[quote]Chushin wrote:
I do have to say, were it me, I think at this point I’d be trying to surround myself with compassion rather than the animosity you find here…
Again, sorry to hear about your family.[/quote]
Much appreciated.
That’s one of those times where being religious helps. Not that I’m getting any sleep though. Been 4 days that I watch the sunrise (in Sweden and in the winter, it is not early as can probably guess).
Oh well…I’m guessing no PRs at the gym today.
[quote]lixy wrote:
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]
I don’t know you lixy, but for what it’s worth you have my condolences.
I perceive Iran to be have a regime run by leaders with a Jew paranoia akin to one A. Hitler and plans on an imperialist Persian adventure toward the goal of eliminating the Jewish people in Israel with nuclear weapons. You can go to MEMRI tv and look at videos translated from Iranian television. That will tell you all you need to know.
The Iranian people themselves are probably fine. I’ve met several, and they are generally very fine people and disinterested in Islam.
[quote]PRCalDude wrote:
I perceive Iran to be have a regime run by leaders with a Jew paranoia akin to one A. Hitler and plans on an imperialist Persian adventure toward the goal of eliminating the Jewish people in Israel with nuclear weapons. You can go to MEMRI tv and look at videos translated from Iranian television. That will tell you all you need to know.
The Iranian people themselves are probably fine. I’ve met several, and they are generally very fine people and disinterested in Islam. [/quote]
I find it odd that there is such a disconnect between the individual, and the governance of said people.
[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]
You’re being dishonest here. In Iran they are alot more progressive than you say, and if you are blaming the acts of individuals and lynch mobs on the President of the country you’d be false. Iran is far more progressive and forgiving than you’re ally Saudi Arabia, that was the home of I think more than half of the bombers involved in 9/11 and would behead a homosexual in a public square.
In Iran, they see things differently than we do, and have a a very different culture, as do most in the middle east. But they don’t execute, homosexuals and drug users in their country.
They have rehabilatation programs and other initiatives for both groups.
I’m not saying I personally believe homosexuals need “reeducatioon” but they don’t have the intention of wiping them off the face of the planet like you’re asserting.
Also, what the hell is a terrorist? The two main opposition posters in this thread, are asserting that we are in some sort of war with Global Terror or something. Which makes no sense, as if there is some sort of Terror Army led by Cobra Commander. This is false and unreasonable assertion, because the wars we are in are what is creating these “terrorists.” Many of whom fight conventionally and are no more prone to terror tactics than the US Air Force’s shock and awe.
I don’t know of any terrorists Iran trains. Iran trains insurgents in Iraq, and had trained conventional guerilla forces in Lebanon who I don’t think could be defined as “terroristic”, is this a word? Than post-Saddam Iraqi opposition forces, they’ve supplied mortars and other weaponry, conventional weaponry.
If supplying soldiers and training partisans is indicative of terrorism, than the United States is the most terrorist nation on the globe and the main terrorizer in the Middle East.
Especially when you consider the effects of aerial bombings, the weddings those bombs have landed on, and the children they have killed and injured.
–
My assertion now is, the pro-American occupation of Iraq, and Iran is crazy crowd seem to hold the perception that they are fighting some kind of global army of terrorists, created and supplied by the main percieved antagonists in the region. I say, you are wrong, that there are no terrorists as you see them in the Middle East only individuals who wish to see foreign occupiers out of their countries and American politicians out of their affairs.
If you don’t agree with this, my question then asks, if we invaded Afghanistan to fight these terrorists for 9/11, why then did we not hold Pakistan and Saudi Arabia responsible as well? These two countries had mroe clear and present links with this supposed army of terror than either Afghanistan or Iraq.
[quote]Sikkario wrote:
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.
You’re being dishonest here. In Iran they are alot more progressive than you say, and if you are blaming the acts of individuals and lynch mobs on the President of the country you’d be false. Iran is far more progressive and forgiving than you’re ally Saudi Arabia, that was the home of I think more than half of the bombers involved in 9/11 and would behead a homosexual in a public square.
In Iran, they see things differently than we do, and have a a very different culture, as do most in the middle east. But they don’t execute, homosexuals and drug users in their country.
They have rehabilatation programs and other initiatives for both groups.
I’m not saying I personally believe homosexuals need “reeducatioon” but they don’t have the intention of whiping them off the face of the planet like you’re asserting.[/quote]
And pray tell,how would you know what their intentions may or may not be?
Psychic hotline?
[quote]And pray tell,how would you know what their intentions may or may not be?
Psychic hotline?[/quote]
I suppose that was a bad assertion, there is no they, of Iran. It is a democracy so just like the United States there are probably political bodies that fall all over the spectrum I was making this assertion however i response to the op’s assertion which wished to pain a picture of Iran being murderous and villian-like.
It was a bad assertion ,because like the rest of us,what you have is an opinion,nothing more or less…
I’m just really oppossed to this black and white, WERE AT WAR drawing alot people are trying to create of the region and it’s people.
The way I see it, it has been the actions of Britain and then the United States, that have shaped this opposition, and now the foriegn policy of the USA for the past half century has only worked to exacerbate it, worse and worse.
The representation that muslims just come out of nowhere, with the idea to DESTROY THE UNITED STATES, is propesterous.
It fails to take responsibility for the actions of our own nation in this conflict.
Case and point. We didn’t do random bombings of the Soviet Union because we disagreed with them ideologically… because we knew it wouldn’t be tolerated. Yet in the Middle East, we’ve dropped tons and tons of bombs upon them, created armed militant states in the region which have spilled the blood of millions, interally exacerbating their country’s political situations through armament of violent groups and attempted to conquer their sovereign governments through proxy.
The characterization that there is a some sort of teroristic army that is unjustified and acting out of pure aggression is absurd when one looks at our history in the region.
If anything, they are simply striking back and defending themselves in the only way available to them.
The more extreme groups aligned with them have been created, from our actions and noone elses.
This is not to say Al-Qaeda is right, but they don’t shoulder all the blame of this conflict.
We started fucking around with the middle east, making the young men of many country’s feel castrated and flaunting our global super power status LONG before we thought such a global intifada against geo-political hegemony were possible…unfortunately people push back, and it’s come to bite us in the ass.
The USA would have no antagoanists in the Middle East right now, if it would have never interfered in that part of the globe in the first place.
We have no business there, it is not in our immediate sphere of influence and no nation has ever endeavored to make harm into our people, prior to our entry into their arena.
The solution many of you seem to think however, is deep our dicks furthter and further, and further, and further, and further, into their affairs, adn their region and somehow we will end the antagonization.
This is wrong.
I point out as well, that Russia another nation which fucked around in the ME’s affair, faces a real threat from Muslim extremism, unlike us, for they share land borders with these nations, yet now only deals with the issue within their own nation (Chechnya) and has actually created strong diplomatic relations with countries which HATED the former soviet union.
Forgiveness and peace are possible, but only if we choose treat sovereign nations with the respect they deserve and stop our aggressive campagain of control and destruction.
Back out, apologize, truly apologize, cease support for Israel or any foreign state, pursue diplomatic relations with, nations, inssurrections, and groups within the region.
Worry about United States internal security and internal defense.
Make no reparations or amends, just back out, stop giving a fuck and start acting liek Switzerland.
[quote]Sikkario wrote:
I’m just really oppossed to this black and white, WERE AT WAR drawing alot people are trying to create of the region and it’s people.
The way I see it, it has been the actions of Britain and then the United States, that have shaped this opposition, and now the foriegn policy of the USA for the past half century has only worked to exacerbate it, worse and worse.
The representation that muslims just come out of nowhere, with the idea to DESTROY THE UNITED STATES, is propesterous.
It fails to take responsibility for the actions of our own nation in this conflict.
Case and point. We didn’t do random bombings of the Soviet Union because we disagreed with them ideologically… because we knew it wouldn’t be tolerated. Yet in the Middle East, we’ve dropped tons and tons of bombs upon them, created armed militant states in the region which have spilled the blood of millions, interally exacerbating their country’s political situations through armament of violent groups and attempted to conquer their sovereign governments through proxy.
The characterization that there is a some sort of teroristic army that is unjustified and acting out of pure aggression is absurd when one looks at our history in the region.
If anything, they are simply striking back and defending themselves in the only way available to them.
The more extreme groups aligned with them have been created, from our actions and noone elses.
This is not to say Al-Qaeda is right, but they don’t shoulder all the blame of this conflict.
We started fucking around with the middle east, making the young men of many country’s feel castrated and flaunting our global super power status LONG before we thought such a global intifada against geo-political hegemony were possible…unfortunately people push back, and it’s come to bite us in the ass.
The USA would have no antagoanists in the Middle East right now, if it would have never interfered in that part of the globe in the first place.
We have no business there, it is not in our immediate sphere of influence and no nation has ever endeavored to make harm into our people, prior to our entry into their arena.
The solution many of you seem to think however, is deep our dicks furthter and further, and further, and further, and further, into their affairs, adn their region and somehow we will end the antagonization.
This is wrong.
I point out as well, that Russia another nation which fucked around in the ME’s affair, faces a real threat from Muslim extremism, unlike us, for they share land borders with these nations, yet now only deals with the issue within their own nation (Chechnya) and has actually created strong diplomatic relations with countries which HATED the former soviet union.
Forgiveness and peace are possible, but only if we choose to stop being aggressive.[/quote]
Listen up.
Don’t presume to lecture me.
Especially if you’re going to portray yourself as being on both sides of the conflict.You can’t be ‘we’ on both angles,so what this saying to me is that you’re actually just spouting shit.
So in fairness,before you expend what intellectual capital you may have on here,clean up your thinking and writing,then post again.
Nice catch.But you know exactly what I’m talkig about.
[quote]Listen up.
Don’t presume to lecture me.
Especially if you’re going to portray yourself as being on both sides of the conflict.You can’t be ‘we’ on both angles,so what this saying to me is that you’re actually just spouting shit.
So in fairness,before you expend what intellectual capital you may have on here,clean up your thinking and writing,then post again.[/quote]
I have no idea what you are talking about. Also, my post wasn’t directed specifically at you, I was expressing my opinion on the issue at large.
I have my own opinions on the issue, and I’ve expressed them pretty clearly.
Iran is not the aggressor in this situation or in recent history.
Iran is not a threat and if it were a threat it would only be in response to our provocation and for their own defense.
Iran is not a crazy, lunatic theocracy, but a develop nation with a democratic and theocratic aspect.
If Iran were purusing nuclear weapons, which I don’t think so, I don’t believe that is a bad thing, or outside of their rights to have.
I think you have me confused with someone who is playing both sides of the argument because, I haven’t resorted to personal attacks or ad hominem arguments on the USA, Israel or Iran.
You don’t need to villify other nations in order to have an opinion on global politics.
[quote]Sikkario wrote:
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.
You’re being dishonest here. In Iran they are alot more progressive than you say, and if you are blaming the acts of individuals and lynch mobs on the President of the country you’d be false. Iran is far more progressive and forgiving than you’re ally Saudi Arabia, that was the home of I think more than half of the bombers involved in 9/11 and would behead a homosexual in a public square.
In Iran, they see things differently than we do, and have a a very different culture, as do most in the middle east. But they don’t execute, homosexuals and drug users in their country.
They have rehabilatation programs and other initiatives for both groups.
I’m not saying I personally believe homosexuals need “reeducatioon” but they don’t have the intention of wiping them off the face of the planet like you’re asserting.
Also, what the hell is a terrorist? The two main opposition posters in this thread, are asserting that we are in some sort of war with Global Terror or something. Which makes no sense, as if there is some sort of Terror Army led by Cobra Commander. This is false and unreasonable assertion, because the wars we are in are what is creating these “terrorists.” Many of whom fight conventionally and are no more prone to terror tactics than the US Air Force’s shock and awe.
I don’t know of any terrorists Iran trains. Iran trains insurgents in Iraq, and had trained conventional guerilla forces in Lebanon who I don’t think could be defined as “terroristic”, is this a word? Than post-Saddam Iraqi opposition forces, they’ve supplied mortars and other weaponry, conventional weaponry.
If supplying soldiers and training partisans is indicative of terrorism, than the United States is the most terrorist nation on the globe and the main terrorizer in the Middle East.
Especially when you consider the effects of aerial bombings, the weddings those bombs have landed on, and the children they have killed and injured.
–
My assertion now is, the pro-American occupation of Iraq, and Iran is crazy crowd seem to hold the perception that they are fighting some kind of global army of terrorists, created and supplied by the main percieved antagonists in the region. I say, you are wrong, that there are no terrorists as you see them in the Middle East only individuals who wish to see foreign occupiers out of their countries and American politicians out of their affairs.
If you don’t agree with this, my question then asks, if we invaded Afghanistan to fight these terrorists for 9/11, why then did we not hold Pakistan and Saudi Arabia responsible as well? These two countries had mroe clear and present links with this supposed army of terror than either Afghanistan or Iraq.
[/quote]
You are wrong. They do execute both in Iran. I don’t know what else to say to you because you are just straight up wrong.
[quote]
Treating drug abuse in Iran
Formal and explicit treatment of drug abusers after the 1979 revolution began in 1994, after an amendment in the acts concerning addiction by the Iranian legislative system. From this period onwards, medical intervention for drug abuse became legalized and explicit. Drug users seeking treatment would be exempt from prosecution and could freely refer to registered centers. At this time, the Prevention Deputy of Welfare Organization set up outpatient centers for volun-tarily admitted drug users. In these centers, rapidly burgeoning in all provinces, drug users were detoxified by clonidine and miscellaneous psycho-active therapeutics for a period of 14 days. During the detoxification period and thereafter, patients received individual counseling, supportive psychotherapy and participated in group sessions mainly with an unstructured composition. Some centers mandated routine urine toxicology tests and service was offered for only totally abstinent patients, although some had less stringent inclusion and follow-up demand. In some centers, separate psychoeducational and counseling sessions, mostly in groups, were offered to family members of the drug abusers. The above�??mentioned services were offered at very low subsidized prices and frequently after paying an admission fee; all follow-up services, including relapse treatment, were free of charge.7[/quote]
http://www.ams.ac.ir/AIM/0253/0253184.htm
You might want to do a little thing called ‘research’ before you make you’re strong assertions my friend. Otherwise you just look like a fool.
Sodomy laws in Iran are comparable to those of the USA. If you can find me and official case where an individual was killed for the official reason of homosexuality in Iran, I will cede my point to you.
But from what I know, homosexuality isn’t a crime in Iran, sodomy is prohibited and the gov’ts official stance is that there are no gays in Iran. So to execute for being gay, if there are no gays in Iran, doesn’t really make any sense, where do these gays come from? I’m speaking from a purely bureacratic notion here.
It would be impossible for the government to discriminate or pass legislation against homosexuality if it does not view homosexuality as existing in Iran.
That would be like the United States government decreeing it will be exterminating all the indigenous australian aboriginal communities in Arizona when it’s offical stance is, the United States has no Australian Aborigines.
[quote]Don’t they teach you kids how to spell and proofread – let alone construct a decent sentence – in school anymore?
Forget your distorted, idealistic, rose-colored views. I’d be glad if you could write something readable.[/quote]
I’m writing papers right now, and make this posts quickly and on the side.
I think I have some spelling errors and the traditional letter displacement associated with internet posting but to say it is entirely unreadable would indicate low cognitive abilities on your part.
That is to say that you are unable to to apply context and infer that ‘campagain’ was meant to be campaign and the like.
You might want to work on that, or just refrain from discussion if you’re reading ability is that weak.
Iran is worse than an enemy, they are a MORTAL enemy. The Iranian Guards would truly love to rape our wives and daughters, cut our children’s throats while forcing us to watch, burn down our homes, then finally give each of us a bullet in the head. They would chuckle with delight while doing all of this, and we all know it.
Firebomb their cities and capture the oil fields. I wish we could simply kill all the leadership but they’re like Nazis. We have to root them out from the populace, so a lot of the people have to die. Better their cities than ours.
[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
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]
Nope, not irrelevant - Israel is very powerful, Middle Eastern nations are not. That is a good thing, since the Middle Eastern nations have an ax to grind. Such an imbalance reduces the chances that Middle Eastern nations will have a conventional confrontation.
And that is a good thing.
I’m not worried what Van Creveld wrote, because I am not arguing that Middle Eastern nations can defeat Israel. My point is that the inability to defeat Israel is key to keeping things out of a traditional hot war, and if the military capabilities were ever “proportionalized” via Israel’s enemies obtaining nukes or Israel dispossessing itself of nukes, the deterrent effect is gone - and the chances of a bloody hot war go up.
I like the imbalance - and so should anyone else interested in peace in the Middle East.
[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
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. [/quote]
I think you are right - the power may be despotic, but it isn’t in the hands of an omnipotent strongman. “Despotic” would have been a better choice.
Yes, like “neocon”.