significant power in the Republican party.

Combine that with political power of wealthy Jewish political donors and guilt over the holocaust putting pressure for the US on the Democrat side, and the US won't directly oppose Israel, and will normally go out of its way to support them.
 
2012-10-24 05:22:01 PM

Mugato: Dafatone: Roughly, yes?

There isn't a major (D or R) candidate out there who wasn't going to commit semi-atrocities in Pakistan.

People are way too comfortable putting a value on something like gay rights and then saying they're not that big a deal.

Sorry but the fact that Romney is in Sheldon Adelson's pocket and will probably invade most of the Mideast is more important than his stance on gay right. Not that it matters anyway because he's on the wrong side of both issues but priorities are important.


I mean, it doesn't matter much to me in the case of Romney because he's wrong about everything, so I don't really care which wrong is worse.

I'm thinking of someone I met recently, who is liberal, and said he wasn't voting for Obama because of our actions in Pakistan, and that Obama hadn't done anything but the ACA, which he didn't like anyway. So I mentioned that he ended don't ask don't tell, and the guy just sort of went, "...true."

But that hadn't crossed his mind as something that got done, because gay rights aren't a big deal or something.
 
2012-10-24 05:23:13 PM

Silverstaff: guilt over the holocaust putting pressure for the US on the Democrat side,


Are you serious? When did the US have anything at all to do with the Holocaust?
 
2012-10-24 05:23:41 PM
Just had a vision while reading the comments. A deja vu type vision. That Romney will win and start shiat with Iran and that nukes will come into play. Scary.

Pah. Don't believe in visions.
 
2012-10-24 05:24:16 PM

Silverstaff: Combine that with political power of wealthy Jewish political donors and guilt over the holocaust putting pressure for the US on the Democrat side, and the US won't directly oppose Israel, and will normally go out of its way to support them.


Not to mention the "any whiff of a statement that might in any way be construed as anti-Israel is now and forever antisemitism" herp-a-derp propaganda. As if there's any difference between Judaism, the Jewish people in Israel or in diaspora, Israel, Israeli citizens, the Israeli government, Israeli right-wing parties, Israeli party leadership, the Israeli government, Israeli right-wing extremists, or Jewish right-wing extremists.

Slack-jawed, dead-eyed yahoos who wouldn't know Likud from Lik-a-Stix if you put a gun to their head and a copy of The Jerusalem Post in their hands, calling people antisemitic. Especially when they themselves are typically the most antisemitic farkers in the US.
 
2012-10-24 05:25:35 PM

Epoch_Zero: Silverstaff: guilt over the holocaust putting pressure for the US on the Democrat side,

Are you serious? When did the US have anything at all to do with the Holocaust?


Yes I'm serious. We didn't have anything to do with it, but it's a good all-purpose guilt card that gets quietly played sometimes. The idea that the Jews were being actively exterminated, set up a homeland so it would never happen again. . and now are surrounded by countries that would love to destroy it and wipe out the Jewish people.

So, it's not so much that the US had anything to do with it, just that it's subtly implied that our help is needed to keep it from happening again.
 
2012-10-24 05:28:00 PM
Israel is the party issuing threats.
 
2012-10-24 05:32:51 PM

homelessdude:

Oh and how do we get the human capital for our military? Why by dangling the citizenship carrot in front of immigrants. It's ...

 
2012-10-24 05:48:08 PM

Silverstaff: Epoch_Zero: Silverstaff: guilt over the holocaust putting pressure for the US on the Democrat side,

Are you serious? When did the US have anything at all to do with the Holocaust?

Yes I'm serious. We didn't have anything to do with it, but it's a good all-purpose guilt card that gets quietly played sometimes. The idea that the Jews were being actively exterminated, set up a homeland so it would never happen again. . and now are surrounded by countries that would love to destroy it and wipe out the Jewish people.

So, it's not so much that the US had anything to do with it, just that it's subtly implied that our help is needed to keep it from happening again.


They were legitimately being wiped out. It was literally the end times for jews during the Nazi regime. Which is why you are laughed off the planet when you compare anything to the holocaust that isn't already the holocaust. In a few decades when the dust settles and the scale of the killing in Africa by the militant juntas and whatnot can be officially measured, I'm sure people will have another thing to compare horrible things to, whatever that event will be called.

I'm not sure how you would view it, but if I ever heard a jewish person yelling at someone that wasn't related to the nazis for how much his people suffered, and using it for sympathy, that person would just be ridiculed. I haven't seen a case of some jewish guy being passed up for something, and coming back with 'but the holocaust' and getting his way. Never. I'm not sure how one can see that happening unless they have a particular bias to see it that way. In which case, yeah....Same thing goes for black people and American slavery. Any mention of the history of the south and the treatment of black people by whites and it's suddenly a guilt trip, and not just a statement of the horrid reality we must live with.

/Is there a Semi-Godwin for the mention of the holocaust?
// Like a .4 Godwin?
 
2012-10-24 05:51:58 PM

Epoch_Zero: Which is why you are laughed off the planet when you compare anything to the holocaust that isn't already the holocaust.


The elimination of Central/Southern American empires after the arrival of Europeans?
 
2012-10-24 05:54:29 PM
Mitt Romney called for the indictment of Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for "genocide incitation" at Monday's debate, a strategy his top adviser suggested might actually result in his arrest.

As Romney alluded to in the debate, the ICC does recognize "incitement" as a legitimate charge under the Genocide Convention. In the 1990s, Rwandan politician Jean-Paul Akayesu was arrested, tried, and convicted by the UN International Criminal Tribunal for "direct and public incitement to commit genocide" among other crimes.

Neither country seems too likely to approve of the idea and Romney has pledged to take a harder diplomatic line against both of them on the campaign trail.

But let's grant Romney's assumption and imagine that Russia and China side with the United States and that the ICC decides on making Ahmadinejad a test case for a broader definition of the law.

You seem to have a problem with an idea that Obama hhimself has floated. Not even a Romney idea as Bush also floated it at one time.

Which hurts worse- the stupid or the dizziness from the spin?
 
2012-10-24 05:54:31 PM

someonelse: I'll bet the plan involved horses and bayonets.


And a call from the 1980's to distract him.
 
2012-10-24 05:56:57 PM

Epoch_Zero: They were legitimately being wiped out.


Bad choice of word?
 
2012-10-24 06:09:25 PM
I have this mind's eye vision of the detectives from Dragnet putting the cuffs on Ahmadinejad.
 
2012-10-24 06:12:54 PM

Epoch_Zero: They were legitimately being wiped out. It was literally the end times for jews during the Nazi regime.


Except for the Jews that weren't in Nazi-controlled Europe. In the 1930's the Nazis officially encouraged Jews to leave Germany. Many took up that offer. Many came to the US or other places well out of Nazi reach.

Unless the Nazis completely conquered the world, they couldn't succeed in their plan.

Yes, millions were dying, but the complete eradication of all Jews on Earth was not even close to a realistic goal of the Holocaust.
 
2012-10-24 06:13:38 PM

Epoch_Zero: Silverstaff: guilt over the holocaust putting pressure for the US on the Democrat side,

Are you serious? When did the US have anything at all to do with the Holocaust?


The Holocaust was just the worst example. In addition to discriminating against various shades of brown the US wasn't very nice to Jewish people either. Catholics were suspect as well. I think modern generations are a bit unclear on just how recently the US made even the pretense of non-discrimination.
 
2012-10-24 06:25:00 PM

Peppermint Rose: Epoch_Zero: Silverstaff: guilt over the holocaust putting pressure for the US on the Democrat side,

Are you serious? When did the US have anything at all to do with the Holocaust?

The Holocaust was just the worst example. In addition to discriminating against various shades of brown the US wasn't very nice to Jewish people either. Catholics were suspect as well. I think modern generations are a bit unclear on just how recently the US made even the pretense of non-discrimination.


The catholics are still suspect. Just look at those funny hats their leaders wear!
 
2012-10-24 06:26:19 PM

Peppermint Rose: Epoch_Zero: Silverstaff: guilt over the holocaust putting pressure for the US on the Democrat side,

Are you serious? When did the US have anything at all to do with the Holocaust?

The Holocaust was just the worst example. In addition to discriminating against various shades of brown the US wasn't very nice to Jewish people either. Catholics were suspect as well. I think modern generations are a bit unclear on just how recently the US made even the pretense of non-discrimination.


In 1939 the United States turned away 930 Jews who had set sail from Hamburg on the S.S. St. Louis. Link

The depression was on-going and there was serious opposition to allowing Jewish refugees to settle in the US in large numbers. One reason that so many fleeing for their lives ended up in the Middle East is because Palestine was British territory and it was an area to which they were allowed to go.
 
2012-10-24 06:29:47 PM
what pisses me off is when Americans get offended when you point out how shady our past is.

yea, we are a great country but we have done some less that great things, accept it, don't allow it to reoccur & most importantly, learn from it.

learn for your past America, you dipshiat!
 
2012-10-24 06:30:58 PM
Did it also require the suspension of the Laws of Physics?
 
2012-10-24 06:37:12 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Arkanaut: John Bolton is one of Mitt's foreign policy advisers.

Vote Republican 2012: Fool Me Twice.


Considering that they've been punking most folks since '80... much more than twice.
 
2012-10-24 06:38:51 PM

Coelacanth: I have this mind's eye vision of the detectives from Dragnet putting the cuffs on Ahmadinejad.


I have in my mind's eye Romney dressed in his old police uniform he used to ride around in harassing people slapping the cuffs on him.
 
2012-10-24 06:56:35 PM

Fart_Machine: Just send Mitt, his sons and grandchildren over to arrest him personally. What could possibly go wrong?


The world would be a much safer place to live in.
 
2012-10-24 07:31:13 PM

clowncar on fire: I herp two derps in the morning, I herp two derps at night. I herp two derps in the afternoon and it makes me feel alright.


Except for the part where as an inchoate crime, the speech has to be directly proven to have the potential to cause genocidal violence, and be intended as such. As the head of state of a regional power that has in its history possessed, and continues to posses, WMD, Ahmadinejad has the capacity to wage, or order, such violence; and moreover, as a regional power Iran can influence other states to engage in or aid in the execution of genocidal violence. If Ahmadinejad genuinely intended to wage a campaign of genocidal violence, or incite others to do it, it is certainly in his capacity as a head-of-state to have done it without merely engaging in speech.

Especially for the fact that, whatever political hay is made over Iran's capacity to build and use nuclear weapons, its capability to build and use biological, chemical, and radiological weapons is quite clear and unambiguous given its history of biological and chemical weapons usage in the Iran-Iraq War.

Case in point, the indictment of Akayesu itself. Genocide actually occurred, in which he was directly proven to have helped incite and intended as such. Additionally, the ICC ruled in that very case the speech in question must be a direct, explicit, call to action to qualify as genocide; thus far, none of Ahmadinejad's speech has found to be sufficiently direct nor intended to incite genocidal violence by the Court itself despite previous attempts by both Israel and the United States to charge him with the crime. Moreover, the charge was not employed in the case of Slobodan Milosevic, despite the qualifying conditions for the charge being present, making the precedent weak at best.

Not that any of it matters, as the US is not a member-state of the International Criminal Court, since George W. Bush withdraw American support from the institution in 2002. And, you must really ask yourself is this the hill you choose to die on, considering the only thing blocking Israel from being declared an Apartheid state by the very institutions you now claim to support is the United States?

So, shush.
 
2012-10-24 07:37:04 PM
dl.dropbox.com

You send some guys in classified helicopters to go pick him up.

/I thought that's how we did things now.
/Was it a trick question?
 
2012-10-24 07:37:16 PM
if mittens is elected, we will all be wearing temple undies...
bandaids on the nipples are NOT covered by your flex plan...
 
2012-10-24 07:41:22 PM
Why does Mitt Romney hate the 1st Amendment? Capital J The J is for Jews.
 
2012-10-24 07:51:40 PM
Jesus he's clueless
 
2012-10-24 08:14:30 PM

Waxing_Chewbacca: Jesus he's clueless


...and He's not alone.
Mr. "57 States" mixed up his Russian and US ships during the Democratic convention, and then tried to expound on Romney's lack of geographical and Naval knowledge during the last debate.

The horrifying truth is that both candidates are clueless on a wide range of important subjects.
You might as well choose one based on their taste in beer.

/I guess its score one for Obama there.
 
2012-10-24 08:16:59 PM

bullsballs: if mittens is elected, we will all be wearing temple undies...
bandaids on the nipples are NOT covered by your flex plan...


I can't even wear an underwire bra, I am not about to wear one of those coverall garments, thanks.
 
2012-10-24 08:23:07 PM

way south: Mr. "57 States" mixed up his Russian and US ships during the Democratic convention, and then tried to expound on Romney's lack of geographical and Naval knowledge during the last debate.


You people are still harping on the 57 states thing, are you farking serious? And you're equating that to what Romney said about Iran? Christ on a cracker, you can't be real.
 
Displayed 50 of 130 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report