Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 9

 

2009-09-30 02:03:14
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

Dilbert_X wrote:

Iran needs to keep it in their pants as well. Like I said it does them no good to slap the world community in the face when they are willing to talk with them.
Iran was talking with the world community, they were engaged with the IAEA who were monitoring their facilities.

Then Duhbya decided to play the cowboy - again - and told them they couldn't even have a civil nuclear power program - which they are entitled to under international law.

Surprisingly enough they then withdrew their cooperation.

If there is to be military action it would be a global majority consensus.
It wasn't with Iraq, why would the Iranians expect any difference?
Dubya was not "playing cowboy" with Iran when they kicked the International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors out. The US actually offered to help out Iran with developing nuclear energy under the Bush administration. However, as you alluded to, Iran is secretly seeking to develop nuclear tech for weapons. The majority of the UN has been voting together for international sanctions. I understand it's easier to put the blame on one man but the facts are a little different. It seems you are torn between justifying their desire for a nuke and their statements of only seeking nuclear energy. Which is it? They have been open with cooperation in ensuring peaceful purposes.. or it's to protect themselves from aggressors even though you have admitted that with nukes they have no chance of retaliation?

As I said before, there has been a significant shift in the leadership of this country. The educated people of Iran should recognize this. This is terrible news for the Mullahs. If they can't scare Iranians into a believing an invasion is imminent the people of Iran will start to focus on their horrible domestic leadership. They NEED the appearance of a white Satan 'cowboy' more than we need to invade them. .. which again, no one at all is saying we should.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-09-30 05:47:46
13rin
Member
+977|6766

Spark wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

The reality is that he's going to do nothing -save serve the populous hollow rhetoric as Iran finishes their weapon.  Save yourselves Israel.
Yes, yes, because that's precisely what you want him to do, isn't it?
No.  Just going off of what the Supreme Community Organizer said at his UN speech about Israel.  Also his diplomatic track record in dealing with the asshat nations thus far has been a joke.  Hell, even France gets this issue.

Kmarion wrote:

An invasion/attack would unite a divided Iran against the west.
Not necessarily

Last edited by DBBrinson1 (2009-09-30 05:50:41)

I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2009-09-30 09:04:41
Bradt3hleader
Care [ ] - Don't care [x]
+121|6223
So when do we nuke Iran?
2009-09-30 09:22:36
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

An invasion/attack would unite a divided Iran against the west.
Not necessarily
An attack would validate the rhetoric that the current regime been spewing. Nothing unites a people more than when they believe they are constantly under attack and fighting a common enemy (See Hitler).
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-09-30 09:48:36
Bradt3hleader
Care [ ] - Don't care [x]
+121|6223
Yeah I'm sure the thousands of people protesting against the horrible government would fight Americans coming in to destroy that government while "Freeing" the unhappy population. Makes perfect sense
2009-09-30 09:51:05
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

They were protesting the election results. Roll some foreign tanks in there and bomb a few towns and you'll see how survival trumps politics.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-09-30 09:54:22
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6784

Bradt3hleader wrote:

Yeah I'm sure the thousands of people protesting against the horrible government would fight Americans coming in to destroy that government while "Freeing" the unhappy population. Makes perfect sense
wait - what? aren't we still in Iraq? Afghanistan? aren't troops lost every day still?
2009-09-30 10:41:09
13rin
Member
+977|6766

Kmarion wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

An invasion/attack would unite a divided Iran against the west.
Not necessarily
An attack would validate the rhetoric that the current regime been spewing. Nothing unites a people more than when they believe they are constantly under attack and fighting a common enemy (See Hitler).
I understand your point and agree, the insurgents in Iraq are a perfect example of outsiders united to fight (the great satan) -but it depends upon who the common enemy is made out to be.  I'd start an information war way prior to any UN action.  Yea, I was kidding about the UN part.  I'd just knock out the leadership. 

By remaining silent on the fraudulent elections in Iran and subsequent protests demanding freedom -then validating Iran's regime (election results) Obama signaled his approval to the fanitical radicals.  It really didn't surprise me in the least.

Kmarion wrote:

They were protesting the election results. Roll some foreign tanks in there and bomb a few towns and you'll see how survival trumps politics.
Again, it depends at what the turrents are pointed at.

Last edited by DBBrinson1 (2009-09-30 10:42:05)

I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2009-09-30 10:42:38
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5645|London, England

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:


Not necessarily
An attack would validate the rhetoric that the current regime been spewing. Nothing unites a people more than when they believe they are constantly under attack and fighting a common enemy (See Hitler).
I understand your point and agree, the insurgents in Iraq are a perfect example of outsiders united to fight (the great satan) -but it depends upon who the common enemy is made out to be.  I'd start an information war way prior to any UN action.  Yea, I was kidding about the UN part.  I'd just knock out the leadership. 

By remaining silent on the fraudulent elections in Iran and subsequent protests demanding freedom -then validating Iran's regime (election results) Obama signaled his approval to the fanitical radicals.  It really didn't surprise me in the least.

Kmarion wrote:

They were protesting the election results. Roll some foreign tanks in there and bomb a few towns and you'll see how survival trumps politics.
Again, it depends at what the turrents are pointed at.
I don't know why he recognized them as a legitimate government. Did way more harm than good imo.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-09-30 11:31:34
Bradt3hleader
Care [ ] - Don't care [x]
+121|6223

burnzz wrote:

Bradt3hleader wrote:

Yeah I'm sure the thousands of people protesting against the horrible government would fight Americans coming in to destroy that government while "Freeing" the unhappy population. Makes perfect sense
wait - what? aren't we still in Iraq? Afghanistan? aren't troops lost every day still?
I'm not talking about actually going to war with them. It's just that some people think the Iranian people (civilians) will be against the U.S. or whatever other country comes in to get rid of their dictatorial government, if you can call it a government.
2009-09-30 11:47:54
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Not necessarily
An attack would validate the rhetoric that the current regime been spewing. Nothing unites a people more than when they believe they are constantly under attack and fighting a common enemy (See Hitler).
I understand your point and agree, the insurgents in Iraq are a perfect example of outsiders united to fight (the great satan) -but it depends upon who the common enemy is made out to be.  I'd start an information war way prior to any UN action.  Yea, I was kidding about the UN part.  I'd just knock out the leadership. 

By remaining silent on the fraudulent elections in Iran and subsequent protests demanding freedom -then validating Iran's regime (election results) Obama signaled his approval to the fanitical radicals.  It really didn't surprise me in the least.
He did speak out against the violence. Where in the constitution does it say that the President should intervene in another countries election? Change in Iran must come from the inside for it to last. The common enemy will be the ones dropping bombs and circling drones over their homes. Dinnerjacket has been predicting more "western aggression". An attack would prove his words correct and therefor more and more Iranians will listen to him and follow.

Kmarion wrote:

They were protesting the election results. Roll some foreign tanks in there and bomb a few towns and you'll see how survival trumps politics.
Again, it depends at what the turrents are pointed at.
Iraq, Afghanistan ... and now Iran. This IMO will undoubtedly be the straw that breaks the camels back. An attack on Islam will be viewed not only by the Iranians but outside the borders of Iran as well. It is the compilation of these events that separates another attack apart from just a one or two country conflict. We need to look beyond Iraq and what happened there. The circumstances are dynamic and predicting outcome based on previous actions would be a massive failure.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-09-30 11:49:57
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|7062|Moscow, Russia

JohnG@lt wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

An attack would validate the rhetoric that the current regime been spewing. Nothing unites a people more than when they believe they are constantly under attack and fighting a common enemy (See Hitler).
I understand your point and agree, the insurgents in Iraq are a perfect example of outsiders united to fight (the great satan) -but it depends upon who the common enemy is made out to be.  I'd start an information war way prior to any UN action.  Yea, I was kidding about the UN part.  I'd just knock out the leadership. 

By remaining silent on the fraudulent elections in Iran and subsequent protests demanding freedom -then validating Iran's regime (election results) Obama signaled his approval to the fanitical radicals.  It really didn't surprise me in the least.

Kmarion wrote:

They were protesting the election results. Roll some foreign tanks in there and bomb a few towns and you'll see how survival trumps politics.
Again, it depends at what the turrents are pointed at.
I don't know why he recognized them as a legitimate government. Did way more harm than good imo.
oh, c'mon guys, hadn't a thought cross your mind that those so called "uprisings" may not have been what the media tried to tell you they were? now, obama may be a clown, but there's no doubt in my mind that had there been a real opportunity to use those fraudulent elections and the resulting protests to topple islamic radicals in iran it would have been taken. all that "zomg, the election in iran are rigged!"-thing looked blown waaaay out of proportion even in russian media - i can only imagine what it was like in us.
you make it look like obama's the only one who has any say on the matter. you know, democratic process - which, btw, is just as prone to manipulation and abuse as any other - aside, international politics aren't about what's fair. by validating iran's regime obama left himself a "space for maneuver" - after all, there's no shortage of stuff over which to be shitty to iran, right? ffs, russian elections were just as rigged, as are ukrainian, georgian and allah knows what else - why aren't you speaking about those?

Last edited by Shahter (2009-09-30 11:52:58)

if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2009-09-30 12:02:14
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

^^Actually the US media didn't even report on it initially.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10264398-2.html

We were getting updates directly from the people of Iran.. even after the government tried to shit them down.

Shahter wrote:

ffs, russian elections were just as rigged
Start a twitter/youtube account. <3
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-09-30 12:33:15
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|7062|Moscow, Russia

Kmarion wrote:

We were getting updates directly from the people of Iran..
orly? O_o

Kmarion wrote:

Shahter wrote:

ffs, russian elections were just as rigged
Start a twitter/youtube account. <3
and?..

democracy doesn't work. never did. cattle get brought to the pond, one way or another.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2009-09-30 12:48:44
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

Shahter wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

We were getting updates directly from the people of Iran..
orly? O_o
Yea really..

Kmarion wrote:

Shahter wrote:

ffs, russian elections were just as rigged
Start a twitter/youtube account. <3
and?..
democracy doesn't work. never did. cattle get brought to the pond, one way or another.
Works better for some... obviously^.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-09-30 13:06:37
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|7062|Moscow, Russia

Kmarion wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

We were getting updates directly from the people of Iran..
orly? O_o
Yea really..
huh? enlighten me, just how do you know it was "people of iran"? tor makes it pretty much impossible to trace internetz stuff back to its author.

Kmarion wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Start a twitter/youtube account. <3
and?..
democracy doesn't work. never did. cattle get brought to the pond, one way or another.
Works better for some... obviously^.
i'm not sure what you are implying. i never participate in the farce called "elections" here - no point whatsoever. and no point in yelling about it either.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2009-09-30 13:34:46
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

Shahter wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Shahter wrote:

orly? O_o
Yea really..
huh? enlighten me, just how do you know it was "people of iran"? tor makes it pretty much impossible to trace internetz stuff back to its author.
You do realize that Iran shut down, or at least tried to shut down access to major social networking sites right? Why else would they do this? Did hollywood create a set to emulate the streets of Iran and post the video to youtube?
These aren't from inside of Iran?


http://www.cnn.com/video/?JSONLINK=/vid … i.intv.cnn





Kmarion wrote:

and?..
democracy doesn't work. never did. cattle get brought to the pond, one way or another.
Works better for some... obviously^.
i'm not sure what you are implying. i never participate in the farce called "elections" here - no point whatsoever. and no point in yelling about it either.
Did they count 40 million votes in two hours where you live also? I'm not living in a true Democracy, nor is my country pretending to be. Our election results are valid though.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-09-30 13:58:57
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|7062|Moscow, Russia

Kmarion wrote:

you do realize that Iran shut down, or at least tried to shut down access to major social networking sites right? Why else would they do this? Did hollywood create a set to emulate the streets of Iran and post the video to youtube?
These aren't from inside of Iran?
... links cut ...
i dunno. anything's possible. now, don't get me wrong - i've no doubt that the elections were fraudulent. wouldn't expect anything else from iran and, frankly, i'm sure most iranians woudn't either - that's why i seriously doubt all that stuff on internetz was genuine and reflected the real picture.
i also think it's very unlikely that those "uprisings" posed any serious threat to Ahmadinejad and his government - those protesters got their asses kicked and they had it coming.

Kmarion wrote:

Did they count 40 million votes in two hours where you live also?
they sure had a whopping 95%+ elections turn up in some provinces here, and just about all voted in favor of the pro-government and pro-president party here. that's only one of the more glaring things.

Kmarion wrote:

I'm not living in a true Democracy, nor is my country pretending to be. Our election results are valid though.
does it matter really? you got a choice - a clown or a dead man with a empty headed shotgun waving bitch to succeed him. yeah, that's a choise allright...

Last edited by Shahter (2009-09-30 14:00:35)

if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2009-09-30 14:01:36
rammunition
Fully Loaded
+143|6149
Iran has announced that they are getting rid of the petro dollar to the euro. Coincidence or what.

whenever a country has done this before, the last one being saddam hussein in iraq, war has followed.
2009-09-30 14:09:09
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6888|132 and Bush

Shahter wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

you do realize that Iran shut down, or at least tried to shut down access to major social networking sites right? Why else would they do this? Did hollywood create a set to emulate the streets of Iran and post the video to youtube?
These aren't from inside of Iran?
... links cut ...
i dunno. anything's possible. now, don't get me wrong - i've no doubt that the elections were fraudulent. wouldn't expect anything else from iran and, frankly, i'm sure most iranians woudn't either - that's why i seriously doubt all that stuff on internetz was genuine and reflected the real picture.
i also think it's very unlikely that those "uprisings" posed any serious threat to Ahmadinejad and his government - those protesters got their asses kicked and they had it coming.

Kmarion wrote:

Did they count 40 million votes in two hours where you live also?
they sure had a whopping 95%+ elections turn up in some provinces here, and just about all voted in favor of the pro-government and pro-president party here. that's only one of the more glaring things.

Kmarion wrote:

I'm not living in a true Democracy, nor is my country pretending to be. Our election results are valid though.
does it matter really? you got a choice - a clown or a dead man with a empty headed shotgun waving bitch to succeed him. yeah, that's a choise allright...
I agree with a lot of this. ..'cept maybe that the protesters had it coming. I can imagine some none genuine stuff coming from twitter, since it is full of clowns. It was however one of the only ways Iranians could communicate with the outside world. If Iran would have allowed foreign journalist in we wouldn't have been so dependent on social networking to see a true picture. They didn't.

Yes we are often left with choosing the lesser of two evils. It is however better than no choice at all.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
2009-09-30 14:12:38
rammunition
Fully Loaded
+143|6149
talking of "democracy" , Iran was a "democracy" before Britain and America intervened in the 1950's for Iran's oil

read up!

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/1395,feat … n-election
2009-10-01 03:47:08
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6698|'Murka

AussieReaper wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

War with Iran became all but certain when the uprising there failed
Oh for gods sake.
The US has not one single reason to fight a war with Iran.
That they didn't finish the job last time is all the reason some people have...
When was the "last time" exactly?

There won't be a "war" with Iran. At most, strikes against nuclear and military targets that could be used to retaliate in the region.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2009-10-01 08:35:47
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6908|London, England
Even that would start a war. I doubt they would just sit there and let their facilities be attacked, and then let the US or Israel just run back and continue business like nothing happened. They'd probably rather pull the US back into a gruelling war and then try (more) to destabilise Iraq and even Afghanistan. Like Kez said, any sort of attack on Iran might be the straw that breaks the camels back. I mean not even the USSR decided to go and invade three countries like that. Iran would be one war too many for the US.

And our Labour party are on the way out. People are fed up of them for many reasons one of which is the two wars they decided to go into. I doubt once the Conservative party comes into power they'd be willing to follow the US into multiple conflicts. If anything they're more likely to scale down relations with the US, especially in terms of military.

Yeah I know, over here it's the Socialist Left wing Labour party that is more happy to play along with the neo cons and Republicans of the US.

Last edited by Mekstizzle (2009-10-01 08:37:33)

2009-10-01 08:44:34
Bradt3hleader
Care [ ] - Don't care [x]
+121|6223
I didn't see any blood in the video "Students shot on camera"
2009-10-01 11:02:18
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5645|London, England

Bradt3hleader wrote:

I didn't see any blood in the video "Students shot on camera"
https://cache.boston.com/bonzai-fba/Third_Party_Photo/2008/12/29/8__1230581263_6515.jpg
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 9

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard