After we liberate Iran

Abuskedti

NCfan wrote:

Not sure how you can make the case that America invaded Iraq for religious purposes - that is turning the country into a Christain nation.

Would you agree that among other things, America's goal in Iraq is to build a society that supports religious tolerance?

Would you agree that if Iran had their way, they would promote a society that mirrors their own - where it is a crime to be any religion other than their brand of Islam?

Can you see that???

Yes, I can clearly see how differently the US view on religions is from that of Iran and Iraq. And yes, we have bombed them relentlessly in an attempt to see it our way.

If it walks like a duck....

NCfan

lucylespian wrote:

Strange, but the world was full of nukes a couple of decades ago, and even while the US and the USSR were very hostile to each other, no-one really came close to using them. I think it is pretty unlikel;y that Iran would initiate a nuclear conflict. They really want them mostly to deter American and Israeli aggression. The best way to reduce an Iranian nuclear threat is to make friends with the buggers, not to antagonise them. They have seen teh invasions of Afganistan, Iraq and Lebanon and figure they are probably next, so are trying to prevent that. What is really unfolding is self-fulfilling prophecy.
I have much less fear about Iran having nukes than I do about another US invasion of another country. The religious war that Bush is waging must cease. I am sure that he is trying to ensure that it happens before his term in office expires.

To comment on some above posts, the US won the battles in Iraq, but are losing the war, the same thing would happen in Iran, at best. It's an old, old story, and countless invaders in history have found the same thing. The only ways to really retain an occupied country is either to wipe out all the original inhabitants, or to colonise it with your own people.

Not sure where to even start with this. Nobody came close to using nukes during the cold war? Go read about October 1962.

Excuse me, but I would rather not rely on somebody's judgement that Iran would not use nuclear weapons. Who knows if the mad-men that run their country wouldn't sacrifice 40 million of their own to wipe out the Jewish state for all of eternity. I'd rather make the sacrifices of another war to prevent them from getting these weapons in the first place than have to sleep every night knowing they have them and listening to their leadership boast about Israel being a "one bomb state". What kind of religious war is Bush wagin? One in which we hope the outcome gives all people of Iraq the freedom to choose their own beliefs... how dare us!!!!! Give me a break...

NCfan

Abuskedti wrote:

Yes, I can clearly see how differently the US view on religions is from that of Iran and Iraq. And yes, we have bombed them relentlessly in an attempt to see it our way.

If it walks like a duck....

Na, I think we bombed extremist.. not the general population.

Specifics

NCfan wrote:

I'd rather make the sacrifices of another war to prevent them from getting these weapons in the first place ".

Spoken like someone who never has, or ever intends to be, anywhere near a battlefield, but gets a semi-on seeing them on TV. Bullies are bullies and they all go the same way eventually.

Abuskedti

NCfan wrote:

Na, I think we bombed extremist.. not the general population.

I know that is what you think..

Its like bombing New York City when George Bush is in town.

We bombed Bagdad. That was a busy city with many beautiful people.

NCfan

Abuskedti wrote:

I know that is what you think..

Its like bombing New York City when George Bush is in town.

We bombed Bagdad. That was a busy city with many beautiful people.

Na, more like bombing the UN while he was speaking - not carpet bombing the whole fucking city to kill one guy. You're failing to put things into context. Of course we've killed Iraqi civillians, no doubt. But we didn't level Baghdad like we did Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima or Nagasaki. We killed a minimal amount of civillians - far fewer than are claimed daily by extremist who go blow up people standing in lines to get jobs just because they worship a different way.

Abuskedti

NCfan wrote:

Na, more like bombing the UN while he was speaking - not carpet bombing the whole fucking city to kill one guy. You're failing to put things into context. Of course we've killed Iraqi civillians, no doubt. But we didn't level Baghdad like we did Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima or Nagasaki. We killed a minimal amount of civillians - far fewer than are claimed daily by extremist who go blow up people standing in lines to get jobs just because they worship a different way.

Two bombs hit new york city - that was pretty bad.

Our thought were different right before we bombed hundreds of buildings in Iraq.

Our thoughts were different before we terrorized..

guess that makes it better.

NCfan

Abuskedti wrote:

Two bombs hit new york city - that was pretty bad.

Our thought were different right before we bombed hundreds of buildings in Iraq.

Our thoughts were different before we terrorized..

guess that makes it better.

Whatever dude, think what you want. My view is based on the logic of the greater good. You don't have to agree with it, that's fine. But to me, it's better to kill thousands of Iraqi's to give millions a chance to prosper. That makes sense to me.

Abuskedti

NCfan wrote:

Whatever dude, think what you want. My view is based on the logic of the greater good. You don't have to agree with it, that's fine. But to me, it's better to kill thousands of Iraqi's to give millions a chance to prosper. That makes sense to me.

We seem to have already established that we kill people for religious reasons - or if you prefer for what we believe to be the greater good. Clearly the greater good is different from the Iraqi and the US point of view - and from yours and my point of view. Which is precicely why it is not justified to kill thousands of people based upon that.

Ahnimus

NCfan wrote:

Not sure how you can make the case that America invaded Iraq for religious purposes - that is turning the country into a Christain nation.

Would you agree that among other things, America's goal in Iraq is to build a society that supports religious tolerance?

Would you agree that if Iran had their way, they would promote a society that mirrors their own - where it is a crime to be any religion other than their brand of Islam?

Can you see that???

The government of Iran doesn't really speak for the people of Iran. It's a complicated situation. But Iranians do protest U.S. policy a lot. For the most part Iranians aren't extremist muslims and disagree with, and disobey their government's policies. Just sit back and wait for social progress to occur in Iran. The regime will blow over in time. The same would have occured in Iraq if not for third-party interferance.

ThumbingMyWay32

Ahnimus wrote:

The regime will blow over in time. The same would have occured in Iraq if not for third-party interferance.

Humor me...

Ahnimus

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

Humor me...

The U.S. invasion.

ThumbingMyWay32

Ahnimus wrote:

The U.S. invasion.

Come on Ahnimus. Tell the future. The U.S. invasion isn't even relevant to the statement you made; although it may be the only statement you have here. Tell us about the eventual hypothetical fall of the Iranian and Iraqi regimes. Make it juicy. Remember, Hollywood's listening...

Ahnimus

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

Come on Ahnimus. Tell the future. The U.S. invasion isn't even relevant to the statement you made; although it may be the only statement you have here. Tell us about the eventual hypothetical fall of the Iranian and Iraqi regimes. Make it juicy. Remember, Hollywood's listening...

All humans are human TMW32. The only thing that differs between you and your neighbour is your experience (excluding genetics). Just as Iran and the U.S. have different histories. But all paths lead to the same truth eventually.

ThumbingMyWay32

Ahnimus wrote:

All humans are human TMW32. The only thing that differs between you and your neighbour is your experience (excluding genetics). Just as Iran and the U.S. have different histories. But all paths lead to the same truth eventually.

So when would the Iraqi regime have fallen? And when will the Iranian regime fall? You said it was assured, I'm just wondering when. Did I word my questions poorly? Hello?

Ahnimus

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

So when would the Iraqi regime have fallen? And when will the Iranian regime fall? You said it was assured, I'm just wondering when. Did I word my questions poorly? Hello?

Iraq would have probably taken longer than you have the patience for. But I don't see how their culture was affecting your life. Iran will become more westernized naturally, probably within this century. We will likely see world-government and the absolution of diversity by next century as well, either by force or influence.

ThumbingMyWay32

Ahnimus wrote:

Iraq would have probably taken longer than you have the patience for. But I don't see how their culture was affecting your life. Iran will become more westernized naturally, probably within this century. We will likely see world-government and the absolution of diversity by next century as well, either by force or influence.

What do assumptions about my patience level have to do with anything? What are you even asserting with that statement? You've successfully moved your argument from one of assurance to one of probability. Furthermore, probabilities that you're pulling from the very air your breathing. Ahnimus, one this is certain... The murderous Iraqi regime ceases to exist because of third-party intervention, not because of third-party enlightenment. What and who Iraq was affecting, again, is not relevant to the questions I asked. You seemed at first to have had some sort of mythical Nostradamus-like abilities, which held my interest momentarily, but now seem to be nothing more than prophetical phsycobabble. Cheerio!

Ahnimus

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

What do assumptions about my patience level have to do with anything? What are you even asserting with that statement? You've successfully moved your argument from one of assurance to one of probability. Furthermore, probabilities that you're pulling from the very air your breathing. Ahnimus, one this is certain... The murderous Iraqi regime ceases to exist because of third-party intervention, not because of third-party enlightenment. What and who Iraq was affecting, again, is not relevant to the questions I asked. You seemed at first to have had some sort of mythical Nostradamus-like abilities, which held my interest momentarily, but now seem to be nothing more than prophetical phsycobabble. Cheerio!

There is still a murderous Iraqi regime, but they are killing in the name of Americans now.

ThumbingMyWay32

Ahnimus wrote:

There is still a murderous Iraqi regime, but they are killing in the name of Americans now.

lol Your mind belongs in a museum.

Ahnimus

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

lol Your mind belongs in a museum.

Whatever you say Hitler.