I have never heard of this guy before, but he is a great debater. I love his candid, honest approach to this topic.

Holy shit that caller is a moron.

Galloway is a great debater, I like him, though he has said some weird stuff over the years.

If you enjoyed this look for his testimony before the senate about Iraq and charity donations. He totally took them apart. Funny stuff. An excerpt is sifted but check out the full thing:
http://www.videosift.com/video/British-MP-smacks-down-US-Senator-in-hearing-51705

That was great... I hadn't heard of Galloway before, but I like the cut of his Jib!

Did you folks hear the office paper clip noises in the background though? Check it out at -3:30 & -1:13

The caller remained calm and was not totally batshit crazy until the end where he totally lost it. I mean how could he actually use a war with Iraq as reason for us to go to war with them.

Galloway is another Neville Chamberlain.

This same spinelessness was also evident during the Cold War, when 'useful idiots' in the West tried telling us the Soviets only wanted to "coexist peacefully".

You can only have peace when your enemies fear you. The Iranians don't have the proper fear of extinction they should at the moment.

quantumushroom = insane extremist

Quantumushroom = My ideology is the right ideology and I will kill you if you don't agree.
No different from any fundementalist.

When is self-defense justifiable?

The leftist says "Never" and thinks the Universe somehow smiles on this Enlightened answer. But as the secular humanists love pointing out, there is only 'survival of the fittest'.

Appeasement doesn't work with kooks like I'm-a-Dinner-Jacket. Nor has reason or negotiation. He'll keep trying to get nukes and keep promising to annihilate Israel.

Leftists simply cannot be trusted with national security. The subject doesn't even occur to them.

You're going to have to do better than ad hominem attacks, fellows.

"The leftist says 'Never'...."

My God, you love to lie, don't you?

You understand that attacking a country which poses no threat to your own is a war crime, correct?

You understand that Nazi Germany was guilty of that in WWII, correct?

You understand that your opinions regarding "national security" and "war with Iran" are equal to that of the Nazi Germans, correct?

Or are you going to tell us that Americans are firmly behind this war again, forgetting to add that the only people that you consider American are the people who agree with you?

In short, like Bush, are you going to cover your first lie with a second lie?

The leftist says 'Never'...."

My God, you love to lie, don't you?

>>> Well, "never" is a bit of exaggeration, but the last time the American left got mad enough to fight was over Hitler. Now they show support by waving the Mexican flag.

You understand that attacking a country which poses no threat to your own is a war crime, correct?

>>> You lefties like to proclaim you know the intentions of nations run by weirdos and tyrants, as if you were some kind of magickal seers. Before 9-11 no one would've thought 19 drugged-up virgin engineers with box cutters could take down two skyscrapers. There's damned good reasons no one trusts the left with national self-defense.

You understand that Nazi Germany was guilty of that in WWII, correct?

>>> And look what an awesome job the appeasement weasels did stopping Hitler with worthless pieces of paper!

You understand that your opinions regarding "national security" and "war with Iran" are equal to that of the Nazi Germans, correct?

>>> Mohammed (another leftist hero) believed in preemptive strikes against his enemies. So try to think of bombing Iran as 'celebrating multiculturalism'. We don't have to wipe them out, just scare the hell out of them. "Crazy Americans" is something even the hardiest tyrant understands from the safety of his spider hole.

Or are you going to tell us that Americans are firmly behind this war again, forgetting to add that the only people that you consider American are the people who agree with you?

>>> Public opinion so far favors survival and victory over defeat. I don't care what the appeasers favor, if we lose they won't get what they want anyway. Yeah, it's gotten that bad. One can't worship socialism and expect to gain anything in a free market system except through government extortion and manipulation of the courts. How many generations are going to tolerate these parasites and bandits remains to be seen.

In short, like Bush, are you going to cover your first lie with a second lie?

>>> Right. There's that Bolshevik thingy again...rewriting history and blaming the accuser of the very thing they're guilty of. You can have your lefty mythology if it makes you happy, starting when Bush "stole" the 2000 election and go from there.

Being on the left is matter of endurance and little else. How many times can you watch the same failed ideas fail again and act surprised?

Galloway is spineless weasel.

"You lefties like to proclaim you know the intentions of nations run by weirdos and tyrants, as if you were some kind of magickal seers."

And you are doing the same thing, telling us who the bad guys are and how we should annihilate them. As if YOU were some kind of magical seer.

George Galloway is certainly is a sharp debater. I don't necessarily agree with him on much, though.

One of his main argument in this clip seems to be that attacking Iran is a bad idea because they can retaliate. That's a weak argument. I buy the arguments that we can't trust the intelligence and that Iran may have a right to be developing nuclear facilities. But the threat of terrorism to London shouldn't change your policy. That's just giving in to Iran's brinkmanship. That's rewarding them for supporting terrorism. I don't agree with Galloway that it would be justifiable "self-defense" for them to bomb civilians in London if we strike a nuclear weapons program.

He says Iran is a strong nation to be feared. Then a minute later he says they can't attack anyone and they're not to be feared, and in fact 300 Spartans stopped them.

All of the allegations relating to him, his wife, or his charity benefiting from abuses of the oil-for-food program are also suspect. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Galloway

*dark

Adding video to channels (Dark) - requested by calvados.

I think it important to point out that Galloway opposed the removal of Saddam not on any principals, but because he was personally profiting to the tune of millions off the Oil for Food scandal, and traveled to Iraq and sang Saddam's praises while there.

He doesn't care about or support Arabic and Persian people like he claims, his a sycophantic parasite off the tyrants and dictators repressing them.