Actually, I do not think we should go to war with Iran.
The most of the war-like acts which I complain about happened prior to our attempts to bring down the Iranian government. They have been hostile to us for 2 decades.
Plus, we disposed of two enemies on their borders, put them in a position of vast potential power and they have the audacity to arm the Tailban, al-Qaeda and al-Sadr against us? Screw these ingrates.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Actually, I do not think we should go to war with Iran.
The most of the war-like acts which I complain about happened prior to our attempts to bring down the Iranian government. They have been hostile to us for 2 decades.
[/quote]
It hasn’t been a totally one sided affair. Your governments have been interacting with each other poorly for quite a while now.
Don’t even think about suggesting that your country is doing anything in the Middle East for the benefit of Iran or that Iran would think you had done any of this on their behalf. This too is simply laughable.
[quote]John S. wrote:
vroom wrote:
John S. wrote:
Did I ever say things where that simple. But I ask you Vroom please read lixy’s posts in his threads, All condemn America but give the Muslim nations a free pass.
Your first part is right… he does condemn American actions a lot.
However, when he discusses Iran’s view of the situation, he is not “giving them a free pass”.
A lot of people here never consider world issues from other viewpoints, and it can be useful to do so, whether or not you agree with them.
Bullshit, the only thing he says is America has bases all over the world. WHAT EVER IRAN DOES THATS ALL HE FUCKING SAYS. Ask about bin laddin all he says is AMERICA HAS FUCKING BASES ALL OVER THE WORLD. Never mind the attacks over in europe I guess he would still say AMERICA HAS BASES ALL OVER THE WORLD.[/quote]
So when he says that, SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE BASES ALL OVER THE WORLD.
Thats why he keeps saying it. You won’t respond.
He’ll respond to terrorist remarks. We know he will and he has. Do I like his answers? Doesn’t matter.
You, and many others won’t even TOUCH some of the questions hes asked. You just immidiatly call on him for being anti-American and dismiss his points. Just because someone out their did something worse doesn’t mean you get to ignore every bad thing the US has done.
Respond. Write something about why the US having bases all over the world and claiming to be for peace isn’t hypocritically. I’m sure you could do it.
If you give him an answer, he’ll stop bugging you, and he’ll debate you on it. Thats what this forum is for.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
I would like to jump in here on a couple of points. First off, America will never leave Iraq, America has bases all over the world…Right, but not in Uzbekistan. They wanted us out and we left. I am sure, when the time comes, we would do the same in Iraq. [/quote]
Time will tell.
Whom you armed and supported throughout the Iran/Iraq war.
Note to self: Remind the Iranians to send Americans flowers.
I am not the only one who condemns those actions. Matter of fact, and to take only the most unambigious case, the International Court of Justice itself condemned your intervention in Nicaragua.
And for God’s sake, don’t be so ridiculous as to compare tiny islands hundreds of miles from your coasts, to real countries immediately adjacent to Iran.
There is no possible comparison between Grenada or Nicaragua and the current conflict. But the important bit is that you acknowledged the self-defence component.
Here’s why: If the US didn’t invade Iraq, none of that would have happened.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Respond. Write something about why the US having bases all over the world and claiming to be for peace isn’t hypocritically. I’m sure you could do it.
[/quote]
What’s wrong with having bases all over the world? It’s not like we are colonizing these countries. The countries’ governments request that we put a base in. Like I said, we had a base in Uzbekistan, they told us to leave and we did.
As far as the bases being there for peace, look at the geography involved and tell me why these bases are where they are. A lot of them are in Europe, which was over shadowed at one time by the Soviet Union, who also, by the way had bases all over the world. These Us bases were put there to prevent an attack by the Soviet Union. I can see a similar reason for a base in South Korea.
Why don’t you give me a few countries that have bases and explain your reasons we should not have them there. Who are these countries’ neighbors? Are they potentially hostile?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Before you reply to my above post by saying that Bush called Iran one of the Axis of Evil and threatened them, might I remind you that Iran has called America Great Satan for almost 20 years, pre-dating the Axis of evil speech. [/quote]
And may I remind you of the atrocities commited by the US-backed Shah?
You can’t be so stupid to believe that Iran would knowingly supply Al-Qaeda with arms, now can you?
And Iranian threats are only hot air. We all know that they can’t hurt you. You, on the other hand, could blow Iran up into the stone age.
Get it?
Again, Iran isn’t the one threatening your sovereignty. It’s the other way around. YOU are the ones surrounding them and with the ability to inflict serious damage. Iran couldn’t take you out and you know it.
[quote]vroom wrote:
It hasn’t been a totally one sided affair. Your governments have been interacting with each other poorly for quite a while now.
We never did any of the things I listed above. No need to be repetative. They are the reasons we’ve had poor relations.
Don’t even think about suggesting that your country is doing anything in the Middle East for the benefit of Iran or that Iran would think you had done any of this on their behalf. This too is simply laughable.
[/quote]
I never said we did it to benefit Iran. The reasons we did so were written in an above post. But the fact that we did what we did BENEFITTED Iran regardless. Yet they chose to attack us.
Next, We are in Iraq. Likewise, Iraq was a hostile enemy of the Iranians.
Whom you armed and supported throughout the Iran/Iraq war.
Until we argue about Nicaragua, the contras, then you complain that we armed Iran during the war.
Anti-american bias.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Plus, we disposed of two enemies on their borders, put them in a position of vast potential power and they have the audacity to arm the Tailban, al-Qaeda and al-Sadr against us? Screw these ingrates. [/quote]
You’re seriously suggesting that Iran would arm Al-Qaeda? You are seriously misinformed my friend.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Until we argue about Nicaragua, the contras, then you complain that we armed Iran during the war. [/quote]
I never complained about arming Iran per se. I complained about how the money was used to destabilze a legitimate government in Nicaragua and killing thousands in doing so. Clear?
[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
Plus, we disposed of two enemies on their borders, put them in a position of vast potential power and they have the audacity to arm the Tailban, al-Qaeda and al-Sadr against us? Screw these ingrates.
You’re seriously suggesting that Iran would arm Al-Qaeda? You are seriously misinformed my friend.[/quote]
Those in glass houses…
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=7191
http://analysis.threatswatch.org/2006/11/terror-irans-chief-export/
http://billroggio.com/archives/2007/01/iran_and_alqaeda_in.php
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/11/iran_forging_alliance_with_alq_1.php
http://www.aina.org/news/20060518110454.htm
lixy, you may not believe this, however, when you demanded an apology, I wondered if I was being too harsh on you.
After reflection, you deserve a great deal of scorn for your attitude and flagrant disregard for the lives of Americans. Further, you continue to post things that support and in some instances seem to excuse terrorism against the United States.
I included a wide variety of links. There are references to European, American, and Iraqi news services.
iran is arming al qaeda. They are also arming the taliban.
If you can excuse this under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, that is very illustrative.
There is NO EXCUSE nor JUSTIFICATION FOR ARMING al qaeda. “Oh, the iranian’s are feeling threatened.”
Good. Maybe they ought to stop kidnapping soldiers, threatening annhilation of sovereign states (innocent men, women, and children), arming the murderous scum of the universe in Iraq, Somalia, Lebanon, etc…
JeffR
[quote]lixy wrote:
Sorry, lad. A referendum will always be most legitimate. Unilateral decisions by heads of states will always be the least legitimate in my book.[/quote]
But this is exactly why we vote for representatives. Or is your stance one that rule of law should be completely by polls?
[quote]
JeffR wrote:
Yes, blame it on the terrorists. Second, plenty of people were dying in Iraq in shredders, being raped, and dying of hunger. Iraq was CERTAINLY not peaceful nor benign prior to the invasion.
lixy wrote:
Relatively, it certainly was peaceful prior to the invasion.[/quote]
See, here you go again. You have shown your complete ignorance of the Saddam Regime. It’s well documented. Try and educate yourself before you speak on this topic again.
[quote] lixy wrote:
I’ll be expecting apologies.[/quote]
Apologize to the Iraqis whose family members were summarily executed, for it is they who you are insulting with your inferences of “relative” peace in Iraq.
[quote]lixy wrote:
By the way, how old are you? I’m really curious. Your writing and lack of understand of basic issues suggest that you’re a teen. Care to confirm that?[/quote]
You realize you’re arguing with an illiterate moron, right?
Thoughts on Lixy’s last few posts:
So what if America is sorounding Iran, so what if they called Iran “Axis of Evil.” Does that give them the right to supply arms to our enemies? Nothing is forcing them to do so.
The only thing they and Saudi Arabia fear is that the democracy in Iraq would succeed. Because if it did, their governments would come crashing down when their citizens demanded the same.
That is why they arm the enemy.
As far as the Iran/Iraq war goes: In your opinion then, it was correct for the US to arm Iran, but not Iraq? I am confused here.
Next time you are searching for a map, look up a map of the Soviet Union’s sphere of interest circa 1985. You will see that they controlled more than just a few small islands and South American countries. Do the same for Communist China. They were both formidable enemies. The US was totally justified stopping the Communist invasion of our hemisphere.
Lixy,
May I remind you of the atrocities of the Ayatollah Khomeini? No wait I already did:
In other words, it’s ok for Iran to insult us, threaten us, hold our embassy employees hostage, use proxies to kill our marines, civilians, peacekeepers, and kidnap numerous people, kill some and ransom others, 20 years ago in Lebanon, and supply arms to the Taliban, Al Qaeda in Iraq and Sadr’s militia today, but not vice versa?
So what your saying is it’s ok for Iran
to do all of that because we backed the Shah?
If Iran is afraid we can take them out easily, then maybe they should shut the hell up already.
Bush may have threatened to use action, but the Iranians CLEARLY ARE using action against us and Nato.
(I copied this from another of your very similar posts hehehe)
The US threatening them with a proxy army is no different than them arming and helping Hezbollah. Hezbollah are the ones who committed many of the atrocities listed above. Why is one side’s actions right and one side’s wrong if they are doing the same exact thing?
You said you were not in favor of the current Iranian government. (I don’t actually believe this for a moment). Who exactly do you want to rule them?
Well, if calling Iran part of the “Axis of Evil” makes their proxy war understandable, threats to destroy Israel is understandably enough to…You see where I’m going with this?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Well, if calling Iran part of the “Axis of Evil” makes their proxy war understandable, threats to destroy Israel is understandably enough to…You see where I’m going with this?[/quote]
See, this is a more reasonable statement.
One, you understand the perceived threat that Israel has. Two, you realize that perceived threats are significant to the recipient.
Wow, making some big steps here… keep it up!
[quote]vroom wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, if calling Iran part of the “Axis of Evil” makes their proxy war understandable, threats to destroy Israel is understandably enough to…You see where I’m going with this?
See, this is a more reasonable statement.
One, you understand the perceived threat that Israel has. Two, you realize that perceived threats are significant to the recipient.
Wow, making some big steps here… keep it up![/quote]
Is funding terrorist groups, taking American hostages, and fighting proxy wars against NATO and the Iraq Coalition a VASTLY greater perceived threat? Oh wait, that’s a realized threat. Well, then Iranians can’t blame us if we destroy their Government. They should have considered how their actions would be perceived by the recipient.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Is funding terrorist groups, taking American hostages, and fighting proxy wars against NATO and the Iraq Coalition a VASTLY greater perceived threat? Oh wait, that’s a realized threat. Well, then Iranians can’t blame us if we destroy their Government. They should have considered how their actions would be perceived by the recipient.[/quote]
How far back in time do you want to go Sloth?
There is a history of crap happening in the Middle East, so picking just a few recent events is a bit silly.
Try not to let your hate displace your reason.
Honestly, and I’ve said so in the past, I don’t trust Iran. I don’t want them with nuclear technology. I would not shed a tear if their regime was toppled. They should not be aiding terrorism, at all, because terrorism is wrong.
However, things aren’t exactly that simple. You can’t ignore the past and the many years of enmity and hatred that have persisted in most Middle Eastern countries.
Well, not if you are concerned about eventually not being at war.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Sloth wrote:
There is a history of crap happening in the Middle East, so picking just a few recent events is a bit silly.
A FEW EVENTS!! these are the events which shaped our current policy with Iran.
Try not to let your hate displace your reason.
However, things aren’t exactly that simple. You can’t ignore the past and the many years of enmity and hatred that have persisted in most Middle Eastern countries.
[/quote]
I don’t think he is ignoring the past. He is stating Iranian aggression against the US. What I don’t understand about these Iranian sympathizers (and I know from your post Vroom, you ain’t one of 'um) is this:
They blame every crime Iran has committed against the US on the US backing the Shah and it is ok, reasonable, logical ect.
But…when we list the Iranian crimes against us since the fall of the Shah as reasons we try to disrupt their government, it is NOT ok, reasonable, logical, ect.
That is a blatant anti-american arguement.
When you say you would like to see the Iranian government fall, who would you like to see take their place? If the US is backing moderate Iranians and puts them in power in a popular revolution, what harm would that cause?
Couldn’t be any worse than the Ayatollah kicking out the Shah and executing thousands, enslaving women, ect.