[quote]Gkhan wrote:
The Afghan nation is weaker than shit. That did not stop people there from attacking us.[/quote]
WHAT?
There wasn’t a single Afghan with the 9/11 crew. Don’t think for a second that it takes more than a few determined people to kill on a semi-massive scale. The genie is out of the bottle, and you’d better hope that you only have to deal with the idiots we’ve seen since 9/11.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
I don’t have a preference for lives, I have a preference for peace. And tolerance. But I am a Western liberal, and I am picky like that.
My point is this - Israeli nuclear power saves more lives than it threatens. If Israel doesn’t have nuclear power, we’d see more conventional attacks, more attempts at intimidation.
Overwhelming force projection saves lives - all lives, regardless of whether they are Israeli or Arabs.
[/quote]
I don’t remember saying Israel should have it’s hundreds of nuclear bombs removed. I remember suggesting exactly what you’re suggesting, except for the other side as well.
Also, I doubt there would be much conventional war anyway. Who’s going to attack Israel? Not Egypt, Syria can’t even reclaim the Golan, not Iran [the US is just itching for an excuse to invade], not Jordan, I won’t even bother mentioning Lebanon.
There are obstacles, and not everyone wants peace, but that is true of both sides.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Israel claims it does not possess nukes [/quote]
It’s pretty irrelevant given that Tel-Aviv refused to sign the NPT and told the world to take a hike.
And there is that Moroccan dude that goes by the name of Mordecai Vanunu. You know, the one jailed for almost his entire existence…
There’s also the 2006 slip by the Israeli PM.
And then there’s the international consensus on the matter.
But if you insist, we can leave it at “alleged wink wink”
You’re not so good with grammar and comprehension, are you? Here’s what I wrote:
The US is extremely antagonistic to Venezuela and might even have been behind the 2002 coup against Chavez.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
lixy wrote:
Go tell that the Southern Lebanese.
Tell that to the Northen Israels who have rockets fired “on their heads.”[/quote]
Tell what?
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
lixy wrote:
Exactly. Zionists are the nicest people and the region that is now known as Israel was an uninhabited piece of land. The current animosity is solely the fault of the “barbarians” and their inherent anti-Semitism. Thank God that Israel is containing the hordes of terrorists. Otherwise, them Muslims will be coming at us with machetes.
Ha, other than what is written in the Bible, the Jews have no history of invading anyone. How many countries did the Jews conquer and convert to Judasm?
How many did the Muslims - (to Islam, of course)?[/quote]
Who’s speaking of Jews?
[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
The Afghan nation is weaker than shit. That did not stop people there from attacking us.
WHAT?
There wasn’t a single Afghan with the 9/11 crew. Don’t think for a second that it takes more than a few determined people to kill on a semi-massive scale. The genie is out of the bottle, and you’d better hope that you only have to deal with the idiots we’ve seen since 9/11. [/quote]
I said people there. Not Afghans.
[quote]lixy wrote:
You’re not so good with grammar and comprehension, are you? Here’s what I wrote:
The US is extremely antagonistic to Venezuela and might even have been behind the 2002 coup against Chavez.[/quote]
And I said they claim that they were not. So why bring it up?
[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
lixy wrote:
Go tell that the Southern Lebanese.
Tell that to the Northen Israels who have rockets fired “on their heads.”
Tell what? [/quote]
Find your own post and figure it out.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Gkhan wrote:
lixy wrote:
Exactly. Zionists are the nicest people and the region that is now known as Israel was an uninhabited piece of land. The current animosity is solely the fault of the “barbarians” and their inherent anti-Semitism. Thank God that Israel is containing the hordes of terrorists. Otherwise, them Muslims will be coming at us with machetes.
Ha, other than what is written in the Bible, the Jews have no history of invading anyone. How many countries did the Jews conquer and convert to Judasm?
How many did the Muslims - (to Islam, of course)?
Who’s speaking of Jews?[/quote]
Take what I’ve written, replace the word “Jew” with the word “Zionist” and answer the question.
[quote]Sikkario wrote:
Are you serious? If you are you need to study up the situation. Start with the bill of rights and go from there.
I never said they had more or less than you do. I’m asking you, what are these freedoms you hold so dearly that make your existence so much better than theirs.
The citizens of Iran are guaranteed rights and freedoms as well, their people are guaranteed personal freedoms and liberties just like ours are. Whether or not their government always abides by this will probably come under scrutiny now that I have made this assertion. We know that our gov’t has also routinely violated the rights of its people throughout its history as well.
You’ve made the assertion that the ruling elite of Iran enjoy freedoms and the citizen lacks these freedoms.
That here in the United States we do not have a ruling elite, and our citizens enjoy greater freedom than theirs.
Thus we exist on a moral high ground compared to theirs.
I’m asking you to back up your claim or forfeit it.[/quote]
No, you are rambling.
[quote]Sikkario wrote:
This is actually what my paper is about.
My new question, is, why does everyone think Iran is insane, unstable, aggressive and otherwise evil?
My piece I’m writing is called, In Defense of Iran.
In recent history, the only country that has tried to control, conquer, damage or otherwise maim any other country in relation to Persia, has been the United States.
Iran has not EVER acted aggressively towards the United States, in fact the past 50 years has been a continual escalation, alienation, damaging and maiming of Iran, by the United States.
The only incident that stands out, is the Iranian hostage crisis, which was a direct retaliation performed by militants against American attempts to control Iran’s government.
…
[/quote]
What about directing and funding the bombing of our Marine peacekeepers in Lebanon?
What about the many kidnappings they directed in Lebanon?
[quote]Sikkario wrote:
I agree that we see Iran differently. I don’t think you could call the knuckle head in power right now a stable person. I don’t think the country is stable. You don’t give a 2 year old kid a razor blade. I think the same common sense should apply to rogue states.
Ahlmenijad, hasn’t killed anyone. …
[/quote]
What about the homosexuals they hang from construction equipment?
What about the terrorists he trains and arms in Iraq?
You are just plain wrong on so many counts. Your paper will be hard to write if you use reality instead of Iranian propaganda.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
will to power wrote:
rainjack wrote:
will to power wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Sikkario wrote:
I think the ME is already as unstable as could possibly be, considering Pakistan is at the point of total collapse and has a fully equipped nuclear arsenal.
Despite this, the USA, still is in bed with Pakistan.
I don’t think you have to worry so much about Pakistan going nuts wrt the ME - their enemy is India. Their attention will be turned to them - not Israel, or Iran.
What about the concern of certain groups acquiring nuclear weapons? I don’t expect a sensible state to use them when faced with a nuclear enemy but if crazy enough individuals did the situations could get much worse.
I think that if Pakistan even farts in the shape of a mushroom cloud, India will turn the entire country into a glass parking lot.
I was actually concerned about, say, Bin Laden getting his hands on nukes since he operates in Pakistan and using or trying to use them on Israel.
I don’t think that is a real possibility. At least not in my mind. He has sanctuary in the South, but that is about it. That is a long way from him stealing some nukes.
[/quote]
Agreed.
[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
will to power wrote:
rainjack wrote:
will to power wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Sikkario wrote:
I think the ME is already as unstable as could possibly be, considering Pakistan is at the point of total collapse and has a fully equipped nuclear arsenal.
Despite this, the USA, still is in bed with Pakistan.
I don’t think you have to worry so much about Pakistan going nuts wrt the ME - their enemy is India. Their attention will be turned to them - not Israel, or Iran.
What about the concern of certain groups acquiring nuclear weapons? I don’t expect a sensible state to use them when faced with a nuclear enemy but if crazy enough individuals did the situations could get much worse.
I think that if Pakistan even farts in the shape of a mushroom cloud, India will turn the entire country into a glass parking lot.
I was actually concerned about, say, Bin Laden getting his hands on nukes since he operates in Pakistan and using or trying to use them on Israel.
I don’t think that is a real possibility. At least not in my mind. He has sanctuary in the South, but that is about it. That is a long way from him stealing some nukes.
Agreed.[/quote]
Probably true, but I’ll feel much more comfortable if Pakistan’s political situation gets more stable.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
will to power wrote:
There’s a huge difference between conventional and nuclear warfare, in particular to the risks for the civilian population.
Correct observation.
Actually, a nuclear response to conventional warfare is exactly what I’m referring to. Whether or not you agree if an invasion occurs, that’s no justification for nuking civilian cities.
Interesting - you seem worried about justifications, but you don’t seem worried about the initial “justification” of attacking Israel. Nuclear weapons act as a deterrent to the Muslim barbarians’ desire to push Israel into the sea. If they get nuclear weapons, that deterrent disappears.
[/quote]
Irrelevant. The “Muslim barbarians” (and condemning Zionists is racist?) are at their weakest point militarily since they came into being, there is no chance of Israel being defeated in a conventional invasion by Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, etc. Martin Van Creveld, a brilliant Israeli military historian, wrote a good book on the subject a year or two back.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Sikkario wrote:
I respect your opinion.
I’d like to know more about your position however, so it seems they’ve earned a level of condemnation in your opinion. From where does this condemnation derive, you indicate they’ve earned this condemnation, so I’d like to not what they have done to earn it.
Iran - illiberal autocracy that sponsors terrorism, is an infant totalitarian state, and wants nuclear weapons so it can change its weight class in hopes of muscling Israel.
[/quote]
Iran may be a lot of things, but it is not an autocracy. An autocracy has an autocrat. A ruler with absolute power. Ivan the Terrible. Louis XIV. Ahmedinejad, Putin, Chavez, and a host of other “bad guys” are not autocrats. It’s a word people misuse regularly, like “fascist.”
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Take what I’ve written, replace the word “Jew” with the word “Zionist” and answer the question.[/quote]
Hum! Compare a 15 century old 1.5 billion people with a group of folks who are a couple of million strong and whose movement kicked off in the late 19th century? Really?
UNGA resolution 3379? Go find something remotely similar denouncing Islam. Wait…I know: the whole world is in cahoots with the barbarians to throw the Jews in the sea. Thank God the US is there to protect the weak and to rebut aggressors.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
This makes no sense - what make you think I am old? [/quote]
You do have a bitchin’ knowledge of your country’s history (not so much the rest of the world), so I assume you are old. Well, older than me at least.
My dad passed away in his 30s when I was one years old. He himself lost his father (my granddad, that is) when he was 6 years old.
So, no. No trust fund for either of us. Not planning on leaving any for my kids either (what with the supps and all).
And since we’re on gloomy personal life topics, my uncle died three weeks ago of brain aneurysm and my mother is struggling with cancer. I’d be content if I make it past my 40s.
[quote]lixy wrote:
UNGA resolution 3379? Go find something remotely similar denouncing Islam. [/quote]
They could use one denouncing Islamic supremacism. Alot of religious minorties would be grateful. Not to mention the victims of Islamic seperatists. I’m just saying…