Third Party & Independents Archives

Regime Change Necessary To Free Iranian People

I’m not disappointed, but I was hoping President Trump would suggest regime change in his words to the press this morning.

This is the most opportune time we've had in years to support a regime change in Iran. The people are mad, in the streets. Their gov't has killed some 1500 people in the last year or so in protesting gov't.

Trump has had sanctions on Iran for a year or so and their economy is bigtime weak at the moment.

Can't know how long the $175B or so, will fund terrorist activities but none of that will get to the people or quell street unrest.

President Trump is not ready to get involved in regime change at this time. I do hope, in his 2nd term that he works to free the Iranian people. I'm sure we have operatives in place to get the job done when the time comes.

Iranian people are great people and have so much potential to be a country at the forefront of nations. We must help them to get into the 21st century, get the boot off their throat.

Meanwhile, more sanctions will further weaken the country, bringing more people into the streets. I hope the President will pick the right time and secure their freedom.

Posted by Roy Ellis at January 8, 2020 1:44 PM
Comment #452396

Do you know what I think the most effective way to bring about regime change would be?

Offer a path to statehood. Invite them into a process that will lead them to earning a star on the American flag.
Our history is peppered with instances where new states have been brought into the union. California is an example of a state having no border shared with another state. Texas is an example of another country being granted statehood. Alaska and Hawaii could be considered abroad as they share no common border with the lower 48.

Trump would be grudgingly held up as a mediocre Pulitzer Prize winner if he could convince Iran to start on the journey toward statehood.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 4:49 PM
Comment #452397

Iran our 51st state? Weary is having a little fun; or just “musing” again.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 8, 2020 5:21 PM
Comment #452398

Eventual statehood for Tamaulipas and Nuevo Leone would benefit both the U.S. as a whole and the individual states if they pledged allegiance to the United States of America and lived under our constitution.

Hey, sure, it’s more pie in the sky, but if it happened tomorrow, ten years from now you wouldn’t give it a second thought.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 5:34 PM
Comment #452399

What are your thoughts on North Korean statehood Weary?

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 8, 2020 5:50 PM
Comment #452400

If the people of North Korea collectively elected a government that supported statehood and converted to the requirements set forth in the constitution, then who are we to stop them?

South Korea could be a candidate. It’s up to them. If they meet the criteria laid out in the constitution and pledged allegiance to the United States, I’m all for it.

You guys must not realize this, but it’s more fun talking about things that are possible instead of discounting things out of hand because they were unspoken.

What would the federal government do if Hong Kong applied for statehood, or the privileges afforded Guam, or the Samoan Islands, or Puerto Rico? Would that benefit Hong Kong? Would it benefit the U.S.? Then why can’t it be considered and discussed instead of laughed at and ridiculed?

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 6:10 PM
Comment #452401

Sorry Weary, I place a very high value on citizenship in the US. There must be considerable value to us before considering statehood for others.

Research the reasons why Puerto Rico has not been admitted to the Union.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 8, 2020 6:15 PM
Comment #452403

Puerto Rico is a failed, welfare state. I would be against statehood for Puerto Rico. Quebec, on the other hand, would and should be courted for statehood.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 6:24 PM
Comment #452404

Path to citizenship:

Declare your independence and recognize your rights.
Discard any government that denies your rights.
Adopt a republic as a form of government.

Please point out the flaws in this path.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 6:25 PM
Comment #452405

U.S. annexation of the Mexican states mentioned earlier would provide a 300 mile border with the rest of Mexico and stop most of the illegal activity in the area. Illegals wouldn’t be dying 80 miles inside the border of Texas.

I would support annexing all of northern Mexico for security reasons only.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 6:30 PM
Comment #452406

“Please point out the flaws in this path.”

If this is accomplished Weary; why not stay as you are? There would be no reason to become a state.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 8, 2020 6:31 PM
Comment #452407

I can’t believe you are saying there are no benefits to being a state under our flag?

If those people can maintain an independent state I give them great respect. That’s the entire point, right? If they no longer, as an independent state, adhere to the values our flag stands for, and our constitution, then we don’t need them, do we?

Perhaps you’re operating under the assumption we will be using force to achieve these goals. This can’t be further from the truth.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 6:43 PM
Comment #452408

Weary; this discussion is getting to weird. I withdraw.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 8, 2020 6:46 PM
Comment #452409

What was the purpose of injecting North Korea into this discussion. You rightly assumed I was making fun when I wrote this:

Trump would be grudgingly held up as a mediocre Pulitzer Prize winner if he could convince Iran to start on the journey toward statehood.

Do I sound like I’m being serious? Why then, do you interject North Korea into the discussion and use that to discount the entire premise of the discussion?

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 6:53 PM
Comment #452410

I really can’t believe this. I’ve attempted to present an argument using history and examples of how it’s already been used to benefit our country. I’ve suggested those procedures be used in situations in the present day. I’m being called irrational and weird.

I just don’t get it.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 7:05 PM
Comment #452412

Oh, let me jumpe into this.

I would very much like for Ca, Or, deannexed and given to Mexico. Also, would like to see Ny, NJ, given to Mexico.

We’ve got too many people and those few large states would unburden us biggly.

I would be willing to give them some ‘cash on a pallet’ to sweeten the deal so long as they promise not to want to come back.

Otherwise, can u believe the Iranians blew the Ukr. flight out of the air? Was either one of their missiles or an intentional bombing of the plane, IMO. There goes some of our billions down in smoke. Double indemnity if they intentionally blew the plane up.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at January 8, 2020 7:35 PM
Comment #452417

What are you jumping into? It sounds like you’re trying to change the subject.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 8:16 PM
Comment #452418

Why has only Ukrainian flights been the subject of international drama?

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 8:17 PM
Comment #452419

Is this also a joke? I thought I was the comedian on this stage!

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 8:18 PM
Comment #452420

That was my Bobby Hill impression.

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 8, 2020 8:19 PM
Comment #452448

The U.S.A. should not start a war with Iran.
Taking out Soleimani was justified, because the U.S. has every right to project its troops and embassies.
Another pre-emptive war with Iran would be another huge mistake.
Iran is suffering from sanctions already, and it is up to the people of Iran to fix their own country.
Regime change in Iran is not worth the life of one U.S. citizen.
Even if the U.S. repeated the Iraq mistake in Iran, it would not be appreciated, as it isn’t appreciated in Iraq today, as Iraq votes to force U.S. troops out of Iraq.
The major reason the U.S. has not left Iraq (and other nations) is because the U.S. doesn’t want Russia, China, and Iran to take over the entire middle-east (and other nations).
Iran attacked Saudi Arabia, but Saudi Arabia did nothing about it, and Saudi Arabia has the largest military (relative to GDP) spending budget of any country in the world.
IF the people of Iran and Saudi Arabia won’t fight back, then why should the U.S.?
Saudi Arabia was attacked by Iran, so why hasn’t Saudi Arabia retaliated.
There are neighboring countries that should be concerned about Iran’s terrorist activities, because Iran is the biggest state-sponsor of terrorism in the world.

Rank ______ Country _______ MilitarySpending ___ %_of_GDP

  • 1 _____ United States ___ $649 Billion_______ 3.2%
  • 2 _____ China _________ $250.0 ____________ 1.9%
  • 3 _____ Saudi Arabia ____ $67.6 _____________ 8.8%
  • 4 _____ India _________ $66.5 _____________ 2.4%
  • 5 _____ France ________ $63.8 _____________ 2.3%
  • 6 _____ Russia ________ $61.4 _____________ 3.9%
Rank ______ Country ________ 2019-Population ___ GDP($USD)
  • 1 _____ United States ___ 329,093,110 ______ $21.410 Trillion
  • 2 _____ China __________ 1.42 Billion ______ $15.54 Trillion
  • 3 _____ Japan __________ 126,854,745 _____ $5.4 Trillion
  • 4 _____ Germany ________ 82,438,639 ______ $4.4 Trillion
  • 5 _____ India __________ 1.37 Billion _______ $3.16 Trillion
  • 6 _____ France _________ 65,480,710 ______ $3.06 Trillion
  • 7 _____ U.K. ___________ 66,959,016 ______ $3.02 Trillion
  • 8 _____ Italy __________ 59,216,525 _______ $2.26 Trillion
  • 9 _____ Brazil __________ 212,392,717 _____ $1.8 Trillion
  • 10 ____ Canada _________ 37,279,811 ______ $1.53 Trillion
IF Iran’s neighbors won’t do anything about Iran, then why should the U.S.?
In my opinion, none of those countries are worth risking the life of one U.S. troop or citizen.

Posted by: d.a.n at January 9, 2020 10:43 AM
Comment #452452

The Pentagon reported today that Iran shot down the Ukrainian airliner in Iran (killing 176) on 7-JAN-2019, using a Russian-made SAM (Surface-to-Air-Missle), the same day Iran fired missiles at U.S. bases in Iraq.

Posted by: d.a.n at January 9, 2020 12:19 PM
Comment #452455

The Democrats are such hypocrites.
When Trump wanted to pull all troops out of Syria, the Demorats complained, and wanted them to stay, and fight if necessary, to protect the Kurds from Turkey (a NATO member).

Now, when Trump takes out a terrorist (and Soleimani was declared a terrorist in 2005, who was responsible for killing many hundreds of U.S. troops, and who was planning an attack on the U.S. embassy in Iraq), they say it was the wrong thing to do, and it may cause a war with Iran.

Democrats are making total asses of themselves, almost on a daily basis.
But, that’s a good thing!
It’s SNAFUBAR (Situation Normal All ***** Up Beyond All Recognition) for Democrats.
After all, Democrats have done far worse things over the past 155+ years.

Posted by: d.a.n at January 9, 2020 4:08 PM
Comment #452516

“I’m being called irrational and weird. I just don’t get it.”

Take a deep breath and relax Weary. I wrote; “this discussion is getting too weird”.

Posted by: Royal Flush at January 10, 2020 4:24 PM
Comment #454376

Nice posts

Posted by: Asad ali at March 18, 2020 1:34 AM
Comment #454377

great post

Posted by: Androidpeaks at March 18, 2020 1:35 AM
Post a comment