Has anyone seen the debate between Dave Smith and Dinesh D'Souza? D'Souza has been obsessively posting in favor of Israel, and making fake 'documentaries' making really weird claims about the Bible prophesying the fight between Hamas and Israel. Really bizarre.
But he humiliated himself utterly in this debate. I had to listen to it again just to make sure that I heard everything correctly.
He claimed that the Cold War was a war, even though 'bullets didn't fly', because missiles were built. He simultaneously claimed that invading Venezuela, killing a hundred people and kidnapping their president was not a war.
He said that Europe is too lax in its enforcement of 'hate speech laws'. He cited the Emirates as a good example of fighting Islamism and quoted one of their guys as saying: "In America and Europe, anti-semitism is an opinion, here it is a crime".
He claimed that America helping the Islamists in Afghanistan fighting the Soviets was an example of an intervention that was a great success.
He unironically cited the "narco-terrorist" line about Venezuela to justify the invasion. Later on, he admitted that it was just a pretext and claimed that it was about Maduro allegedly emptying prisons into the US.
At one point, he said that he only supports wars that are in accordance with "our values and our interests". Then he said that he supports Venezuela because they have oil that we want. His values include stealing other people's oil?
He's also a Machiavellian through and through. He advocated for ignoring the constitutional prescription that only Congress can declare war, saying that Congress doesn't do much. Exactly the leftist excuse for judicial lawmaking: "Congress didn't do what we wanted, so the judiciary had to act." And at the end, he mocked Dave Smith for believing that Congress should have the ability to declare war, not the president, because Congress is easier to influence by moneyed interests. As if Smith would then say: "You know, Dinesh, I never thought of it that way. I guess that since Congress is easier to manipulate, we should just ignore the Constitution".
All in all, a complete embarrassment. It really wasn't worth the $7,000.
I remember during one of the Gulf Wars, one of the reasons given for not invading Iraq was because they killed a bunch of Muslims with their border skirmishes with Iran.
Muslims, much like Communist, seem to like to fight each other to prove they are the true believers.
While it's true that Muslims love to fight Muslims, this is different. Obviously, Saddam the secularist wasn't fighting Iran to show who is the real Muslim. Iraq invaded Iran in large part due to the USG asking them. It then used chemical weapons that the USG supplied them, while it used its diplomatic leverage to prevent any consequences for thos actions.
It makes sense to protect people who committed war crimes on your behalf.