Widespread Damage at US Bases.

Correct, it happens in the Middle East. They have never attacked us on our soil. If we wouldn’t be over there those Americans would still be with their families.
You really ARE stupid, aren't you? Remove your head from your butt every now and again and live in the real world. They attacked our embassy 47 years ago and held our people hostage for 444 days. They let them go because they knew that Reagan was ready to bomb the hell out of them.
 
Marco Rubio explained in plain language years ago why Iran must be stopped from acquiring nuclear weapons at all cost.

 
You really ARE stupid, aren't you? Remove your head from your butt every now and again and live in the real world. They attacked our embassy 47 years ago and held our people hostage for 444 days. They let them go because they knew that Reagan was ready to bomb the hell out of them.
Why did those young people take hostages?

I’ve explained this more than once.

We did a regime change I believe it was in 1954. Iran was a westernized country at that point. And we put in what they have today. 27 years later, Those people before 1954 knew what it was before we did a regime change. I’m sure they were telling their kids and or grandkids what it was like before America did what they did. The hostage situation took place due to the fact that we literally changed everything they had.

I’m not stupid. I understand hurt. I understand tragedy. I understand pain. I understand loss. I understand loosing siblings. I understand suicide. I understand loosing family before they were in their 40’s. I understand children never to have their parent walk through their home again. I understand parents never to see their child again. And this is what we are making the innocent Iran people go through.

And I understand what happened in 1954 all because of oil. Iran has never attacked us on our soil. Neither did the Iraqis, Lybia or the others I could name. How many years were we in Iraq? How many innocent children died over there. How many soldiers never came home to their parents, siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents? Tell me Iraq was a success go ahead please tell me that was a success. Tell me Lybia was a success. Tell me Afghanistan was a success. Tell me Vietnam was a success.

Next question.
 
Last edited:
Why did those young people take hostages?

I’ve explained this more than once.

We did a regime change I believe it was in 1954. Iran was a westernized country at that point. And we put in what they have today. 27 years later, Those people before 1954 knew what it was before we did a regime change. I’m sure they were telling their kids and or grandkids what it was like before America did what they did. The hostage situation took place due to the fact that we literally changed everything they had.
Well you are getting closer. But.

You are correct in that we helped overthrow their elected government and restored the Shah to the throne. You are partly correct in that it was about oil. The elected government was going to nationalize the oil industry. The oil companies would have lost their business to the Iranian government. The Shah and the elected government were both "western" by definition. Iran developed into a modern country with a broad western culture. The Islamic radicals eventually took over the country via revolution. The attack on the US embassy was in response to our part in bringing western culture to Iran. The goal was to punish the infidels that had polluted their country with western values. That is the reason they call us the Great Satan. The revolution replaced the regime of the Shah with the ayatollah and his government. They reigned in the western cultural traditions via arrests and executions, replacing them with Islamic radicalism and sharia law. That is what they have now. It is arguably true that what they have today came about because of our previous actions. But it is incorrect to say that we put in what "they have today".
 
Well you are getting closer. But.

You are correct in that we helped overthrow their elected government and restored the Shah to the throne. You are partly correct in that it was about oil. The elected government was going to nationalize the oil industry. The oil companies would have lost their business to the Iranian government. The Shah and the elected government were both "western" by definition. Iran developed into a modern country with a broad western culture. The Islamic radicals eventually took over the country via revolution. The attack on the US embassy was in response to our part in bringing western culture to Iran. The goal was to punish the infidels that had polluted their country with western values. That is the reason they call us the Great Satan. The revolution replaced the regime of the Shah with the ayatollah and his government. They reigned in the western cultural traditions via arrests and executions, replacing them with Islamic radicalism and sharia law. That is what they have now. It is arguably true that what they have today came about because of our previous actions. But it is incorrect to say that we put in what "they have today".
Yes our CIA helped. I didn’t realize I needed to be soooo specific.

“came about because of our previous actions” tells me what they have is because of what we did.

I already said in a previous post that they were going to nationalize oil. I get tired of repeating myself. But I guess it’s good for some people on here that I don’t keep repeating myself because it allows people like you a chance to “believe” you’re correcting me and feel super duper educated, well read and self proclaimed historians. 🙄
 
Yes our CIA helped. I didn’t realize I needed to be soooo specific.

“came about because of our previous actions” tells me what they have is because of what we did.

I already said in a previous post that they were going to nationalize oil. I get tired of repeating myself. But I guess it’s good for some people on here that I don’t keep repeating myself because it allows people like you a chance to “believe” you’re correcting me and feel super duper educated, well read and self proclaimed historians. 🙄
You said "we put in what they have today" which is wrong. We did not.
 
John Gill predates Zionism. He would indict you as an apostate for what you think of present day Israel™.

Here's Matthew Henry's commentary:

4. He gives a character of the child she should bear, which, however it may seem to us, perhaps was not very disagreeable to her (v. 12): He will be a wild man; a wild ass of a man(so the word is), rude, and bold, and fearing no man-untamed, untractable living at large, and impatient of service and restraint. Note, The children of the bondwoman, who are out of covenant with God, are, as they were born, like the wild ass's colt; it is grace that reclaims men, civilizes them, and makes them wise, and good for something. It is foretold,​
  • (1.) That he should live in strife, and in a state of war: His hand against every man-this is his sin; and every man's hand against him-this is his punishment. Note, Those that have turbulent spirits have commonly troublesome lives; those that are provoking, vexatious, and injurious to others, must expect to be repaid in their own coin. He that has his hand and tongue against every man shall have every man's hand and tongue against him, and he has no reason to complain of it. And yet,

​
​
Who has been kicked out of practically every nation for their troublemaking?
What does Matthew Henry’s opinion have to do with John Gill? And if you compare the historical proof that the trouble Arabs have caused to western society to Judaism, you’re absolutely goofy. But I’m all ears, make your case and show your work.
 

Ekklesian​

"John Gill predates Zionism. He would indict you as an apostate for what you think of present day Israel™.

Zionism - The belief that Jewish people share the right to live safely, freely, and independently in their historic homeland. Charles Spurgeon shared the same pulpit and followed very much in the footprints of John Gill.

Spurgeon on Zechariah –
“This vision and prophecy graciously reveal the future history of Jerusalem. We may spiritualize it and say Jerusalem signifies the church, but we should not forget the literal meaning of the words. The Jewish people and their royal city will remain the center of the manifestations of divine glory. The nations of the earth will be joined to the Lord, a suburban population to the chosen city. Jerusalem will be rebuilt in more than her former splendor; the Jews will be restored to their own land; and Messiah will reign as a prince of the house of David.” The Spurgeon Study Bible

John Gill on Amos 9:14 - “And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel,.... Which is not to be understood of the captivity of the Jews in Babylon, and their return from thence, with whom some of the ten tribes of Israel were mixed; for they were not then so planted in their own land as no more to be pulled up again, as is here promised; for they afterwards were dispossessed of it by the Romans, and carried captive, and dispersed among the nations again; but the captivity both of Judah and Israel is meant, their present captivity, which will be brought back, and they will be delivered from it, and return to their own land, and possess it as long as it is a land; see Jer_30:3; as well as be freed from the bondage of sin, Satan, and the law, under which they have been detained some hundreds of years; but now shall be delivered into the glorious liberty of the children of God, of Christians, with which Christ has made them free:

and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; literally the cities in Judea wasted by the Turks, and others; and mystically the churches of Christ, of which saints are fellow citizens, and will be in a desolate condition before the conversion of the Jews, and the gathering in the fulness of the Gentiles; but by these means will be rebuilt, and be in a flourishing condition, and fall of inhabitants:

and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them; which, as before, will be literally true; and in a spiritual sense may signify the churches of Christ, compared to vineyards and gardens, which will be planted everywhere, and be set with pleasant and fruitful plants, and will turn to the advantage of those who have been instruments in planting them; see Son_6:2.”

John Gill on Romans 11:26 - And so all Israel shall be saved,.... Meaning not the mystical spiritual Israel of God, consisting both of Jews and Gentiles, who shall appear to be saved in the Lord with an everlasting salvation, when all God's elect among the latter are gathered in, which is the sense many give into; but the people of the Jews, the generality of them, the body of that nation, called "the fulness" of them, Rom_11:12, and relates to the latter day, when a nation of them shall be born again at once; “

There is no reason to spiritualize the prophecies of the regathering of the Jews to their homeland. Many Reformed theologians believed in a future conversion of national/ethnic Israel that don’t don’t conform 100% to your beliefs.
 
Back
Top