Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

baradar_jackson

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    9,730
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    38

Posts posted by baradar_jackson


  1. 1 hour ago, Islandsandmirrors said:

    I am not “supporting” anyone. All I’m saying is that the US never arrests anyone unless there is a reason. 

    Read history. Study it, learn from it.

    You have a country and you like it, OK you are one in 7 billion.

    But go study the history of your country. Analyze the current situation of your country. Reflect on it.

    Saying that nobody is arrested in your country without reason; I mean this is inherently absurd. There are wrongful arrests in every country, even the best of countries. So you cannot legitimately believe such a thing unless you are deluded.


  2. LOL He spoke to a crowd in a stadium in Makhachkala and said "you cannot keep an eagle in the cage." Never change, Khabib. :hahaha:

     

    Khabib vs. Tony next, please UFC. Ten trillion people who watched UFC 229 were exposed to the monster that is Tony Ferguson. And of course everyone knows Khabib now; many who hate him, many who love him. Khabib vs. Tony makes competitive sense and business sense.


  3. 3 hours ago, ShiaChat Mod said:

    Next time, please let us know sooner. We can't predict after the event has occurred.  

     

    I posted this before the fight. check the timestamp broham

     

    3 hours ago, Reza said:

    ...and you were correct!

    But what the heck, what happened afterwards? Developing story. 

     

    The media is being lying liars as usual.

     

    Conor throws a dolly on the bus, seriously injures fighters, and the video footage is used on AAAAAAAAAAALL the promotional material for this fight. He and his team talk a bunch of crap, crossing a few red lines in the process. Dillon Danis, the king of the douchebags, gets attacked. Why is anyone surprised?

     

     

    Why are they talking about suspensions, and stripping the title? Why are they talking about "rematch" when Conor got completely outclassed???? This sport and the whole media that surrounds it has become a joke.


  4. On 9/13/2018 at 3:05 AM, habib e najjaar said:

    Salam alaykum,

    Where can I download/buy this with English subtitles? I do not manage to get 3 hours straight to watch it, and would rather have an offline version I can watch at my pace. It was on youtube for a few days then disappeared.

    ws

    Salaam aleikum. There is a download link. You can download the film and watch at your own pace:

    http://www.mediafire.com/file/4sn33lli0d6udj7/Film+Mohammed+VOSTENG.mp4


  5. The very presence of Abadi is a violation of Iraqi sovereignty on part of the USA. But some people are content staying in the dirt, flinging mud at a fraternal people rather than recognizing what truly plagues the region and has plagued the reason for over a century.

     

    PS Iran helped establish, train, and equip the PMU... which is why there aren't people hanging from the gallows in every Iraqi city just for being of a *certain* mazhab (wink wink).


  6. As far as I know these jobs are usually taken up by people in Latin America, Africa, Eastern Europe, and parts of Asia. If you live anywhere with high cost of living, such jobs are clearly not worthwhile but depending on where you live it may be something to look into. (I have no idea what data entry is by the way so I am basing this comment on the prevalence of coding jobs of American and European companies being outsourced).


  7. On 8/1/2018 at 2:37 AM, Sumerian said:

    Lol. Cutting trees should be legal at any time if it's your private property. It's your tree, do what you want with it.

    Thank God you don't own the amazon rainforest. Maybe we'd all be dead by now.

    On 8/1/2018 at 9:30 AM, Sumerian said:

     I'm a strong believer in private property, if you own something you can do whatever you want with it.

    Nobody cares what you strongly believe in. Argue something based on its merit, not based on your beliefs, strong or otherwise.


  8. 7 hours ago, Laayla said:

    Assalam Alikum Brother @Sumerian

    The believers have tawaqal 3la Allah.

    You are only looking at it in the perspective of numbers.

    I know you are very good in fiqh, but I ask you have you studied seera?

    What do you want the Iranian leadership to do exactly?

    Numerous times Mohammad Jawad Zarif said come to us let's talk at the table,  let's work towards diplomacy.  Dump Administration doesn't want that.   So when Dump comes at them with war of words, how do you expect they will respond?  Allah loves the strong mo2mineen.  

    They learn from Imam Hussain when he said, "Death with dignity is better than life with humiliation."  

    M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah

     

    The US government has shown time and time again that it cannot be reasoned with. They understand one type of language, and that is the language of force.

     

    A lot can be gleaned from little things. Look at this post from the official twitter account of the US department of defence:

     

    At first when I saw this I thought it was a parody account, but no: check the arrow. It's official. They are actually proud of indiscriminate destruction of nations and of civilian infrastructure. No shame whatsoever.

     

    And when you see their so-called diplomacy, this type of posts are not so surprising. They don't generally offer concessions, when they do it is the bare minimum (and then they won't even abide by these agreements they have made anyway). An agreement with the United States is not worth the paper it's written on. I feel sorry for people who do not see this because it's like forgetting that the sky is blue.


  9. On 4/19/2018 at 1:51 PM, notme said:

    All the old people in my neighborhood are having their beautiful big trees cut down. I was told by another neighbor that this one was planted by his wife when they first moved to the neighborhood. I don't understand why they want to cut down perfectly healthy trees that give them shade and make their properties beautiful, especially the ones planted by now-deceased loved ones. 

    I noticed a little grove starting in an untended window planter on the side of my barn. I think I'll pot them individually and plant the ones that grow in my yard to replace the ones in the neighborhood that have recently been removed. Then maybe in 50 years my family will have them cut down. 

    Some people are stoopid.

    I am sure they had some stupid excuse like "the house doesn't get enough light." Yeah it doesn't get light because you have beautiful trees giving you SHADE, idiots. Shade: one of the greatest sources of comfort for man since Adam.

    Cutting down trees with such weak reasoning should be illegal.


  10. 4 hours ago, King said:

    No one in their right mind believes Iran would have a chance in a full scale war with the US.  Irans military is no slouch and pretty capable but even though US power is on the decline, their military is still by far and away the most powerful military force in human history and this is ignoring nukes. It is stupendous what kind of fire power they have and they don't even utilize a small fraction of their capacity when engaged in their militaristic adventures around the world.

    Given the US utilizes even 20% of their military capacity in a war.  Iran at best can mount a decent defense, and that too for a temporary period after which they would have to depend on diplomacy of some sort. This sort of aggression would end up being too costly for the US so they won't bother, it basically would be a defeat for the US considering the cost-benefits analysis and the political backlash at home.  So yes from this perspective a war against Iran would be troublesome but beyond that there is really no comparison.

     

    What you are saying is like saying: the US did not lose a single battle in Vietnam. Technically true. But who cares?

     

    Giap thought they were toast after the failure of the Tet offensive. Little did he realize that this "victory" for the US was not celebrated nor seen as progress.

     

    It literally means nothing. The power the US possesses in theory is as useful as the theoretical possibility that I can make the NBA.

     

     

    25 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

    May I remind everyone the true strength of the US military hasn't been unleashed and probably will never be because there is no worthy competitor to the US military. 

     

    It hasn't been "unleashed" because the US is afraid to actually get into a fight with an adversary that can fight back. They are afraid of conflict expanding beyond the bounds with which they are comfortable, which is in itself a sign of weakness but the reason they even have this issue is because their populous is spoiled by the plentiful means they have enjoyed for 60-70 years or so. There is no population less equipped for long, drawn out warfare.... especially when it's all aggressive warfare and ordinary people tend to not like dying for imperial ambitions.


  11. 32 minutes ago, Sumerian said:

    Reminder: The last engagement between America and Iran ended up with pretty much the Iranian Navy's destruction.

     

    This is factually incorrect. The US "sunk" one warship - the Sahand - and it got recommissioned if I recall correctly.

     

    Also that was ten million years ago. Iran's anti-ship missile capability has vastly improved since then.


  12. 16 hours ago, Sumerian said:

    The problem with your thinking is you seem to overestimate your country's capability. You don't even have air defenses that can track the US's most powerful fighters jets or bombers. All it takes for a mission to hit specific targets in a country is air superiortity.

    Now Iran might retaliate with a barrage of ballistic missiles but that won't end well. That will just force the US to level Iranian cities and in return escalate.

    Whatever damage you do to American assets, it is nothing compared to the destruction America can do to you. You have so much vulnerabilities, you have little international support and your economy relies on one source which will likely be destroyed in any war.

    Stop overestimating yourselves. And don't give me the "rely on faith" nonsense because you always compromise.

    Rhetoric has never won a war. And it never will.

     

    First of all, I am not a part of the Iranian defence apparatus. So I am not overestimating "my" capabilities. I am on the sidelines just like you, simply doing my best to assess the situation. Secondly, I did not really make any reference to faith... although that is absolutely essentially: see how Saudi is signing their own death certificates by invading one of the poorest countries in the world (Yemen). Fortitude, faith, whatever you want to call it. It matters.

     

    Now... as for the military capabilities of the United States, the problem many people run into is that they think this is a numbers game. They say: more budget, more industrial capacity, more fighters, more bombers, more artillery pieces, more guidance systems, more warships, etc...

     

    Military science is not a game of "who has more." It never has been. Everything else being equal, then the numbers matter. In a vacuum, they don't mean much. Instead of looking at numbers, look at history. Look at all the wars in which the US has fought since the end of World War II. How many have they won, and by "win" I don't mean "they killed more people." Obviously, the US has a lot of killing power; killing people in droves is not the same as winning a war. Winning a war or a battle is if: you accomplish the objectives defined by the mission. So if for example if you want a reunification of Korea under YOUR terms, then the absence of that is a defeat. If your objective is to prevent the spread of communist rule in Vietnam and instead Vietnam is united under communist rule, then that is a defeat. If your objective is to overthrow the Taliban and then, 20 years later you are forced to negotiate treaties with Taliban... that's a defeat.

     

    In all of these wars, the US has lost. And they have not taken on particularly strong countries. Vietnam was probably the all-around strongest in terms of overall military capability. But even Vietnam was really not a regional power, let alone a world power. Still, they lost. Yeah they killed a lot of people. That's not the same as winning. Winning means reaching the military objective. Having failed to reach it, that's a defeat. This is not baradar being a jingoist, these are the facts.

     

    Now... could the US "theoretically" defeat Iran. Well, yeah, duh. Nuclear weapons. They could theoretically genocide the entire Iranian people with nukes. But let's save those childish scenarios for the video games, because that's not a realistic scenario. Even against Russia, because the US has more nukes, they can "theoretically" conquer Moscow in a nuclear war. It's a meaningless thought to even entertain because no such conflict will take place.

     

    You said that Iran cannot track the best US fighters and bombers. I'd appreciate if you be more specific because as far as I am concerned, any rhetoric about the US having an unsinkable aircraft went out the door when Serbia downed a F-117. There is no such thing as "stealth" in this world, only stealthy. Iran has devoted a very sizable portion of its defence budget, to air defence. And in air defence there are few countries that are as successful as Iran. Serbia downed a F-117. Iran can do much more of that. And now that we are on the subject of aircraft: the intelligence of a nation which continues to manufacture the B-52 has to be HEAVILY questioned.

     

    Rhetoric has never won a war. I agree. But whose side's rhetoric has consistently failed to match reality? Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, and so on. What has the US won since WWII? Absolutely nothing. They kill, they kill, and they kill. And they lose, and they lose, and they lose. because they fail to meet their most basic objectives. That's the reality of the situation, and that's why - while you're sitting here saying all this fluff about how the US can flatten Iran like a pancake... nothing has happened. 40 years. Nothing. Even their simple "hostage rescue mission" was an abject failure. But yeah, they managed to kill a bunch of civilian passengers of an airliner, sure. Nobody has ever denied they are proficient in killing. They killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, through varied means. That war still was, and always will be, a failure.


  13. 15 hours ago, von Lohengramm said:

    Movie can be viewed in HD here with good subtitles:

    https://www.insight-media.co/videos/muhammad-messenger-of-god-movie-english-subtitles/

    If you right click the video you can display the URL and paste it into a Facebook video converter if you want to download it (1.3gb). Alternatively, you can follow the download link on the page but the file is around 5gbs.

    Everyone please put aside three hours and watch it. it's brilliant


  14. 1 hour ago, Sumerian said:

    The US doesn't need invade Iran, it can attack key assets like military installation, nuclear targets, oil targets - through superior airpower - and blockade the country just like it did to Iraq in the 90s.

     

    Of course, any time a country enters a war, it can do so on its own terms without any worry about anything. Right? Right???

     

    I mean this above statement is just delusional, and I'm not targetting you specifically @Sumerian because a lot of people say things like this and I want to know what they're on. The whole problem of the US right now with respect to Iran is that they cannot have conflict limited to the small sphere which they choose. In my opinion, even the limited conflict they seek will not accomplish what they want, which is regime change, but whatever: either way, the Iranian response - the blows it will deal to the US Navy as well as to regional US military bases, via it's missile capability - will make the escalation of conflict unavoidable. The reason why the US has yet to invade Iran (or the DPRK for that matter, which is a far poorer country with far less chips in its hand) is because it cannot win. If winning were as easy as the hawkish people think it is, it would have been done by now. There have been reports of imminent war since when? I personally remember some as far back as 2002 but I am sure they were before that, as well - as far back as the 1980s - but I was just too young to notice or understand.

     

    I don't think a war will happen, because I think the Pentagon knows it's a death wish and have known that for some time now. But it's not impossible. We'll see. I don't want it to happen, because it will cause a lot of hardship for a lot of people (and it will most certainly escalate into a more global conflict), but what can you do? The US is an insane asylum where the most dangerous inmates are running the show; you never know what's going to happen.


  15. 19 hours ago, IbnSina said:

    I know there christian gay women priests, I do not know what specific nomination of Christianity they adhere to.

    You are referring to pastors (not priests) of some other denomination. The word priest is specific to the Catholic church and the Catholic church does not allow women to become priests.

    edit: sorry the word priest is also used by the Eastern Church. But the Eastern church also does not allow women to become priests.


  16. The TL;DR version:

     

    Everyone in the government (whether reformist or principalist or any other made-up name), as well as most of the people, it does not even cross their minds that there is such a thing as Islamic economics theory. So they haven't "cooked" those ideas. Those ideas are so far from even being put in the oven. 

     

    So instead we have a mishmash of a bunch of crap. What's become really popular in recent years is Keynesian economics. We all see how that's working out.

     

    When Agha a few years ago declared the year of economic (struggle), he knew exactly what he was doing. He knew what was coming ahead. Iranians keep kicking the can down the road but it cannot be avoided forever.


  17. On 7/15/2018 at 11:43 PM, ShiaMan14 said:

    I  guess immigrants can never consider their new place to be their land.

    I mean they're free to do what they want but I always found it kind of pathetic. Pogba before the match was talking about how he's a proud Frenchman... I can't respect it.


  18. 3 hours ago, Reza said:

    The majority of players were born and raised in France. Is the origin of their parents, grandparents, and distant ancestors matter?

    It matters in terms of genetics. No standard Frenchman has the genetics of Pogba or Mbappe.


  19. On 7/15/2018 at 4:12 PM, ShiaMan14 said:

    Sounds like sore loser talk.

    Dominating possession is not the aim of the game. It's to score goals.

    This wasn't tiki taka. They were actually creating opportunities to score. Dominating possession with sideways passes is very different from consistently creating chances to score. France had two goals in the first half, and ONE shot. (neither of their goals came from that one shot).

    The first French goal was indefensible because the free kick which created the goal was an obvious dive.

    The second French goal... I dunno, I would not have rewarded that penalty. It looked like it was probably intentional but it barely even affected the trajectory of the ball. You can't reward a team a goal for that.

    The third and fourth French goals were legit... but Subasic should have at least have saved one of those. And he would have if he weren't hurt. You saw it yourself: he didn't even move.


  20. 4 hours ago, ShiaMan14 said:

    Best team in the tournament won the WC.

    Anyone who says otherwise is just a h8er

    First goal was on an undeserved set piece. Second was a pen. Their two "real" goals were because apparently Croatia was fine with playing a keeper who was on one leg.

    Croatia dominated France for most of the game. The problem is that this sport is silly and stupid and cruel. The results often don't match the truth on the field.


  21. 10 minutes ago, Shaykh Patience101 said:

    I think the entire first half was a vindication of my viewpoint.

    And I didn't even get to watch the second half so I have no idea what happened to England. Heard it was bad, though.

    Extra time wasn't even worth watching in my opinion; the most disappointing thing was how gassed the English players were, despite Croatia going to penalties in both of their last two games.

     

    Can't beat the virility of the Slavs, that's for sure.

     

    I have a thought right now... and I know you all will tell me "baradar, stop being hung up on Iran. It's over. Get over it."

     

    But I am.

     

    And I won't.

     

    And looking at how far Russia got in this cup, nearly reaching the semifinal, I can't help but think we could have done serious damage. If there is one team in this entire tournament built to play for penalty kicks, it's our team. Am I right or am I right?

×
×
  • Create New...