Did you hear about the US jet fighter buzzing an Iranian passenger airliner ?

When you lie such as claiming I'm a Hillary supporter when clearly I am not, it just makes you look like a loudmouthed fucking moron.

Congrats on making early release, but if you violate parole, no more computers for you!

When you claim to be a gentlemen, it makes you look like a goddamn fool.

I was hoping your entire family had died from Covid. Less welfare leeches in society. Less n-l to infest society.
 
When you claim to be a gentlemen, it makes you look like a goddamn fool.

I was hoping your entire family had died from Covid. Less welfare leeches in society. Less n-l to infest society.

I didn't claim to be a gentleman, convict. I said I made a "gentleman's bet" which is a standard term...and it's understandable why you never heard of it.

Of course you did, that's how you swing. You're so angry I think you're one hissy fit away from murdering your entire family then going on a shooting rampage murdering children. In fact, that was another gentleman's bet I had: that you were in prison for murder.
 
What variety of pseudo-patriotic dumbass would attempt to call buzzing a civilian airliner ' legal ' when the US jet's presence in the airspace was illegal in itself ?

Your moronic arrogance- and brainwashing- have convinced you that you know more about Iran than Iranians.

What was "illegal" about it? Or, are you just parroting what the Iranian government claims?
 
What was "illegal" about it? Or, are you just parroting what the Iranian government claims?

The evidence to date is that the fighter dangerously buzzed a civilian airliner. What's legal about that, Buck Rogers ?

All claims of a ' legitimate inspection ' are denied as the aircraft itself was there illegally.


Or are you just parroting the criminal claims of the occupying US administration ?
 
The evidence to date is that the fighter dangerously buzzed a civilian airliner. What's legal about that, Buck Rogers ?

All claims of a ' legitimate inspection ' are denied as the aircraft itself was there illegally.

The international standard for approach in an interception is 500 feet minimum. This plane was over 1500 feet away. Interception and inspection are allowed. Show who's claiming the plane was "there illegally" other than Iran.
 
The international standard for approach in an interception is 500 feet minimum. This plane was over 1500 feet away. Interception and inspection are allowed. Show who's claiming the plane was "there illegally" other than Iran.

The fighter buzzed the passenger airliner dangerously- as described by the evidence. That's illegal. What is the point of me even conversing with somebody who doesn't know that the occupation of other people's countries runs contrary to international law ? Do you even know where the illegal interception took place, Buck ?
 
The fighter buzzed the passenger airliner dangerously. That's illegal. What is the point of me even conversing with somebody who doesn't know that the occupation of other people's countries runs contrary to international law ?

I just pointed out that it wasn't a dangerous interception. It was conducted well within international law. The US as a nation has a right to declare war on another nation under many circumstances and did so. That too is considered legal, like it or not. The airliner was in a war zone. That makes a positive identification more necessary to prevent accidental loss of life.
Or, should the US just have shot it down like Iran did or Russia has done?
 
I just pointed out that it wasn't a dangerous interception. It was conducted well within international law. The US as a nation has a right to declare war on another nation under many circumstances and did so. That too is considered legal, like it or not. The airliner was in a war zone. That makes a positive identification more necessary to prevent accidental loss of life.
Or, should the US just have shot it down like Iran did or Russia has done?

Now you're talking out of your ass. The US hasn't ' declared war ' and even if it had then ' declarations of war ' have been illegal since the early 20th century. Occupation is illegal and the US most certainly does not have the permission of the sovereign party.
You're a bit of a dinosaur, aincha Buck.
 
Now you're talking out of your ass. The US hasn't ' declared war ' and even if it had then ' declarations of war ' have been illegal since the early 20th century. Occupation is illegal and the US most certainly does not have the permission of the sovereign party.
You're a bit of a dinosaur, aincha Buck.

You have anything other than ad hominem to offer?
 
Dude, I'm a professional pilot with 20 years in the military and 25 years as an airline pilot. You don't know what the fuck you are talking about. All you are trying to do is tar the US and praise the Iranians. Good luck with your war against the US. You're going to need it.

Prove it.
 
I didn't claim to be a gentleman, convict. I said I made a "gentleman's bet" which is a standard term...and it's understandable why you never heard of it.

Of course you did, that's how you swing. You're so angry I think you're one hissy fit away from murdering your entire family then going on a shooting rampage murdering children. In fact, that was another gentleman's bet I had: that you were in prison for murder.

Only gentlemen can make a gentlemen's bet. At least you acknowledged you're not one and a liar at the same time.

It means I don't care about those not worthing caring.

I've already told you boy, you can't make a gentlemen's bet. You have no honor and can't be trusted.
 
Only gentlemen can make a gentlemen's bet. At least you acknowledged you're not one and a liar at the same time.

It means I don't care about those not worthing caring.

I've already told you boy, you can't make a gentlemen's bet. You have no honor and can't be trusted.

Soooo, by your logic you have to be a race horse to make a horse racing bet. Sorry, but I disagree.

Your assumptions are interesting, but wrong. Is it because you've been "away" for so long?
 
Soooo, by your logic you have to be a race horse to make a horse racing bet. Sorry, but I disagree.

Your assumptions are interesting, but wrong. Is it because you've been "away" for so long?

Disagree all you want. By your logic you can do something involving a characteristic that doesn't apply to you. Next thing you'll say is that you can be a medical doctor without medical degree.
 
Designate the form of proof and make it worth my while.

That's not up to me since I'm not the one providing the proof. It has to have enough information to be verifiable. Provide what you think and I'll determine whether or not it's good enough.
 
Disagree all you want. By your logic you can do something involving a characteristic that doesn't apply to you. Next thing you'll say is that you can be a medical doctor without medical degree.

Obviously you are so focused on pointing out I'm not a gentleman that you are blind to the fact "gentleman's bet" is a phrase. Even your daddy, whoever he is, can make a "gentleman's bet". Same for your mom even if she doesn't remember your daddy.

gentleman's bet
English Noun
gentleman's bet (plural gentlemen's bets)

A bet in which no money is bet; only the honor of the two parties is at stake. There is no need for proof that one party's side of the bet has been fulfilled; he or she is taken at their word.
 
Obviously you are so focused on pointing out I'm not a gentleman that you are blind to the fact "gentleman's bet" is a phrase. Even your daddy, whoever he is, can make a "gentleman's bet". Same for your mom even if she doesn't remember your daddy.

gentleman's bet
English Noun
gentleman's bet (plural gentlemen's bets)

A bet in which no money is bet; only the honor of the two parties is at stake. There is no need for proof that one party's side of the bet has been fulfilled; he or she is taken at their word.

My dad was a gentlemen. He had honor and could be taken at his word. No one is your family has ever been found to have or be able to do either one.
 
Back
Top