peptoabysmal
Illuminator
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2002
- Messages
- 3,466
zenith-nadir
Illuminator
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Messages
- 4,482
Israel has many external threats. One was Saddam who rewarded Palestinian suicide bombers with $US25,000 and fired 39 Scud missiles on Israel in the 1991 Gulf War, killing two Israelis and injuring hundreds.
Today Iran wants to "wipe Israel off the map" and they're lookin' to go nuclear. You have the Iranian/Syrian proxy Hizbollah attacking in the north and Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades lobbing rockets into Israel from Gaza as I type this very post. Oh ya, and how can you forget all that anti-Israel Al Qaeda and Bin Laden rhetoric. Then there's the Saudis, the Tunisians...
So when I hear the "massive aid to Israel" argument, which I illustrated above to be a mind-blowing 0.2% of America's annual spending I wonder why people would object to helping protect Israel from that "love".
Webfusion:
"I loved the opening line of the article -- "All Russian weaponry supplied to Iran is purely for defensive purpose,""
Interesting that the US and Israel should express "concern" about Iran acquiring short range defensive missiles - I'd have thought the US arming Israel with long range, offensive weaponry was more of a problem.
Nor should it be surprising in the least that US aggression should be a strong incentive for other nations to bolster their defenses.
Tut, tut, you'd think that webfusion had never heard of Dick Cheney, first-strike nukes and the Christian/Zionist fundamentalists!
"I loved the opening line of the article -- "All Russian weaponry supplied to Iran is purely for defensive purpose,""
Interesting that the US and Israel should express "concern" about Iran acquiring short range defensive missiles - I'd have thought the US arming Israel with long range, offensive weaponry was more of a problem.
Nor should it be surprising in the least that US aggression should be a strong incentive for other nations to bolster their defenses.
Tut, tut, you'd think that webfusion had never heard of Dick Cheney, first-strike nukes and the Christian/Zionist fundamentalists!
Mephisto
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2005
- Messages
- 6,064
It's just another American case of, "do as we say, not as we do," when it comes to middle-eastern countries and weaponry. We invade because we suspect they have WMD, yet we're selling an inordinate amount of WMD to Israel.
Makes at least as much sense to me as blessing artillery pieces, or destroying a country in order to save it.
zenith-nadir
Illuminator
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Messages
- 4,482
I am not being combative, but please provide the documentation that the USA "sells an inordinate amount of WMD to Israel".
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 20,501
I think we're being a little loose with our definitions here. Weapons of mass destruction are not just anything that can kill people, specifically the concern was something that could be passed along to a terrorist, such as a poison gas or, ultimately, a nuke.
webfusion
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 9,766
loosey goosey
Using flimsy definitions is getting to be a habit around here.
See: "IDF targets civilians" thread in which we're treated to page after page of illustrations of Human Rights Abuses which have nothing to do with targeting.
BTW--- I was fascinated to see the following report in the news yesterday
(I'm posting it here, rather than bump the ridiculously already-too-long "IDF Targets" topic)
Also in the news today, another clearly absurd definition is offered by none other than Saddam Hussein himself, in his court appearance:
**** webfusion tosses the dictionary out the window ****
Meanwhile, Mephisto is keeping quiet about the WMD that the US sells to Israel. He may not want to reveal State Secrets (that only he has knowledge of?) !!!
Using flimsy definitions is getting to be a habit around here.
See: "IDF targets civilians" thread in which we're treated to page after page of illustrations of Human Rights Abuses which have nothing to do with targeting.
BTW--- I was fascinated to see the following report in the news yesterday
(I'm posting it here, rather than bump the ridiculously already-too-long "IDF Targets" topic)
- Security officials decided Monday night, in wake of the bombing and the constant barrage of Qassam rockets on communities in the south of the country, to adopt a harsher response to the rocket fire emanating from the Gaza Strip.
Israeli artillery fire against the Qassam launchers that had been aimed, for the most part, only at open areas will now be directed also at built-up areas from where the rockets are being fired.
Ahead of the artillery fire at the built-up areas, the Israel Defense Forces will employ loudspeakers to ask the Palestinian residents to clear the area.
Also in the news today, another clearly absurd definition is offered by none other than Saddam Hussein himself, in his court appearance:
- Saddam, dressed in a dark suit and white shirt and clutching a Quran, complained that he and the seven other defendants were tired and had been deprived of opportunities to shower, have a change of clothes, exercise or go for a smoke.
"This is terrorism," he declared.
**** webfusion tosses the dictionary out the window ****
Meanwhile, Mephisto is keeping quiet about the WMD that the US sells to Israel. He may not want to reveal State Secrets (that only he has knowledge of?) !!!
Last edited:
Mephisto
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2005
- Messages
- 6,064
I guess I might first say that I believe Israel has been doing spectacular things recently regarding keeping the peace - I was impressed that they made such large concessions (in spite of the fact that the settlers that were moved made a little money) in land, and I think it put the responsibility of future peaceful acts firmly in the lap of the Palestinians. Of course, that doesn't mean that the extremists on both sides aren't still itching for blood.
That said, I think that the U.S. supports Israel far too much militarily. It has become a crutch that I believe hinders the peace process. Certainly an overabundance of conventional weaponry can still be considered WMD, and when that conventional weaponry is the latest high-tech available it becomes redundant in an area where most casualties occur on a bus or a marketplace.
Here are a few sources that you might find interesting.
_______
"Israel does receive aid on more favorable terms than other nations. For example, all economic aid is given directly to the Israeli government rather than allocated under a specific program. Also, starting in 1982, Israel began to receive all its economic aid in a lump sum early in the fiscal year instead of in quarterly installments as is done for other countries (for 2000, Israel received $1.37 billion of its military aid in the first month and the remaining $550 million was delayed for budgetary reasons). Israel is not required to provide an accounting of how the funds are used. Israel also receives offsets on FMS purchases (U.S. contractors agree to offset some of the cost of military equipment by buying components or materials from Israel).
As of December 31, 2001, Israel owed the United States government $1.977 billion in direct economic and military loans."
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/foreign_aid.html
_________
Israel is the largest recipient of US foreign aid. It is already due to get $2.04 billion in military assistance and $720 million in economic aid in fiscal 2003. It has been getting $3 billion a year for years.
Adjusting the official aid to 2001 dollars in purchasing power, Israel has been given $240 billion since 1973, Stauffer reckons. In addition, the US has given Egypt $117 billion and Jordan $22 billion in foreign aid in return for signing peace treaties with Israel.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1209/p16s01-wmgn.html
_______
Sorry I didn't answer you sooner, ZN. I got off on a tangent when I came back to the forum and didn't see your post right away.
Last edited:
Mephisto:
"I guess I might first say that I believe Israel has been doing spectacular things recently regarding keeping the peace - I was impressed that they made such large concessions (in spite of the fact that the settlers that were moved made a little money) in land, and I think it put the responsibility of future peaceful acts firmly in the lap of the Palestinians."
I wouldn`t see it as spectacular exactly.
A tiny number of settlers were moved and handsomely compensated and Israel gave up the rights to land that is pretty worthless. However this also meant that a hugely expensive occupation (in terms of money and military resources), was eliminated. And all this over land which was illegally occupied and settled by Israel in the first case. I wonder if is it painful for people to return something they stole from you? Maybe so - but I wouldn`t congratulate them for it.
I will grant that strategically it was a very good stunt to pull . Sharon gave up something he and most of Israel didn't care about much, but in such a way that most of the world seems to accept that it was a great sacrifice. This of course leaves the door open for further expansion and consolidation in the West Bank and allows the Israeli regime to continue committing crimes by the thousand against the Palestinians.
Israel has yet to give up a damn thing in the areas that its ruling class cares about - the West Bank and Jerusalem.
Sharon's intention in evacuating Gaza was to put the peace process "in formaldehyde", not to engage in any kind of negotiation with the Palestinians, and the consequence has been to create a giant open air prison which the Israeli military can still attack at will.
"I guess I might first say that I believe Israel has been doing spectacular things recently regarding keeping the peace - I was impressed that they made such large concessions (in spite of the fact that the settlers that were moved made a little money) in land, and I think it put the responsibility of future peaceful acts firmly in the lap of the Palestinians."
I wouldn`t see it as spectacular exactly.
A tiny number of settlers were moved and handsomely compensated and Israel gave up the rights to land that is pretty worthless. However this also meant that a hugely expensive occupation (in terms of money and military resources), was eliminated. And all this over land which was illegally occupied and settled by Israel in the first case. I wonder if is it painful for people to return something they stole from you? Maybe so - but I wouldn`t congratulate them for it.
I will grant that strategically it was a very good stunt to pull . Sharon gave up something he and most of Israel didn't care about much, but in such a way that most of the world seems to accept that it was a great sacrifice. This of course leaves the door open for further expansion and consolidation in the West Bank and allows the Israeli regime to continue committing crimes by the thousand against the Palestinians.
Israel has yet to give up a damn thing in the areas that its ruling class cares about - the West Bank and Jerusalem.
Sharon's intention in evacuating Gaza was to put the peace process "in formaldehyde", not to engage in any kind of negotiation with the Palestinians, and the consequence has been to create a giant open air prison which the Israeli military can still attack at will.
Last edited:
webfusion
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 9,766
very strange request, demo
The Iranian President was directly quoting the late Ayatallah Khomeni (Makh Shemo):
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has openly called for Israel to be wiped off the map. "The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world," the president told a conference in Tehran on Wednesday, entitled The World without Zionism.
"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land," he said.
"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayatallah Khomeini.
((((( from aljazeera )))))
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/15E6BF77-6F91-46EE-A4B5-A3CE0E9957EA.htm
Too bad you weren't at the conference, demo, you probably would have had fun, hangin' out with th' home-boys.
The Iranian President was directly quoting the late Ayatallah Khomeni (Makh Shemo):
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has openly called for Israel to be wiped off the map. "The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world," the president told a conference in Tehran on Wednesday, entitled The World without Zionism.
"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land," he said.
"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, referring to Iran's revolutionary leader Ayatallah Khomeini.
((((( from aljazeera )))))
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/15E6BF77-6F91-46EE-A4B5-A3CE0E9957EA.htm
Too bad you weren't at the conference, demo, you probably would have had fun, hangin' out with th' home-boys.
webbie:
"very strange request, demo"
Not really.
I`ve been reading the statement by Ahmadinejad as posted on the National Council of Resistance of Iran website and no where does he say "Israel must be wiped off the map".
He does say "Our dear Imam [Khomeini] ordered that the occupying regime in Jerusalem be wiped off the face of the earth." which is somewhat different.
http://ncr-iran.org/content/view/489/59/
Too bad you weren't at the conference, you probably would have got a more accurate view of what th' home-boys actually said.
"very strange request, demo"
Not really.
I`ve been reading the statement by Ahmadinejad as posted on the National Council of Resistance of Iran website and no where does he say "Israel must be wiped off the map".
He does say "Our dear Imam [Khomeini] ordered that the occupying regime in Jerusalem be wiped off the face of the earth." which is somewhat different.
http://ncr-iran.org/content/view/489/59/
Too bad you weren't at the conference, you probably would have got a more accurate view of what th' home-boys actually said.
webfusion
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 9,766
Sure is strange -- demo making excuses, and spinning like a top.
"I have no doubt that the new wave [of attacks] which has started in dear Palestine and which we witness today all over the Islamic world will soon wipe this scourge of shame from the Islamic world. This is doable… "
That is what the President of Iran said, in the translation you linked to, demo. Not what he said someone else said -- these are his own words.
Give it a rest, demo. The Iranians will have plenty of opportunity to curse and get all indignant about Israel soon enough (see: Natanz). There was an excellent report on US national TV tonight about the liklihood of the Israelis taking-out that under-construction fuel-reprocessing center. The TV evaluation indicated how Arik Sharon is looking for a great election-campaign 'gimmick' and knows that he can gain a lot of benefit at the voting booths in March with a raid on the building-site at Natanz.
"I have no doubt that the new wave [of attacks] which has started in dear Palestine and which we witness today all over the Islamic world will soon wipe this scourge of shame from the Islamic world. This is doable… "
That is what the President of Iran said, in the translation you linked to, demo. Not what he said someone else said -- these are his own words.
Give it a rest, demo. The Iranians will have plenty of opportunity to curse and get all indignant about Israel soon enough (see: Natanz). There was an excellent report on US national TV tonight about the liklihood of the Israelis taking-out that under-construction fuel-reprocessing center. The TV evaluation indicated how Arik Sharon is looking for a great election-campaign 'gimmick' and knows that he can gain a lot of benefit at the voting booths in March with a raid on the building-site at Natanz.
"There was an excellent report on US national TV tonight about the liklihood of the Israelis taking-out that under-construction fuel-reprocessing center. The TV evaluation indicated how Arik Sharon is looking for a great election-campaign 'gimmick' and knows that he can gain a lot of benefit at the voting booths in March with a raid on the building-site at Natanz."
Your chest must be very painful from all that thumping you do on it.
Well of course, gangsters like Sharon and their warmongering followers think nothing of using bombs as election "gimmicks" to boost their chances at the polls even though the evidence on which they resort to bombs doesn`t justify it. It`s the Zionist way.
quote:
ElBaradei to 'Post': No nuclear 'smoking gun' in Iran
DAVID HOROVITZ, THE JERUSALEM POST Dec. 6, 2005
The International Atomic Energy Agency has found no "smoking gun" in Iran that would indicate a nuclear weapons program, Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, the director-general of the IAEA, told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday. At the same time, however, he acknowledged that, until three years ago, Teheran maintained an undeclared nuclear program for 18 years, which the IAEA failed to detect.
ElBaradei said there was now "lots of speculation" about an Iranian drive to nuclear weapons capability. But "we try to work on the basis of facts," he said. And the facts, he said in response to a question from the Post, were that "we haven't seen a smoking gun in Iran. We haven't seen an underground production enrichment facility. We haven't seen enough materials in Iran, other than gram quantities, to put into a weapon."
Asked about Israel's concerns over a nuclear-armed Iran, and the issue of whether Israel might have to resort to force as a last resort to thwart Iran going nuclear, ElBaradei made no direct comment about the use of force. He stressed, however, that the IAEA sought to continue "to work through our verification [process], through our diplomacy."
Elbaradei was answering questions after giving a speech entitled "Reflections on Nuclear Challenges Today" at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. In that address, he said he hoped his agency would be able to reach definitive conclusions about the nature of Iran's nuclear program within a year.
ElBaradei, who along with the IAEA received this year's Nobel peace prize, said his agency had spent the past three years filling in the "puzzle" of Iran's long-concealed program. "We have done a lot of the work," and found "most of the pieces" of the puzzle, he said, but there were still "a number of open questions" about that program, which had relied heavily on black market supplies.
More transparency and pro-active cooperation was required from Teheran to "clear" its past. For instance, he said, the IAEA needed access to military sites, the right to interview key people, and to see certain vital documents.
In a talk in which he set out a phased program which could reduce the global nuclear threat if there were sufficient international support, he nonetheless presented a stark reality of widening proliferation of nuclear weapons and technology, clandestine procurement networks and "sluggishness" in nuclear disarmament. Given the scale of the threats and the deficient international will to counter them effectively, he said, "One may legitimately ask whether we are a world in denial."
Having acknowledged the IAEA's failure to detect Iran's nuclear energy program more rapidly, he noted that the agency was immensely hampered by a tiny budget of just $120 million per year. With these "shoestring" resources, it was nevertheless expected to "oversee approximately 900 nuclear facilities in 71 countries. We are only as effective as we are allowed to be," he said.
In answering the Post's questions, he said "Iran might have the capacity to enrich uranium if it starts the enrichment facilities there. But that's where the international community asks Iran to reconsider, or at least to continue to suspend enrichment, because that brings Iran close [to a nuclear weapons capability]." There was no urgent reason for Iran to lift that suspension of the enrichment process, he said, and so long as the suspension remained in force there would be an opportunity for a negotiated solution.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1132475695339&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/Printer
Your chest must be very painful from all that thumping you do on it.
Well of course, gangsters like Sharon and their warmongering followers think nothing of using bombs as election "gimmicks" to boost their chances at the polls even though the evidence on which they resort to bombs doesn`t justify it. It`s the Zionist way.
quote:
ElBaradei to 'Post': No nuclear 'smoking gun' in Iran
DAVID HOROVITZ, THE JERUSALEM POST Dec. 6, 2005
The International Atomic Energy Agency has found no "smoking gun" in Iran that would indicate a nuclear weapons program, Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, the director-general of the IAEA, told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday. At the same time, however, he acknowledged that, until three years ago, Teheran maintained an undeclared nuclear program for 18 years, which the IAEA failed to detect.
ElBaradei said there was now "lots of speculation" about an Iranian drive to nuclear weapons capability. But "we try to work on the basis of facts," he said. And the facts, he said in response to a question from the Post, were that "we haven't seen a smoking gun in Iran. We haven't seen an underground production enrichment facility. We haven't seen enough materials in Iran, other than gram quantities, to put into a weapon."
Asked about Israel's concerns over a nuclear-armed Iran, and the issue of whether Israel might have to resort to force as a last resort to thwart Iran going nuclear, ElBaradei made no direct comment about the use of force. He stressed, however, that the IAEA sought to continue "to work through our verification [process], through our diplomacy."
Elbaradei was answering questions after giving a speech entitled "Reflections on Nuclear Challenges Today" at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. In that address, he said he hoped his agency would be able to reach definitive conclusions about the nature of Iran's nuclear program within a year.
ElBaradei, who along with the IAEA received this year's Nobel peace prize, said his agency had spent the past three years filling in the "puzzle" of Iran's long-concealed program. "We have done a lot of the work," and found "most of the pieces" of the puzzle, he said, but there were still "a number of open questions" about that program, which had relied heavily on black market supplies.
More transparency and pro-active cooperation was required from Teheran to "clear" its past. For instance, he said, the IAEA needed access to military sites, the right to interview key people, and to see certain vital documents.
In a talk in which he set out a phased program which could reduce the global nuclear threat if there were sufficient international support, he nonetheless presented a stark reality of widening proliferation of nuclear weapons and technology, clandestine procurement networks and "sluggishness" in nuclear disarmament. Given the scale of the threats and the deficient international will to counter them effectively, he said, "One may legitimately ask whether we are a world in denial."
Having acknowledged the IAEA's failure to detect Iran's nuclear energy program more rapidly, he noted that the agency was immensely hampered by a tiny budget of just $120 million per year. With these "shoestring" resources, it was nevertheless expected to "oversee approximately 900 nuclear facilities in 71 countries. We are only as effective as we are allowed to be," he said.
In answering the Post's questions, he said "Iran might have the capacity to enrich uranium if it starts the enrichment facilities there. But that's where the international community asks Iran to reconsider, or at least to continue to suspend enrichment, because that brings Iran close [to a nuclear weapons capability]." There was no urgent reason for Iran to lift that suspension of the enrichment process, he said, and so long as the suspension remained in force there would be an opportunity for a negotiated solution.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1132475695339&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/Printer
webfusion
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2004
- Messages
- 9,766
That's pretty funny, demo.
Ahmadinejad indicated that "I have no doubt that the (suicide bombers) will soon wipe this scourge of shame (Israel) from the Islamic world. This is doable… "
and you interpret that to indicate something else besides his encouragement of terrorists to wipe Israel off the map? I wonder what your command of English is, when you are still doubting the meaning of the Iranian President.
As for Natanz, you make a flawed statement about me, demo, by saying I am doing some 'chest thumping' here when all I am really doing is mentioning a TV report which covered the topic. The chest-thumping is originating from Israeli sources, but I must say those reports leave me no doubt the IAF is preparing some little surprise for the Iranians. Couldn't happen to a nicer buch of mullahs.
Ahmadinejad indicated that "I have no doubt that the (suicide bombers) will soon wipe this scourge of shame (Israel) from the Islamic world. This is doable… "
and you interpret that to indicate something else besides his encouragement of terrorists to wipe Israel off the map? I wonder what your command of English is, when you are still doubting the meaning of the Iranian President.
As for Natanz, you make a flawed statement about me, demo, by saying I am doing some 'chest thumping' here when all I am really doing is mentioning a TV report which covered the topic. The chest-thumping is originating from Israeli sources, but I must say those reports leave me no doubt the IAF is preparing some little surprise for the Iranians. Couldn't happen to a nicer buch of mullahs.
webbie:
"Ahmadinejad indicated that "I have no doubt that the (suicide bombers) will soon wipe this scourge of shame (Israel) from the Islamic world. This is doable… ""
My source doesn`t say what your source does.
“In his crusade against the World Arrogance, our dear Imam targeted the central and command base of the enemy, namely the occupying regime in Jerusalem. I have no doubt that the new wave [of attacks] which has started in dear Palestine and which we witness today all over the Islamic world will soon wipe this scourge of shame from the Islamic world."
Still don`t see him saying "wipe Israel of the map".
The "occupying regime in Jerusalem"? Yes. That`s not Israel though, is it? They are two different things. I know plenty of Israelis that don`t support the occupying regime.
"Ahmadinejad indicated that "I have no doubt that the (suicide bombers) will soon wipe this scourge of shame (Israel) from the Islamic world. This is doable… ""
My source doesn`t say what your source does.
“In his crusade against the World Arrogance, our dear Imam targeted the central and command base of the enemy, namely the occupying regime in Jerusalem. I have no doubt that the new wave [of attacks] which has started in dear Palestine and which we witness today all over the Islamic world will soon wipe this scourge of shame from the Islamic world."
Still don`t see him saying "wipe Israel of the map".
The "occupying regime in Jerusalem"? Yes. That`s not Israel though, is it? They are two different things. I know plenty of Israelis that don`t support the occupying regime.
webbie:
"The chest-thumping is originating from Israeli sources, but I must say those reports leave me no doubt the IAF is preparing some little surprise for the Iranians. Couldn't happen to a nicer buch of mullahs."
quote:
Is there a case to be made for allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons in the interests of peace? Or has all the air been sucked out of the debate by American and Israeli demagogues who dominate the airwaves?...
...Well, first of all we need to establish whether or not Iran has a history of territorial aggression.
Have the Ayatollahs followed a policy of ignoring the UN for 30 years while they occupy an area that (according to the vast majority of sovereign countries) belongs to the indigenous people?
No.
Do the Mullahs have a record of preemptive war on 6 continents, massive, regionally-destabilizing covert activities, coup d’etats, and an archipelago of concentration camps spread across the globe?
No.
Has Iran done anything that would indicate that it would use a nuclear weapon against a civilian population like the United States did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
No.
The real issue with Iran is that its leaders have shown the temerity to control their own resources, which the corporate globalists and Washington plutocrats claim as their own.
Isn’t that true?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11215.htm
"The chest-thumping is originating from Israeli sources, but I must say those reports leave me no doubt the IAF is preparing some little surprise for the Iranians. Couldn't happen to a nicer buch of mullahs."
quote:
Is there a case to be made for allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons in the interests of peace? Or has all the air been sucked out of the debate by American and Israeli demagogues who dominate the airwaves?...
...Well, first of all we need to establish whether or not Iran has a history of territorial aggression.
Have the Ayatollahs followed a policy of ignoring the UN for 30 years while they occupy an area that (according to the vast majority of sovereign countries) belongs to the indigenous people?
No.
Do the Mullahs have a record of preemptive war on 6 continents, massive, regionally-destabilizing covert activities, coup d’etats, and an archipelago of concentration camps spread across the globe?
No.
Has Iran done anything that would indicate that it would use a nuclear weapon against a civilian population like the United States did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
No.
The real issue with Iran is that its leaders have shown the temerity to control their own resources, which the corporate globalists and Washington plutocrats claim as their own.
Isn’t that true?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11215.htm
Last edited: