Iran Captures British Sailors

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]John S. wrote:
Actually its my first semester of college. And Im not the one who came in here critizing the army [/quote]

I’m not criticizing the Army, I’m fed up with loudmouth jackasses who talk tough but don’t actually back up their bravado with anything more than typing. They cheer for war like it’s a football game, those people disgust me. They are like maggots, feeding off of death.

Bush/Cheney are trying to provoke Iran right now. It’s been said that the US already has special forces infiltrating Iran, in order to gather information and soften up targets. Ahmadinejad was elected in 2005 in reaction to Bush invading Iraq, and calling Iran part of the Axis of Evil, just weeks after Iran had cooperated with the US actions in Afghanistan. Whenever people feel threatened they will vote for a leader who is perceived to be aggressive, out of fear. Ahmadinejad is a tough-talking douchebag similar to Bush. They feed off of each other’s posturing. There are many many moderates living in Iran but Bush’s tough-guy act pushes the average moderate Iranian over to the right, out of fear. What you wind up with is a self-fulfilling prophecy, in a worst case scenario. Once Bush is out of office and somebody sensible is running the show, it will be easier to get cooperation not just from Iran but pretty much every other nation. Bush scares people, which ratchets up the tension all over the globe. This ham-fisted approach to diplomacy does not work, for proof look at the failure of this approach with North Korea. Bush took a fuck-you approach, gaining no ground, but in the meantime North Korea was motivated to develop their program at an accelerated rate, completely unchecked by inspectors. In the end Bush had to back down, and we are now back to Clinton’s original Agreed Framework status, where we were before Bush took office. We achieved nothing except North Korea was motivated to proliferate at an even faster rate, out of fear and desperation. Bush’s North Korea policy was a failure and it made the world less safe. In the end, cooler heads prevailed. Lets hope that is the case with Iran too, but in the meantime Bush motivated them to also speed up their nuclear program. Until a change of policy happens, we have two complete idiots, Bush and Ahmadinejad, desperately trying to look tough, for the TV cameras and their voters at home.

Anyway, good luck with your decision.

42

[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
hedo wrote:
Maybe the British staged the capture of the sailors and pretended the Iranians did it…right, it’s a conspiracy!

Hasn’t it always been? Or do you just PRETEND not know military history or strategy?

“War is a Racket”
by Major General Smedley Butler, 1935

[i]"…A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small “inside” group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes…

So vicious was this war propaganda that even God was brought into it. With few exceptions our clergymen joined in the clamor to kill, kill, kill. To kill the Germans. God is on our side… it is His will that the Germans be killed.

And in Germany, the good pastors called upon the Germans to kill the allies… to please the same God. That was a part of the general propaganda, built up to make people war conscious and murder conscious.

Beautiful ideals were painted for our boys who were sent out to die. This was the “war to end all wars.” This was the “war to make the world safe for democracy.” No one mentioned to them, as they marched away, that their going and their dying would mean huge war profits.

http://www.playboy.com/magazine/features/lockheed/

No one told these American soldiers that they might be shot down by bullets made by their own brothers here. No one told them that the ships on which they were going to cross might be torpedoed by submarines built with United States patents. They were just told it was to be a “glorious adventure.”…

At each session of Congress the question of further naval appropriations comes up. The swivel-chair admirals of Washington (and there are always a lot of them) are very adroit lobbyists. And they are smart. They don’t shout that “We need a lot of battleships to war on this nation or that nation.” Oh no. First of all, they let it be known that America is menaced by a great naval power. Almost any day, these admirals will tell you, the great fleet of this supposed enemy will strike suddenly and annihilate 125,000,000 people. Just like that. Then they begin to cry for a larger navy. For what? To fight the enemy? Oh my, no. Oh, no. For defense purposes only.

Bush seeks more money for defense
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001847953_ndig31.html

Then, incidentally, they announce maneuvers in the Pacific. For defense. Uh, huh.

The Pentagon is planning to bolster its presence in the Persian Gulf as a warning to Iran’s continuously defiant government, CBS News reports.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/19/world/main2280067.shtml

The Pacific is a great big ocean. We have a tremendous coastline on the Pacific. Will the maneuvers be off the coast, two or three hundred miles? Oh, no. The maneuvers will be two thousand, yes, perhaps even thirty-five hundred miles, off the coast.

The Japanese, a proud people, of course will be pleased beyond expression to see the United States fleet so close to Nippon’s shores. Even as pleased as would be the residents of California were they to dimly discern through the morning mist, the Japanese fleet playing at war games off Los Angeles…

US naval war games off the Iranian coastline

When our boys were sent off to war they were told it was a “war to make the world safe for democracy” and a “war to end all wars…”[/i]
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

Besides a whole new generation of fools–things are still pretty much the same.

But then I suppose there are still quite a few people baffled by the ol’ “quarter behind the ear trick” too… [/quote]

LOL

A bunch of dimwit articles with no relation to the topic…ok great.

So how did the British trick the Iranians into capturing them and threatening to prosecute them for espionage? Tell us?

Do you think the crafty Zionists are behind this one also? Perhaps controlling the minds of the Iranian leadership with invisible brainwaves.

43

[quote]vroom wrote:
Wow. I’m hearing a lot of warmongering.

[/quote]

Good. The American people are waking up…now, when will Canadians wake up? We need you. Stand up, shoulder to shoulder, with President Bush and all of us to confront this evil.

44

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
now, when will Canadians wake up? We need you. Stand up, shoulder to shoulder, with President Bush and all of us to confront this evil.
[/quote]

Nobody can stand shoulder to shoulder with the US. Or haven’t you noticed that you spend more money on the military than the rest of the world combined?

It’ll always be a symbolic stance at best, at worst a total discredit for the Canadian government from its own constituency and from the rest of the world. Remember Spain?

45

[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
now, when will Canadians wake up? We need you. Stand up, shoulder to shoulder, with President Bush and all of us to confront this evil.

Nobody can stand shoulder to shoulder with the US. Or haven’t you noticed that you spend more money on the military than the rest of the world combined?

It’ll always be a symbolic stance at best, at worst a total discredit for the Canadian government from its own constituency and from the rest of the world. Remember Spain? [/quote]

Do you really think Canada can be intimidated as easily as Spain?

46

[quote]hedo wrote:
JustTheFacts wrote:
hedo wrote:
This will most likely provoke the response the Iranians are looking for.

The response the IRANIANS are looking for? Right.

Maybe the British staged the capture of the sailors and pretended the Iranians did it…right, it’s a conspiracy!

[/quote]

The Illuminati are pulling the strings.

47

[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
now, when will Canadians wake up? We need you. Stand up, shoulder to shoulder, with President Bush and all of us to confront this evil.

Nobody can stand shoulder to shoulder with the US. Or haven’t you noticed that you spend more money on the military than the rest of the world combined?

It’ll always be a symbolic stance at best, at worst a total discredit for the Canadian government from its own constituency and from the rest of the world. Remember Spain? [/quote]

Yeah, I remember the Madrid bombing. The scum knew the Spaniards are wimps and wouldn’t fight back. What happens if scum blow up American buildings — Iraq? Afghanistan? The precious Lands of Allah get fucking strafed and bombed.

How about the next time some assholes hit NY or Chicago, we fucking bomb Mecca? That’d end this bullshit once and for all.

48

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
… Remember Spain?

Yeah, I remember the Madrid bombing. The scum knew the Spaniards are wimps and wouldn’t fight back. What happens if scum blow up American buildings — Iraq? Afghanistan? The precious Lands of Allah get fucking strafed and bombed.

…

[/quote]

Probably another topic but when the Madrid bombings changed the course of elections in Spain why did nobody cry conspiracy?

49

It looks like the brits are just just rolling over and peeing on themselves. Better start practicing my Arabic cause the politics of appeasement will have us living under islamic law before to long.

50

[quote]hedo wrote:
Do you really think Canada can be intimidated as easily as Spain?
[/quote]

Here’s what I think: the Spanish government proactively supported Bush’s war despite the overwhelming opposition of the Spanish people to it. As much as 90% of them were opposed to the war.

That inevitably led to Aznar’s political death. I think Canadians have more brains than that and understand that blasting Iraq is only helping Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups to recruit.

Let me know what you think.

51

[quote]lixy wrote:
…
That inevitably led to Aznar’s political death. I think Canadians have more brains than that and understand that blasting Iraq is only helping Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups to recruit.

Let me know what you think.[/quote]

Is it supporting dictators, ignoring dictators or deposing dictators that helps al qaeda recruit?

52

[quote]lixy wrote:
hedo wrote:
Do you really think Canada can be intimidated as easily as Spain?

Here’s what I think: the Spanish government proactively supported Bush’s war despite the overwhelming opposition of the Spanish people to it. As much as 90% of them were opposed to the war.

That inevitably led to Aznar’s political death. I think Canadians have more brains than that and understand that blasting Iraq is only helping Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups to recruit.

Let me know what you think.[/quote]

So you think Canadians are smart(er) and Spaniards are dumb and America is to blame…I’m sure all will be pleased with the endorsement.

Spain caved into the threats of terrorists. Stronger nations like the US, Canada, Britian and Australia do not. Inevitably when terrorists can no longer inspire fear, their primary weapon is rendered useless. Study the previous versions of Islamic radicalism for the likely outcome.

The foriegn fighters in Iraq are dying in large numbers. Those that do not get killed and make it home are not so anxious to tangle with the Great Satan again. Those that die are no longer a problem.

To the point, rather then the tangent, do you think the British Sailors should be held and prosecuted by Iran?

53

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
lixy wrote:
…
That inevitably led to Aznar’s political death. I think Canadians have more brains than that and understand that blasting Iraq is only helping Al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups to recruit.

Let me know what you think.

Is it supporting dictators, ignoring dictators or deposing dictators that helps al qaeda recruit?[/quote]

Depends on what argument he is trying to make…but it’s always the fault of the US, all the time.

Hope that helps.

54

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Is it supporting dictators, ignoring dictators or deposing dictators that helps al qaeda recruit?[/quote]

C’mon, you know that it’s the presence of US bases, troops and the subsequent abuses that help them.

It’s not like the US ever had trouble with dictators as long as they played along. Let me refresh you memory:

Abacha, General Sani -Nigeria
Amin, Idi --Uganda
Banzer, Colonel Hugo -Bolivia
Batista, Fulgencio —Cuba
Bolkiah, Sir Hassanal -Brunei
Botha, P.W. -South Africa
Branco, General Humberto --Brazil
Cedras, Raoul -Haiti
Cerezo, Vinicio -Guatemala
Chiang Kai-Shek -Taiwan
Cordova, Roberto Suazo --Honduras
Christiani, Alfredo --El Salvador
Diem, Ngo Dihn -Vietnam
Doe, General Samuel -Liberia
Duvalier, Francois —Haiti
Duvalier, Jean Claude–Haiti
Fahd bin’Abdul-'Aziz, King --Saudi Arabia
Franco, General Francisco -Spain
Hitler, Adolf -Germany
Hassan II-Morocco
Marcos, Ferdinand --Philippines
Martinez, General Maximiliano Hernandez -El Salvador
Mobutu Sese Seko --Zaire
Noriega, General Manuel --Panama
Ozal, Turgut --Turkey
Pahlevi, Shah Mohammed Reza --Iran
Papadopoulos, George --Greece
Park Chung Hee -South Korea
Pinochet, General Augusto --Chile
Pol Pot-Cambodia
Rabuka, General Sitiveni --Fiji
Montt, General Efrain Rios --Guatemala
Salassie, Halie --Ethiopia
Salazar, Antonio de Oliveira -Portugal
Somoza, Anastasio Jr. --Nicaragua
Somoza, Anastasio, Sr. -Nicaragua
Smith, Ian --Rhodesia
Stroessner, Alfredo --Paraguay
Suharto, General -Indonesia
Trujillo, Rafael Leonidas -Dominican Republic
Videla, General Jorge Rafael - Argentina
Zia Ul-Haq, Mohammed —Pakistan

55

[quote]hedo wrote:
So you think Canadians are smart(er) and Spaniards are dumb and America is to blame…I’m sure all will be pleased with the endorsement.[/quote]

You’re twisting my words, but anyone who’s followed the thread knows what I mean.

What’s Iraq gotta do with Al-Qaeda? Can’t really say…

That works both ways you know; The US army terrorizes people around the world…

Finally a point we probably agree on; They should be released, unharmed and in a prompt manner.

What we’re gonna disagree on is that the revolutionary guards the US arrested in Iraq should also be set free.

56

[quote]lixy wrote:
hedo wrote:
So you think Canadians are smart(er) and Spaniards are dumb and America is to blame…I’m sure all will be pleased with the endorsement.

You’re twisting my words, but anyone who’s followed the thread knows what I mean.

Spain caved into the threats of terrorists.

What’s Iraq gotta do with Al-Qaeda? Can’t really say…

Stronger nations like the US, Canada, Britian and Australia do not. Inevitably when terrorists can no longer inspire fear, their primary weapon is rendered useless.

That works both ways you know; The US army terrorizes people around the world…

To the point, rather then the tangent, do you think the British Sailors should be held and prosecuted by Iran?

Finally a point we probably agree on; They should be released, unharmed and in a prompt manner.

What we’re gonna disagree on is that the revolutionary guards the US arrested in Iraq should also be set free.[/quote]

What’s to twist? It’s always the fault of the US isn’t it? Did I misrepresent your position? Have you written something to the contrary?

Actually Muslim extremists are far better known for terrorizing people around the world then the US Army, as I’m sure your realize but sadly are prevented by bigotry to admit.

Why should the Iranians be released? Is the location about where they were captured in dispute? Perhaps what they were doing?

Surely you of all people have heard of “Al-Queda in Iraq”. Z man said they have to win or suffer the consequences…before he suffered the consequences.

I don’t think anyone has bought your propaganda yet lixy? How long will you be on this fool’s errand of yours?

57

I wonder if the British captives are receiving Bush’s high standard of detainee treatment?

Waterboarding?

Stripped naked and hosed with water, kept in freezing cold?

Hooded for days at a time?

Chained standing up with arms over head, overnight? “Stress positions”?

Smeared with shit?

You know, the “Club Gitmo” routine… it’s like a spa, only with frat-style hijinks. If they didn’t get their fingers chopped off, “then it aint torture”!

58

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
I wonder if the British captives are receiving Bush’s high standard of detainee treatment?

Waterboarding?

Stripped naked and hosed with water, kept in freezing cold?

Hooded for days at a time?

Chained standing up with arms over head, overnight? “Stress positions”?

Smeared with shit?

You know, the “Club Gitmo” routine… it’s like a spa, only with frat-style hijinks. If they didn’t get their fingers chopped off, “then it aint torture”![/quote]

you know most of that stuff you said was psycological. Torture is when you physically inflict a lot of pain on someone like shocking their balls or branding them with hot iron or whatever else. But WTF, hooded for days at a time? That’s psycologically stressful but it’s not torture.

59

[quote]Brad61 wrote:
I wonder if the British captives are receiving Bush’s high standard of detainee treatment?

Waterboarding?..

Stripped naked and hosed with water, kept in freezing cold?

Hooded for days at a time?

Chained standing up with arms over head, overnight? “Stress positions”?

Smeared with shit?

You know, the “Club Gitmo” routine… it’s like a spa, only with frat-style hijinks. If they didn’t get their fingers chopped off, “then it aint torture”![/quote]

Of course not, since Iran hasnt the biggest guns they cant do that.

Damn, i wonder why some people see the US as “the great satan”. In the Nurnberg trial one guy was sentenced to death for allowing stuff less than that…

60

[quote]Ken Kaniff wrote:
Of course not, since Iran hasnt the biggest guns they cant do that.

Damn, i wonder why some people see the US as “the great satan”. In the Nurnberg trial one guy was sentenced to death for allowing stuff less than that…[/quote]

  1. Who was this person?

  2. What nation did he “fight” for?

  3. What specifically were his crimes?

  4. When was he convicted?

  5. What was the manner of his execution?

  6. When was his execution?

  7. What nation administered his execution?

I ask because I’m curious about your statement. I’m sure you wouldn’t mind posting evidence of your statement of fact because you surely didn’t exaggerate a claim, or just make things up.

Of course, maybe I’m confusing that vicious Nurnberg trial with another one…