• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Oh look, an unclenched fist!

Cleon said:
Godwined with the first reply. WTG!
Click to expand...

Ummm, given how "Peace in our time" turned out last century, ignoring it would be rather foolish. It is, after all, the poster child for "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
 
Beerina said:
Ummm, given how "Peace in our time" turned out last century, ignoring it would be rather foolish. It is, after all, the poster child for "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Click to expand...

Foolish to ignore it, sure. But also a little foolish to apply it to this situation, considering that "peace for our time" was about allowing Nazi Germany to annex a chunk of another country, while this is just about Iran wanting to talk.

Chamberlain is jeered for "peace for our time," but in this situation the relevant quote comes from his more popular successor: "To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war."
 
Beerina said:
Ummm, given how "Peace in our time" turned out last century, ignoring it would be rather foolish. It is, after all, the poster child for "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Click to expand...
Sure. But Chamberlain's mistake was in thinking that if he wanted to speak softly, he could only appear sincere if he didn't carry a big stick: that he could only appeal for peace if he didn't arm for war.

Now, this is very different from how the present American president is behaving. He is willing to speak softly, but he also wants to carry the world's biggest stick.
 
Beerina said:
Ummm, given how "Peace in our time" turned out last century, ignoring it would be rather foolish. It is, after all, the poster child for "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Click to expand...

Ummmm, context is everything, and supposedly pithy quotes rarely are.

The context of Chamberlain's statement, and the current situation, are as different as they can be.
 
Oliver said:
Iran will nuke Israel off the map anyway, J. Now get over it. :p

But seriously, what is your fear about? :

What, in your conspiracy theory ridden mind [according to your replies] will happen once Iran does have nukes? :confused:
Click to expand...

They will use their aircraft carriers and subs to use those nukes to attack America.

JoeTheJuggler said:
Nominated!
Click to expand...

Cheers - I actually wondered if anyone would get it!

Dr Adequate said:
Now, this is very different from how the present American president is behaving. He is willing to speak softly, but he also wants to carry the world's biggest stick.
Click to expand...

Not to mention, already does. It's an awful analogy trotted out by [/insert perjorative] every time it looks as though peace might break out.

When Iran has the military capability of fighting it out with USA and NATO, the analogy will be apt. But not before.
 
Cleon said:
Originally Posted by Beerina
Ummm, given how "Peace in our time" turned out last century, ignoring it would be rather foolish. It is, after all, the poster child for "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Click to expand...
The context of Chamberlain's statement, and the current situation, are as different as they can be.
Click to expand...

Strange, I didn't see much leftists try to make such a correction in the countless threads where people tried to compare Bush to Hitler.
 
Pardalis said:
Strange, I didn't see much leftists try to make such a correction in the countless threads where people tried to compare Bush to Hitler.
Click to expand...

Strange, I don't recall these "countless threads," just a couple of fringe posters. In fact, I just looked at all the threads tagged "adolf hitler," and could only find one such thread--and it wasn't taken very seriously.

Good derail attempt, but unfortunately, it does nothing to address my point, which remains valid.
 
Pardalis said:
Don't worry, to anyone else what you said is consistent. DC and the Fool only are splitting hairs. Everybody understands what you meant.
Click to expand...
yep, crystal clear. "no inspections" means "some inspections"

Lol.......just....LOL.......


and I'm not splitting hairs. Iran limits inspections to declared nuclear sites....The lads all react with horror. But hang on.....what does the US allow nuclear inspectors to look at? Golly gee....declared nuclear sites. Can nuclear inspectors go and rummage through Obamas desk?

carry on.....at least wildcat hung around to "clarify" his false statement rather than his usual disappearing act.
 
This whole set up is fairly amusing, in how it makes a laughingstock of the international diplomatic community -- all of it.

Iran sees that the NPT does not appear to apply to Israel. I note that significant trade sanctions (other than the usual Arab stuff) are not directly tied to the NPT being considered a scrap of paper in Tel Aviv. They did not sign. Therefore, not bound by it. Interesting political tactic.

Iran, who signed, can be forgiven for testing whether or not it actually applies to Iran, and to find out just what it costs them to tease the boundaries of NPT. Their neighbors India and Pakistan have nukes. Their not so friendly rival in the Mid East has nukes. Iran is a Power, locally. Iran's position enhanced by having nukes. I'd hope that they only use nukes for energy, but I suspect that hope is in vain.

This case illustrates the silliness of treaties that attempt to do too much: the NPT is one such. Not signing carries no penalty.

Why bother signing? IMO, the US ought to revoke its signature on the NPT.

It is a failed bit of Ivory Tower idealism.
 
This is like Iraq all over again. "They're not allowing inspections", "you're supporting their regime", "remember what happened in Europe in 1939!".

Ummm, given how "Peace in our time" turned out last century, ignoring it would be rather foolish. It is, after all, the poster child for "Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Click to expand...
Yeah, that.
 
The Fool said:
yep, crystal clear. "no inspections" means "some inspections"

Lol.......just....LOL.......


and I'm not splitting hairs. Iran limits inspections to declared nuclear sites....The lads all react with horror. But hang on.....what does the US allow nuclear inspectors to look at? Golly gee....declared nuclear sites. Can nuclear inspectors go and rummage through Obamas desk?

carry on.....at least wildcat hung around to "clarify" his false statement rather than his usual disappearing act.
Click to expand...
Your screen name strikes me as more and more descriptive...
You believe that stuff you spout?
analogy is suspect, but this is close:
"We're the FDA here to inspect your Apple cider operation"
"Ok, no problem--here is where we make Orange Juce. Look all you like"
later:
"Sure-They inspected us!"

in the mean time, speaking of the unclenched fist, they have slapped the hand reaching out to them--we should trust bastard barbarians who make a show out of rushing things to trial on trumped-up charges?
 
Darth Rotor said:
This whole set up is fairly amusing, in how it makes a laughingstock of the international diplomatic community -- all of it.
Click to expand...

Well, they've been setting themselves up as a laughing stick for quite a few years, so it's overdue.

rwguinn said:
in the mean time, speaking of the unclenched fist, they have slapped the hand reaching out to them--we should trust bastard barbarians who make a show out of rushing things to trial on trumped-up charges?
Click to expand...

How do you know they're trumped-up charges? Because Obama says so? Does he personally know the woman and can testify that she was not spying for any US agency or company?

Also, nice of you not to mention the following part of the article:

Bloomberg said:
Mustafa Alani, a regional expert at the Dubai-based Gulf Research Center, said the decision to jail Saberi is a show of strength that could later be reversed to show magnanimity.

“Iran is sending a clear message that Iranian security is a priority which will not be compromised,” Alani said by phone.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, you'd be pulling the trigger, right?

Maybe international politics is a little beyond your scope and that's why you're not writing for Bloomberg.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom