James Delmore
1K posts
James Delmore
@JamesDelmore1
Dedicated to making the world a better place. Blockchain Adoption Specialist. Digital Nomad. Former Fox News Analyst.
New York, NY Katılım Nisan 2013
1K Takip Edilen379 Takipçiler
@ggreenwald Have you spoken to any Iranians in the diaspora? Or even in Iran (difficult because they don’t have internet)? I have and I’ll be posting about it soon. I hope you read my articles on it
English
Look at the number of people under this tweet claiming Iranians in Iran are eager for Trump to bomb all their power plants and bridges so they can live without power for years or decades.
Only Hannity-watching Americans could be convinced that people want to be bombed this way:
Glenn Greenwald@ggreenwald
If Trump ever followed through on his repeated threats to "knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran" -- a threat repeated today -- those who spent months pretending to care about The Iranian People will drop that deceitful facade in about 3 seconds:
English
@timmbach @Fab20 @ggreenwald I want to learn! Please teach wise sir! Please help me get over my embarrassment of ignorance and learn your ways to be successful in life. I’m sure you are highly successful and accomplished great things. Please teach me!
English
@JamesDelmore1 @Fab20 @ggreenwald You're clearly uneducated and proud of you ignorance. AKA a bumbling idiotic waste of time.
English
MAGA war supporters spent all day yesterday celebrating their leader's glorious war triumph because Trump told them Iran gave him everything he demanded in exchange for nothing.
They live in a fabricated Fox reality where Trump destroyed Iran and Iran thus surrendered to him:
The Wall Street Journal@WSJ
Iran's military said the Strait of Hormuz is closed again, prompting ships to turn back on.wsj.com/4sFeW6Q
English
If it’s true that you are right and I am wrong there is nothing embarrassing about being wrong and learning. According to you it is better when centralized power (i.e., governments) control the resources and industries of an area they have sovereign control over. I’m saying that has not only never worked in human history, but I also claim that it is deeply immoral and wrong and amounts to theft.
English
@JamesDelmore1 @ggreenwald Mate, you really need to go back to school before embarrassing yourself further
English
@Fab20 @ggreenwald Nationalizing industries is theft of private property. Any government that does it should lose all legitimacy.
English
@JamesDelmore1 @ggreenwald Yes, it’s state run. Many countries have nationalised industries. You are moving goal posts with each tweet. Am not surprised you have been a ‘Fox News analyst’. Sanctions are illegal under UN charter and prevent Iran trading freely with rest of world including foreign companies
English
@Fab20 @ggreenwald What are you talking about? The Iranian government controls the oil, not private companies.
English
@JamesDelmore1 @ggreenwald You just answered your own question. It’s the sanctions that keep companies away. After Obama deal, and lifting of sanctions, many companies had advanced plans to do business in Iran until Trump reneged on the treaty. Around that time moderates had the upper hand
English
@Fab20 @ggreenwald They want far more than “better governance”, they want to be free. Allowing private companies to operate in Iran is not “pillaging” it
English
@JamesDelmore1 @ggreenwald Many Iranians want better governance but to impose a puppet regime who would let US/Israel pillage the country is not the freedom they are after; it’s slavery. The change must be gradual and organic. Lifting sanctions will help achieve this.
English
@hansvshans @ggreenwald It took my ten seconds to find the answer. Apparently that means I claim to be an expert in your world.
English
@JamesDelmore1 @ggreenwald James Delmore, expert on what the "Iranian people want" Shut the fuck up retard
English
@ggreenwald @ggreenwald Apparently you are unaware that the Iranian people support this war. Trump and Netanyahu’s motivations are irrelevant. If this Iranian regime is removed then the opportunity to finally free the people is there.
English
@JamesDelmore1 There are still people left who think that Netanyahu and Trump's war is about freeing the Iranian people? That's scary: that there are people walking around this easily deceived.
English
@GeneSohoForum @GeneSohoForum, sure I'm happy to read her book. Regarding your other point: the US lost a lot of soldiers in Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s and I have no bitterness towards Vietnam or the Vietnamese people. Additionally, the Iranian people almost universally support this war.
English
@JamesDelmore1 James, I encourage you to read Trita Parsi's LOSING AN ENEMY, re 2015 nuke Iran agreement signed, w/US directly involved. Otherwise, if US suffered 100s of thousands of casualties in 1980s, w/Iran's support w/chemical weapons, would YOU BLAME Americans for bitter feelings?!
English
"America, with the same voice which spoke herself into existence as a nation, proclaimed to mankind the inextinguishable rights of human nature, and the only lawful foundations of government. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy." John Quincy Adams
James Delmore@JamesDelmore1
The Libertarian Case for the Iran War There is one country where a theocratic government has spent 46 years brutalizing its people, where the population has risen up again and again and been slaughtered for it, where every international institution has failed spectacularly, and where nuclear weapons could soon make the regime basically untouchable. Despite these facts, most libertarians deeply oppose the Iran war. But if libertarianism can't grapple with that case — if the only answer the philosophy produces is "not our problem" — then it's not a serious framework for thinking about human liberty. Below is a summary of Dr. Walter Block and I's five core arguments for why this war is just according to Libertarian principles. I. Iran's Government Has Lost Its Sovereignty Sovereignty is not a blank check. A government's legitimacy is conditional — it is earned and maintained by protecting the natural rights of the people it governs. This is foundational to everything from Locke to Rothbard. The Islamic Republic of Iran executes political dissidents. It hangs gay men from cranes in public squares. It imprisons women for the crime of showing their hair. It shoots unarmed protesters in the streets and tortures journalists in basement cells. It has waged a four-decade war against the very population it claims to represent. A regime that systematically destroys the rights of its own citizens has forfeited its claim to sovereign protection. You cannot invoke the rights of nations while annihilating the rights of persons. The two concepts are not independent of each other — the former derives entirely from the latter. This is not a novel argument. It is the logical extension of principles libertarians already hold. We are simply applying them consistently. II. Individual Sovereignty Trumps State Sovereignty This is the heart of the argument. A state is only legitimate insofar as it exists to protect the individual rights of its citizens. When a government becomes the primary violator of those rights — not an occasional violator, not an imperfect protector, but the primary threat to life, liberty, and property — its authority is philosophically void. The Iranian people never consented to theocratic rule. There was no social contract. There was a revolution, followed by a consolidation of power by religious authoritarians who have maintained control through surveillance, censorship, and violence ever since. The people have protested. They have rebelled. They have bled — repeatedly, across generations — trying to reclaim their autonomy. Their individual sovereignty is not a Western construct or an American export. It is a universal principle. Natural rights are natural. They do not stop at a border. If libertarians believe this — and we claim to — then we must accept that 70 million Iranians possess rights that their government is actively and violently destroying every single day. The question is whether we mean it or whether it's just something we say at conferences. III. The UN Has Proven It Cannot Protect Individuals Libertarians are already skeptical of international institutions, so this argument should require the least persuasion. The United Nations has issued resolution after resolution condemning Iran's human rights abuses. Special rapporteurs have filed detailed reports documenting systematic torture, extrajudicial killings, and the suppression of ethnic and religious minorities. Committees have convened. Statements have been released. The result? Nothing. The regime has gotten worse, not better. It sits on UN human rights committees while operating some of the most brutal prisons on earth. It has expanded its military reach across the Middle East through proxy forces while the international community has watched and issued more statements. If the institution designed to protect global human rights has failed to do so for over forty years — and it has — then continuing to wait for it to act is not principled patience. It is abandonment dressed in procedural language. The Iranian people cannot file another appeal. They cannot wait another four decades for a committee to convene. IV. US and Israeli Strikes Will Likely Save Iranian Lives This is the most counterintuitive of the five arguments, and the one that demands the most intellectual honesty. The Iranian regime has killed more Iranians than any foreign military. In the 2019 protests alone, credible estimates put the death toll between 300 and 1,500 citizens killed by their own government. The regime spends billions on the IRGC, on Hezbollah, on its nuclear program — resources extracted from a population suffering under economic mismanagement and international sanctions that exist because of the regime's behavior. Precision strikes targeting military and nuclear infrastructure are not aimed at the Iranian people. They are aimed at the apparatus that oppresses them. Every IRGC installation degraded is one less tool the regime can deploy against the next generation of protesters. Every nuclear facility disrupted is one step further from a world in which this regime becomes permanently untouchable. The alternative to intervention is not peace. The alternative is a nuclear-armed theocracy that will be beyond any external pressure forever, free to continue crushing its own people behind closed doors indefinitely. That is not the libertarian outcome. That is the nightmare scenario. V. Popularity and Congressional Process Do Not Determine Moral Legitimacy The war is unpopular. Congress has not formally declared it. These are legitimate concerns, and we do not dismiss them. But libertarians of all people should understand that popularity does not equal morality. Slavery was popular. Jim Crow had broad congressional support. The Fugitive Slave Act was duly passed by elected representatives. The question has never been "do the polls support this?" The question is: "Are individual rights being violated, and can they be defended?" Constitutional constraints on executive war-making power exist for good reason and should be respected. We are not arguing otherwise. But procedural objections cannot become a moral shield behind which we hide while millions suffer under tyranny. If the principle is right, the argument over process is important but secondary. Rights exist before votes. That is what makes them rights. Read our full arguments: The Libertarian Case for Trump's Iran War: Persians Have Natural Rights, Too washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-amer… The Libertarian Case for Trump's Iran War: Answering the Critics washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-amer… We welcome the debate. @ComicDaveSmith @ggreenwald @GlennJacobsTN @LPNational @TRHLofficial @LLibertadAvanza @LPNH @PeterSchiff @ericbolling @RealWayneRoot @geraldposner @PatrickByrne @patrickbetdavid @RubinReport @Jerusalem_Post @jeremykauffman @GadSaad @BretWeinstein @GeneSohoForum @kennedy @jeffreytucker @feeonline
English
@GeneSohoForum @GeneSohoForum I didn't think you did! I was merely using it as an example as to why Iran could still have good relations with the US despite the US's past support for Iraq during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War.
English
@JamesDelmore1 James, I'm not sure why you think I could possibly disagree with this general principle of peaceful relations with other nations, despite past conflicts.
English
@ggreenwald @ggreenwald have you ever spoken to an Arab-Israeli or Druze-Israeli or any non-Jewish israeli citizen?
English
Wherever Israel goes, young children are slaughtered and massacred like this, because -- and it's so vital to understand this about Israel -- that state does not assign value to the human life of anyone outside of the dominant, supreme ethno-religious group that rules it.
Saul Staniforth@SaulStaniforth
"she was 4 years old & called Lamar.. when they found her body she'd been decapitated. Her mother was killed with her" @AlexCrawfordSky reporting from Lebanon
English
@PeterSchiff @PeterSchiff please read the Libertarian Case for the Iran War by Walter Block and I.
washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-amer…
English
Trump using the U.S. Navy to blockade the Strait of Hormuz could easily be considered an act of war by other nations impacted by the action. What right does the U.S. have to use military force to prevent China from buying oil? However, China’s right to retaliate would seem clear.
English
@GeneSohoForum Right but just because a country like Japan did bad things to the U.S. in the past it doesn't mean I want the U.S. to antagonize them today. The US can have peaceful relations today with countries in which they had bad relations with in the past. Don't you agree?
English
I trust you agree the US materially supported the 1980-88 war Iraq initiated vs. Iran, supplying Iraq w/materials for aggressive chemical weapons use? & that Iran signed a July 2015 agreement, allowing International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to monitor its nuclear facilities on an ongoing basis?
English
JUST IN: Iran reportedly may pause shipping through the Strait of Hormuz to respect the blockade & avoid jeopardizing U.S. talks.
English
El artículo completo de Walter Block y yo se puede ver aquí en inglés:
washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-amer…
Español
Puede un libertario apoyar la guerra con Irán? Sí!
Razones clave:
1. Irán ha violado los derechos de millones de personas
2. Los derechos individuales de los iraníes necesitan protección
3. La ONU ha fallado en defenderlos
3. Los ataques estratégicos podrían salvar vidas
Español