My beef with you is over the impatience you show wrt actions against Iran.
As to things printed in the NY Times. They come from any number of unauthorized sources as you should be well aware. Or are you claiming the paper is a mouthpiece for the administration? My argument with you in this respect is because you are assuming this is coming from the Administration rather than the moles within the bureaucracy working against it.
Apparently you believe our enemies are such fools they cannot see and work through the weaknesses within our system. We need not telegraph anything about it to them it has been common knowledge for at least 40 years and used over and over.
And, Yes, I do believe there will be something done about Iran but it may not fit your timetable.
Which is to say: you think you have a beef with me because you HAVEN'T BOTHERED TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M ACTUALLY SAYING even though I've repeated my position multiple times.
I am most definitely NOT saying we need to take action against Iran. I am probably not informed enough to know the advisability of doing so. ALL I am saying is that, if we aren't going to take action against Iran, then openly complaining about their proxy war against us is worse than useless, it is counterproductive.
But your responses show that you haven't bothered to read my posts very carefully. You are bound and determined to have a disagreement with me, even if that means ignoring everything I've been saying and pretending I'm saying something else.
That's my beef with you. It's ok not to read my posts at all carefully, but don't waste my time arguing with me if you don't.
As to things printed in the NY Times. They come from any number of unauthorized sources as you should be well aware. Or are you claiming the paper is a mouthpiece for the administration? My argument with you in this respect is because you are assuming this is coming from the Administration rather than the moles within the bureaucracy working against it.
Um, the story begins "The US military said on Tuesday...". Did you read it? Is "the US military" a mole?
Anyway, I said nothing about "the Administration". WHOMEVER is blabbing to the New York Times should shut the hell up.
Apparently you believe our enemies are such fools they cannot see and work through the weaknesses within our system. We need not telegraph anything about it to them it has been common knowledge for at least 40 years and used over and over.
There's a difference between people being able to figure out that you are weak, and openly saying "I am weak". If you disagree with me, that's ok, but that's what I think.