Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38,527
What is the difference between public utterances and actual intent?
Think.
For the last 15 years, look at the delta between what is said and what is done.
DR
Russian rocket deliveries to Iran started
- Thread starter zenith-nadir
- Start date
-
- Tags
- deliveries iran rocket russian
Think.
For the last 15 years, look at the delta between what is said and what is done.
DR
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38,527
Nope. Wrong, and asinine, answer.
South Korea is only recently a relatively open society. It spent some decades (after the Korean War) as yet another US-supported ally run by autocrats.
DR
Ahmadinejad does not really believe in the reappearance of the Twelfth Imam, any more than Pat Robertson really believes Jesus is coming back. Those are just propaganda tools. Russia is probably selling rocket systems to Iran to (1) make money, and (2) be a geopolitical player. It's probably not great for the United States. But with American troops surroung Iran in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan, I don't think it puts America in anywhere near a crisis position yet either.
public utterences are very important. We hope they are just that but when someone is advocation nuclear holocaust and they have the means to do it, you must take them seriously until proven otherwise. Hopefully its just talk but it would be stupid to not take Iran seriously.
South Korea and Japan have never threatened another nation. Japan really can't . But evan if they had WMDs I don't hink they are of much concern in using them.
zenith-nadir
Illuminator
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Messages
- 4,482
Hitler's political ideology was spelt out pretty clearly in Mein Kampf. And he did what he said he was gonna do. Ahmadinejad's political ideology is spelt out in what he says openly, publicly, that Israel will be destroyed, the holocaust was invented to embarass Germany, he has "[SIZE=-1]divine inspiration", [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]Satan inspires Mr Bush, and [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]Iran will be fully nuclear.
People didn't pay much attention to Hitler at first, and people aren't paying much attention to [/SIZE] Ahmadinejad. Yet Hitler was dead serious, and so is Ahmadinejad. I heard a great analogy last night on TV. It went like this:
"Imagine David Koresh with nuclear weapons. Imagine David Koresh, not with hundreds of followers, but millions of followers, with nuclear weapons, wanting to obliterate America, wanting to obliterate America`s allies..."
Ahmadinejad is part of a cult which believes they were put here on Earth to bring the Mahdi back in a great religious war between true believers and infidels. Feel free to research it as I am not making this up.
How well do you know Ahmadinejad? Because he really does believe in his divine mission like Bin Laden and others believe in their divine missions..
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38,527
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2006
- Messages
- 38,527
Godwin for fifty, Alex.
Far more interesting analogy.
I am aware of the legend of the 12th Mahdi.
He's a politician. So, let me get this right: you buy his ******** hook, line, and sinker?
DR
And you accuse me of being too "USA centric". Good for a laugh, eh?
Stuff and nonsense. Codswallop. Enough with the scare stories already; nuclear war stopped being a real global problem with the end of the Cold War. Many nations can't afford to even make sure most of their citizens have enough to eat or have clean drinking water, and you're egocentric enough to wave nuclear war fantasies around? Sheeeeeeeeeeeeesh.
Go back and read the posts properly, then reply to the point.
Nonsense again. The Cold War actually started up in the 1930's, it's only that the Americans were all isolationist back then in silly ways and never noticed, and so weren't involved much.
Had the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki never happened, and the war with Japan been won by purely conventional means, the Cold War between the USSR and the USA would have still started soon after --- with much bigger chances of it having become a very hot war, too.
The MAD doctrine and balance of power may well have saved us a Third World War following on very shortly from the Second World War.
Do you think
Amadinejad cares about poor people? What abou Kim Jo Il?
North Korea and Iran can't afford food for their people but they both develop nuclear weapons. Amadinejad continues to threaten nuclear holocaust of Israel.
Weapons proliferation and nuclear war not a problem.
1.Iran to groom Bin Laden successor
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/14/wiran14.xml
2. Iran ready to share weapons systems
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=worldNews&storyid=2006-11-06T103853Z_01_BLA626240_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAN-MISSILES.xml&src=rss&rpc=22
Russian nuclear engineer being dispatched to Iran
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061124/wl_mideast_afp/irannuclearpolitics_061124151325
An oil producing country like Iran nueed nuclear power for energy!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061124/wl_mideast_afp/irannuclearpolitics_061124151325
An oil producing country like Iran nueed nuclear power for energy!
Don't we have to be a bit skeptical about these reports, given the misinformation leading up to the 1st gulf war, and the recent Iraq war?
Personally I am sure you don't either. You only use the nuclear-Iran thing as a scare tactic.
The use of such scare tactics by the Bush admin and others were exactly what led to the current mess in Iraq2 right now; so please don't try using them here.
Just answer to the point instead.
But you don't care about that, you only proliferate fantasies of threats where there are none.
We have to be skeptical about everything. That being said their is no love between Iran vs Israel and the US. Iran is suspected to be helping guerilla fighters in Iraq and Amadinejad publically threatening Israel. Certain Israeli politicians are signalling that Israel may attempt to replicate what they did with Iraq if the workd does not act.
It seems very strange that an oil rich country need nuclear power for energy which is part the cover story.
This is a thread about Russia selling Irna weapons. I thougnt it was. Talking about Iran and their threats of nuclear war in a thread about Iran and Russain means I dont care about poor people. Right
Talking about nuclear war, violence and weapons proliferation, I dont care about poor people. Thats it! Your right let poor people eat yellow cake! Worry about Armajideen threatening to blow Israel off the face of the map getting weapons from Russian. Means I don't care about poor people.
Since this thread is not about poor people but about Iran and its relationship to Russia in weapons proliferation maybe we can focus the thread on the threat at hand, save poor people for another thread that deals with economics.
yes that it! you convinced me! Of what I have no idea! you solved all the worls problems! and to think it was so easy!
Which is why you have scattered false accusations and strawman arguments all over the place like confetti?
Just answer to the point.
And it's not about your appeals to emotion either. So just answer to the point.
Can't say the same for you. You've tried convincing us Iran is some major threat to the world overall. You've failed.
Appealing to the existance of poor people does not evoke an emotional response at all. Of course not its a logical argument you put foward. You have a point to respond to.
Have I failed? Oh I am so disappointed! It must because I don't care about poor people.
Iran's nuclear arament certainly is no problem for anyone but Israel and who cares about them, those crazy Israelis.
We all know that there is no poor people in Israel or occupied terretories to be concerned about if Iran fires a nuclear weapon at them. Right?
Last edited:
...doesn't exist yet.
So enough with the scaremongering already.
If Iran had genuine nuclear weapons, it would be a problem for anyone near it. Just like Pakistan. How come you aren't worried about Pakistan, who is known to have nuclear weapons?
Israel has actually got a large nuclear strike capability. Don't you ever follow the news?
If Iran threatened Israel, Israel's capability to mount a retaliatory nuclear strike in large proportions should be enough to scare off Iran. Let alone the USA's reaction.
Your argument is getting badly incoherent. Badly so. Bizarrely so, in fact.
Last edited:
...doesn't exist yet.
So enough with the scaremongering already.
If Iran had genuine nuclear weapons, it would be a problem for anyone near it. Just like Pakistan. How come you aren't worried about Pakistan, who is known to have nuclear weapons?
Israel has actually got a large nuclear strike capability. Don't you ever follow the news?
If Iran threatened Israel, Israel's capability to mount a retaliatory nuclear strike in large proportions should be enough to scare off Iran.
Your argument is getting badly incoherent. Badly so. Bizarrely so, in fact.
The argument is to prevent Iran from getting nukes so it can't follow through on its threats. Israel and Pakistan are not threatening to nuke anyone of the face of the Earth. That is a substanial difference. I worried about Pakistan to the extent that they have given nulcear info to Iran. Pakistan won't nuke India because India will nuke it back. Mutually assured destruction is preventing war. It is a concern Israel gets attacked by Iran, it will use it nuclear arsenal. Nuclear war is an enemy in and of itself. The Soviet Union and the US were reliable to react in their best interest. The dozens of nuclear armed nations are not guaranteed to do that now. That's a problem, even for poor people.