Time to kick Iran

[Matteo Martini]

As our world gets increasingly more complicated, the question of "who" has the power to do "what" is less and less important. More important is "who" *would" do "what" if they *did have* the power, and THAT, I think, is the heart of this issue.

Unless you think, for instance, that a single small yield warhead being detonated in the middle of, say, Tokyo or Mexico City wouldn't be that big of a deal. Or the facilitated release of a nasty pathogen with high mortality rates across world airports. Guess what -- both of those scenarios can be carried out by a single person in today's world.

Agreed with that.
This is why I am against Iran getting hands into full enrichment process..

 

[rocketdodger]

US included?

Absolutely.

The US have an history of thuggery and murder far longer that Iran` s.
Study history, please..

And if we were a smaller country with few resources (like Iran) I would advise the world to prevent us from acquiring nuclear tech as well!

I am no fool. While I love what my country stands for, I hate the way it is run, I hate those doing the running, and I especially hate they way they have handled a great many issues. I am not one to pretend our hands are clean of blood. In fact I might suggest that the majority of the political problems in the world today have been caused by my country's moronic policies in one way or another.

 

[gumboot]

I'm so glad I live in New Zealand.

-Gumboot

 

[Matteo Martini]

Absolutely.



And if we were a smaller country with few resources (like Iran) I would advise the world to prevent us from acquiring nuclear tech as well!

I am no fool. While I love what my country stands for, I hate the way it is run, I hate those doing the running, and I especially hate they way they have handled a great many issues. I am not one to pretend our hands are clean of blood. In fact I might suggest that the majority of the political problems in the world today have been caused by my country's moronic policies in one way or another.

Wait.
I do not think that the majority of the political problems in the world today have been caused by the U.S.
Also, I think that what is causing the world not to have large-scale conflicts going on, is due to the scientific progress ( internet, aviation, etc. ), mainly developed and due to the US

 

[rocketdodger]

Wait.
I do not think that the majority of the political problems in the world today have been caused by the U.S.

Emphasis of mine on "one way or another." I certainly don't mean the direct cause. I was thinking more along the lines of "we have the most power to do the right thing and set a good example, and our failure there may be responsible in part for alot of bad stuff."

 

[jsiv]

Inasmuch?

Inasmuch as cooperating is a good way to get the program going.

Neither is the 10,000 nukes US. What's the point of this remark?

The point is that you called Iran a third-world country. It is not, and is far more capable than one.

Wrong - they're starting new discussions right now. Missed that?

Because they still aren't complying. Do you even read what you write?

Evidence. Not "Bible-Studying-Like-Woo-Evidence".

"Evidence?" I've explained my take on it before, in one of the trillions of posts you chose to ignore.

And this is reason enough to start a war for you? Are you kidding me?

Now you're just making stuff up. I have explicitly stated about a dozen times already that I'm not advocating a war with Iran. In fact, I say so in the very post you are replying to! Hello, Earth to Oliver!

Oh my - my worldview just fell apart...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_terrorism

It makes your claim that Iran is a peaceful nation that does not engage in hostilities untrue.

What other countries do or don't do is completely irrelevant. I think you've spent so much time over at the Loose Change Forum that you're adopting their techniques. Hah, see what I did there? I compared you to a Truther! Your favorite insult!

Oh, so other nations wouldn't react this way to get the bullies out of their neighborhood, right?

I see, so now you are in fact recognizing that Iran is trying to drive Israel ( or "the bullies" as you call it) out of "their neighborhood." You just don't see it as a big deal, because you agree with Iran. Fair enough.

Watch the presidential debates from time to time, will you?

I wasn't aware that I or anyone else here is running for president. In fact, I didn't even know that I could.

Sweet, I hope I win.

Yes, I agree. And it's up to them to make this happen. Not you or anyone else.

Like it was up the Germans to stop Hitler and the Nazis?

Oh look, I Hitlered the thread!

Yes, it would. Did you miss the demonstration in Iran against Ahmadinejad - or don't you care that people are aware of problems without being attacked by foreigners?

The point that you so spectacularly missed is that you refuse to ever condemn or criticize anyone that can be considered Anti-American or Anti-Israel.

Criticizing Iran is not the same thing as saying it should be invaded tomorrow. Are you completely incapable of understanding this?

Should the Muslims invade Norway for stupidity? Yes, you would argue in favor of this as well - or do you choose the hypocrites way?

No, I wouldn't "argue in favor of this as well," as I have not argued for any "invasion of Iran for stupidity."

You are a god damn liar, Oliver, and you keep assigning me opinions that I do not hold.

When have I suggested that we invade Iran at this point?

When Oliver?

Why do you keep lying and trying to defame your opponents?

Why are you completely unable to discuss the nuances of anything?

 

[jsiv]

Does Iran has any power to do that?

Maybe, maybe not. The point is that they try as hard as they can.

 

[Elizabeth I]

If you do not rule out the use of nukes, that means threathening to use them.

Wait, wait, wait...I have never gone public ruling out the possibility that I might shoot my next-door neighbor. Does that mean the same thing as threatening to shoot him?

 

[Oliver]

Inasmuch as cooperating is a good way to get the program going.

The point is that you called Iran a third-world country. It is not, and is far more capable than one.

Because they still aren't complying. Do you even read what you write?

"Evidence?" I've explained my take on it before, in one of the trillions of posts you chose to ignore.

Now you're just making stuff up. I have explicitly stated about a dozen times already that I'm not advocating a war with Iran. In fact, I say so in the very post you are replying to! Hello, Earth to Oliver!

It makes your claim that Iran is a peaceful nation that does not engage in hostilities untrue.

What other countries do or don't do is completely irrelevant. I think you've spent so much time over at the Loose Change Forum that you're adopting their techniques. Hah, see what I did there? I compared you to a Truther! Your favorite insult!

I see, so now you are in fact recognizing that Iran is trying to drive Israel ( or "the bullies" as you call it) out of "their neighborhood." You just don't see it as a big deal, because you agree with Iran. Fair enough.

I wasn't aware that I or anyone else here is running for president. In fact, I didn't even know that I could.

Sweet, I hope I win.

Like it was up the Germans to stop Hitler and the Nazis?

Oh look, I Hitlered the thread!

The point that you so spectacularly missed is that you refuse to ever condemn or criticize anyone that can be considered Anti-American or Anti-Israel.

Criticizing Iran is not the same thing as saying it should be invaded tomorrow. Are you completely incapable of understanding this?

No, I wouldn't "argue in favor of this as well," as I have not argued for any "invasion of Iran for stupidity."

You are a god damn liar, Oliver, and you keep assigning me opinions that I do not hold.

When have I suggested that we invade Iran at this point?

When Oliver?

Why do you keep lying and trying to defame your opponents?

Why are you completely unable to discuss the nuances of anything?

You don't understand. While the US-Military is dumb enough
to follow "God told me"-Bush into another Quagmire, I say
it's the US who is straightway marching to a nuclear
confrontation. Military interventions in Iran will solve
nothing but making things worse, no matter how long
you, the WH, the Jewish lobbies or Israel might whine
about Iran.

My concern is this:


And it isn't an unrealistic one at all...

(BTW: In contrast to the Iran-WMD evidence.)

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

You link to two opinion analysts talking. Anyway.the mitlary follows the orders of their commander in chief, and this war does not meet the standards of war crimes against humanity. Yet.

 

[Oliver]

You link to two opinion analysts talking. Anyway.the mitlary follows the orders of their commander in chief, and this war does not meet the standards of war crimes against humanity. Yet.

I thought the oath is about following the constitution.
But I could be wrong.

The guy within the Video talking about Iran is former
weapons inspector Scott Ritter:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter

So I give him at least some credibility since he didn't
lie to me yet.

 

[KoihimeNakamura]

They do. But.. the war in Iraq is a legal war (as we voted for a declartion of war) and until Congress says "no more deployments in Iraq.." it's legal.

 

[quixotecoyote]

They do. But.. the war in Iraq is a legal war (as we voted for a declartion of war) and until Congress says "no more deployments in Iraq.." it's legal.

Not technically a declaration of war, but a military engagement authorized by congress.

 

[jsiv]

You don't understand. While the US-Military is dumb enough
to follow "God told me"-Bush into another Quagmire, I say
it's the US who is straightway marching to a nuclear
confrontation. Military interventions in Iran will solve
nothing but making things worse, no matter how long
you, the WH, the Jewish lobbies or Israel might whine
about Iran.

My concern is this:

[...]

And it isn't an unrealistic one at all...

(BTW: In contrast to the Iran-WMD evidence.)

You must have meant to quote someone else, because that is not an answer to anything in my post.

 

[WildCat]

Not technically a declaration of war, but a military engagement authorized by congress.

A distinction without a difference. The Constitution does not demand any specific language be used.

 

[Ziggurat]

While the US-Military is dumb enough
to follow "God told me"-Bush into another Quagmire,

Good to know that you don't believe in civilian control of the military. You really are the Ralph Wiggum of this forum, aren't you?

 

[Oliver]

Good to know that you don't believe in civilian control of the military. You really are the Ralph Wiggum of this forum, aren't you?

Pfffft. NOTHING in US-Politics is controlled by civilians - and I have
no Idea what this wide-spread discourage is about...

This just came in...

Cheney: Iran won't get nukes

The United States and other nations will not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, Vice President Dick Cheney said. If Iran continues on its current course, Cheney said the U.S. and other nations are "prepared to impose serious consequences." full story

The fact that this Idiot and his "Boss" are spilling this crap without
broad Media-Resistance, is the best evidence that there is no resistance
against Iran-Woo -or- that people are Woo enough as well to swallow this
WW3 BS...

 

[Pardalis]

Take your finger out of your nose.

 

[Ziggurat]

Pfffft. NOTHING in US-Politics is controlled by civilians

God damn, you're an ignorant idiot.

Bush is a civilian. Cheney is a civilian. Nancy Pelosi is a civilian. Hell, the Secretary of Defense is a civilian. If civilians don't control government in the US, who exactly do you think does?

 

[Ralph]

LOL......

47 pages & no end in sight.

If you guys wanted to argue with people who have an unlimited capacity for self-delusion and like to post with lots of pretty colors,giant block letters, and cutesy emoticons why not just go over to Rapture Ready.