Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I'm confused somewhat by all the hostility toward the Bush administration concerning their policies towards Iran. Are they handling it perfect? No, they're not. But I don't really think they're doing a bad job either.
For all you people out there that say "live and let live" you are living in denial if you think all humans believe as you do. If we were dealing with say Tibet, then sure "live and let live" is a fine policy.
But we're dealing with an Islamic government, who is sponsoring the overthrow of democratic governments in Lebanon, keeping the Syrians ona chain and unleashing their proxy army, Hezbollah against the Israelis. And this group of thugs is attempting to obtain the most destrutcive force on earth. How in the world can you take the view that this is not our concern, not our fight as the leader of the free world?
They have balked at diplomacy. The Russians and Saudi's have both put offers on the table to allow Iran nuclear energy, however the fuel rods would be produced in a third party country and disposed of in a third party country. That way we could monitor the situation, and make it transparent for the world. Nobody is trying to deny Iran the right to nuclear energy. We're just denying them the right to produce it in secrecy. What's the big deal here???
Who can blame the US for having reservations here? Who can blame the US for imposing sanctions? Who can blame the US for talking tough to a guy who equally tries to be a bad ass on the international stage?
We are not full of inflamatory bluster. All we're saying is that we're not gonna allow Iran to get a bomb and we're leaving all measures on the table. How is that bluster? I'm just not seeing it...
We haven't attacked Iran. We are working every means possible in the diplomacy department except having Bush fly over there and talk with Amidenijad. And seriously, who really wants that? Who really thinks that will do anything? Bush and Cheney are probably America's worst diplomats, unfortunatly.
If China and Russia would just get on board with tough sanctions then we could really make Iran think trice. As it is right now, they stand too much to lose monetarily to do that. It's all about fucking money to them. And the US takes the blame for their greed.
I'm confused somewhat by all the hostility toward the Bush administration concerning their policies towards Iran. Are they handling it perfect? No, they're not. But I don't really think they're doing a bad job either.
For all you people out there that say "live and let live" you are living in denial if you think all humans believe as you do. If we were dealing with say Tibet, then sure "live and let live" is a fine policy.
But we're dealing with an Islamic government, who is sponsoring the overthrow of democratic governments in Lebanon, keeping the Syrians ona chain and unleashing their proxy army, Hezbollah against the Israelis. And this group of thugs is attempting to obtain the most destrutcive force on earth. How in the world can you take the view that this is not our concern, not our fight as the leader of the free world?
They have balked at diplomacy. The Russians and Saudi's have both put offers on the table to allow Iran nuclear energy, however the fuel rods would be produced in a third party country and disposed of in a third party country. That way we could monitor the situation, and make it transparent for the world. Nobody is trying to deny Iran the right to nuclear energy. We're just denying them the right to produce it in secrecy. What's the big deal here???
Who can blame the US for having reservations here? Who can blame the US for imposing sanctions? Who can blame the US for talking tough to a guy who equally tries to be a bad ass on the international stage?
We are not full of inflamatory bluster. All we're saying is that we're not gonna allow Iran to get a bomb and we're leaving all measures on the table. How is that bluster? I'm just not seeing it...
We haven't attacked Iran. We are working every means possible in the diplomacy department except having Bush fly over there and talk with Amidenijad. And seriously, who really wants that? Who really thinks that will do anything? Bush and Cheney are probably America's worst diplomats, unfortunatly.
If China and Russia would just get on board with tough sanctions then we could really make Iran think trice. As it is right now, they stand too much to lose monetarily to do that. It's all about fucking money to them. And the US takes the blame for their greed.
Talk about being a sheep. Who can't see that?
take the names of the countries out and i could swear you're talking about the US and A ...
I see what you are saying. You're right. It is obviously, just not in this specific particular at this point in the dialog. People change a lot from 25-35 and I believe again over the next 10 and so on is I suppose what I'm getting at.
ya..i did think i knew everything 3 years ago... i hope i was wrong... because i think ive learned since than
I'm confused somewhat by all the hostility toward the Bush administration concerning their policies towards Iran. Are they handling it perfect? No, they're not. But I don't really think they're doing a bad job either.
For all you people out there that say "live and let live" you are living in denial if you think all humans believe as you do. If we were dealing with say Tibet, then sure "live and let live" is a fine policy.
But we're dealing with an Islamic government, who is sponsoring the overthrow of democratic governments in Lebanon, keeping the Syrians ona chain and unleashing their proxy army, Hezbollah against the Israelis. And this group of thugs is attempting to obtain the most destrutcive force on earth. How in the world can you take the view that this is not our concern, not our fight as the leader of the free world?
They have balked at diplomacy. The Russians and Saudi's have both put offers on the table to allow Iran nuclear energy, however the fuel rods would be produced in a third party country and disposed of in a third party country. That way we could monitor the situation, and make it transparent for the world. Nobody is trying to deny Iran the right to nuclear energy. We're just denying them the right to produce it in secrecy. What's the big deal here???
Who can blame the US for having reservations here? Who can blame the US for imposing sanctions? Who can blame the US for talking tough to a guy who equally tries to be a bad ass on the international stage?
We are not full of inflamatory bluster. All we're saying is that we're not gonna allow Iran to get a bomb and we're leaving all measures on the table. How is that bluster? I'm just not seeing it...
We haven't attacked Iran. We are working every means possible in the diplomacy department except having Bush fly over there and talk with Amidenijad. And seriously, who really wants that? Who really thinks that will do anything? Bush and Cheney are probably America's worst diplomats, unfortunatly.
If China and Russia would just get on board with tough sanctions then we could really make Iran think trice. As it is right now, they stand too much to lose monetarily to do that. It's all about fucking money to them. And the US takes the blame for their greed.
Talk about being a sheep. Who can't see that?
you ask: Who can blame the US for having reservations here? Who can blame the US for imposing sanctions? Who can blame the US for talking tough to a guy who equally tries to be a bad ass on the international stage?
I ask: Who can blame Iran for having reservations here? Who can blame Iran for talking tough to a guy who equally tries to be a bad ass on the international stage...?
I understand you points raised in your long post. However, you appear to be operating from the perspective Iran is the only one who is doing wrong and that the US is the sole leader in the world. Let me ask, if a nation had invaded Canada and Mexico, and was talking as if the US were next, how would the US respond...?
I'm confused somewhat by all the hostility toward the Bush administration concerning their policies towards Iran. Are they handling it perfect? No, they're not. But I don't really think they're doing a bad job either.
For all you people out there that say "live and let live" you are living in denial if you think all humans believe as you do. If we were dealing with say Tibet, then sure "live and let live" is a fine policy.
Why should Tibet be "live and let live"? How do we know that the Tibetan monks weren't inciting the Myanmar (Burma) monks? At the very least maybe the monks could be deemed insurgents. To China, Tibet is a problem, since China is not a democracy why haven't we started economic sanctions? Why haven't we asked the UN to authorize sanctions so that we could have Japan and South Korea send in troops? Why haven't we blockaged the Hong Kong port?
But we're dealing with an Islamic government, who is sponsoring the overthrow of democratic governments in Lebanon, keeping the Syrians ona chain and unleashing their proxy army, Hezbollah against the Israelis. And this group of thugs is attempting to obtain the most destrutcive force on earth. How in the world can you take the view that this is not our concern, not our fight as the leader of the free world?
Wasn't it Israel who just recently conducted military incursions both into Lebanon (because a soldier was supposedly kidnapped) and into Syria (damaging its nuclear plant). Is it the religion that offends or the actions?
Wasn't it Israel who built a wall around Gaza? Isn't it Israel who seemingly at their pleasure will turn off gas supply lines to Gaza, water lines, electricity and deny them the right to move back and forth to earn a living or see family. Does that sound like the actions of a democratic nation. Israel has nothing to militarily fear from Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq (before/after the war), Pakistan, India, or Saudi Arabia. If you listen to the ground swell in the so called Christian movements, Israel is seen as problem.
They have balked at diplomacy. The Russians and Saudi's have both put offers on the table to allow Iran nuclear energy, however the fuel rods would be produced in a third party country and disposed of in a third party country. That way we could monitor the situation, and make it transparent for the world. Nobody is trying to deny Iran the right to nuclear energy. We're just denying them the right to produce it in secrecy. What's the big deal here???
Who can blame the US for having reservations here? Who can blame the US for imposing sanctions? Who can blame the US for talking tough to a guy who equally tries to be a bad ass on the international stage?
We are not full of inflamatory bluster. All we're saying is that we're not gonna allow Iran to get a bomb and we're leaving all measures on the table. How is that bluster? I'm just not seeing it...
We haven't attacked Iran. We are working every means possible in the diplomacy department except having Bush fly over there and talk with Amidenijad. And seriously, who really wants that? Who really thinks that will do anything? Bush and Cheney are probably America's worst diplomats, unfortunatly.
Saudi Arabia has very little diplomatic creditability left within the middle east.
The U.S. does not permit international inspections of its nuclear facilities. The nuclear plants built in Israel were done in secret and are not subjected to international inspections. Israel is more of threat to that region than any other country, thus, if the U.S. was serious, it would have Israel open its nuclear program to inspection along with Iran, that way everyone would be on the same playing field. Oh, that disposal dump would be on our soil at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, U.S.of A.
Tell me, knowing that a person hates you and wants to control you, would you give them power of attorney over you? What they're asking from Iran is I'll make it for you and provide it to you when I think you "deserve" it. Iran is saying fuck you, a) I can make it myself and b) you hate me, why would I do this.
Saying the Bush/Cheney administration is seeking a diplomatic solution with Iran is like saying Israel is willing to give the Palenstine their own State, not gonna happen?
If China and Russia would just get on board with tough sanctions then we could really make Iran think trice. As it is right now, they stand too much to lose monetarily to do that. It's all about fucking money to them. And the US takes the blame for their greed.
Talk about being a sheep. Who can't see that?
Just like the U.S. needs it ties to Saudi Arabia, China and Russia need its ties to Iran. There's no sheep in this senario just a practical realization to the alternative.
Greed is the compensation of power.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
In 1948 after the signing of the Balfour declaration palestine was invaded by Jews.
The Jews dislocated millions of palestinians and established a state called Israel.
Israel continued to expand it's borders, occupying the fertile land.
In 1967 the "Arab World" stood against this atrocity and attacked Israel. With the assistance of Britain and the United States, Israel defeated the entire "Arab World" expanded it's borders into Syria, Lebanon and Egypt.
The UN passed a resolution demanding the withdrawl of Israel to it's pre-1967 borders. Israel failed to comply. A resistance group rose in southern Lebanon to fight the occupation, the group is now known as Hezbollah.
In 2000 Hezbollah succeeded in pushing Israel out of Lebanon, 33 years since the beginning of the occupation. All the while, the UN failed to influence Israel due to United States veto powers.
In 2001 "Terrorists" attacked the world trade center towers in New York City. Osama Bin Laden, leader of a "terrorist" faction called Al-Qaeda (by the US) claimed responsibility, citing the destruction of Lebonese holy sites (towers) as the cause for the attack.
George W Bush, president of the United States claimed Saddam Hussein had involvement with Al-Qaeda, was harboring terrorists and developing "Weapons of Mass Destruction". The Bush Administration claimed the Iraqi regime needed to be removed from power.
Now, the president of Iran, Ahmenidenijad says that the Israeli regime (Zionists he claims) need to be "wiped from the pages of time" for their atrocious invasion of Palestine and 33 year occupation of Lebanon and Syria.
There is a little bit of hipocracy going on here when the US can take such actions against Iraq, but Iran cannot take action against Israel. Especially since Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Jordan and the rest of the "Arab World" have been dealing with the dislocation of Palestine and the expansion of Israel directly. While the US was a completely 3rd party to the situation in Iraq, with the exception of actually putting Saddam in power and providing him with biochemical weapons.
Iran tried peaceful diplomacy with the United States and Israel under the reformist government. As is typical of both countries they ignored it. Now the Supreme Leader of Iran has empowered fundamentalists.
The United States of America has cost millions if not billions of lives in other regions like Cuba due to their sanctions. US sanctions on a specific component of AIDS treatment has cost thousands of lives in Cuba alone and continues to do so, all the while, Cuba has extended the olive branch to the United States offering to send their international medical force to Illinois in the wake of hurricane Katrina, the US government, with their pompous attitude refused and many died and are still suffering in New Orleans.
This shit is wrong and the US is fucked up.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
In 1948 after the signing of the Balfour declaration palestine was invaded by Jews.
The Jews dislocated millions of palestinians and established a state called Israel.
Israel continued to expand it's borders, occupying the fertile land.
In 1967 the "Arab World" stood against this atrocity and attacked Israel. With the assistance of Britain and the United States, Israel defeated the entire "Arab World" expanded it's borders into Syria, Lebanon and Egypt.
The UN passed a resolution demanding the withdrawl of Israel to it's pre-1967 borders. Israel failed to comply. A resistance group rose in southern Lebanon to fight the occupation, the group is now known as Hezbollah.
In 2000 Hezbollah succeeded in pushing Israel out of Lebanon, 33 years since the beginning of the occupation. All the while, the UN failed to influence Israel due to United States veto powers.
In 2001 "Terrorists" attacked the world trade center towers in New York City. Osama Bin Laden, leader of a "terrorist" faction called Al-Qaeda (by the US) claimed responsibility, citing the destruction of Lebonese holy sites (towers) as the cause for the attack.
George W Bush, president of the United States claimed Saddam Hussein had involvement with Al-Qaeda, was harboring terrorists and developing "Weapons of Mass Destruction". The Bush Administration claimed the Iraqi regime needed to be removed from power.
Now, the president of Iran, Ahmenidenijad says that the Israeli regime (Zionists he claims) need to be "wiped from the pages of time" for their atrocious invasion of Palestine and 33 year occupation of Lebanon and Syria.
There is a little bit of hipocracy going on here when the US can take such actions against Iraq, but Iran cannot take action against Israel. Especially since Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Jordan and the rest of the "Arab World" have been dealing with the dislocation of Palestine and the expansion of Israel directly. While the US was a completely 3rd party to the situation in Iraq, with the exception of actually putting Saddam in power and providing him with biochemical weapons.
Iran tried peaceful diplomacy with the United States and Israel under the reformist government. As is typical of both countries they ignored it. Now the Supreme Leader of Iran has empowered fundamentalists.
The United States of America has cost millions if not billions of lives in other regions like Cuba due to their sanctions. US sanctions on a specific component of AIDS treatment has cost thousands of lives in Cuba alone and continues to do so, all the while, Cuba has extended the olive branch to the United States offering to send their international medical force to Illinois in the wake of hurricane Katrina, the US government, with their pompous attitude refused and many died and are still suffering in New Orleans.
Two, Jews actually did not invade Palestine. They had this little thing called the Holocaust in Europe. Those that could not emigrate to places like the UK or the US fled for their lives. Some, to Palestine. The UN actually created the state of Israel and that was unacceptable to the entire Arab world who then attacked, and lost, to the Israelis in 1948. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_War
In 1967, after Egypt, Syria, Jordan and others massed their armies at the Israeli borders and cut off their only vital port Israel launched a pre-emptive and succesful air assault on Egypt. This, only after suffering years of bombardment on it's norther border with Syria. Again, the Arabs lost.
Here is another little factoid for ya Ahmadnijad. Prior to 1967 Jordan occupied Jerusalem and the West Bank and Egypt occupied Gaza........illegally. Now I don't see any Palestinians going boom in Amman now do you? Kinda inconsistent isn't it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War.
I know a little something about this because I actualy read. In 1967 the United States was actually very much against the war and the Johnson administration did little to help the Israelis because he had his own little problem........Vietnam.
In 1973, again the Arabs attacked, and lost. This time, admittedly, with US help. Need more support or will you just take my word for it now?
I love how you try to simplify the problem on the Lebaneese border as an issue with two soldiers. True it was a justification. But the bigger issues was the unrestrained launching of Katyusha rockets supplied by Iran and Syria falling on Northern Israeli civillian settlements.
Im sorry the problem of the jews is so difficult for you. I hope before you hit the keyboard next and pretend to educate the rest of us you read something first. Enjoy the Holocaust denial seminar next year.
I, for one, am American. I am and always have been ok with countries like France, Britain, and yes Israel having nuclear weapons. Why? They are our friends. Similarly, as an American, I think it bad that our enemies or potential enemies have nuclear weapons. That simple. Bad enough India and Pakistan have, and have now exported nuclear know how to the middle east. Very bad that North Korea, a country we are still technically in a state of war with, to have nuclear weapons and the missiles capable of carrying them to my city. Why is that so difficult for some of you to get? Perhaps you don't live here or live in some parralel universe.....like Canada.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I have a copy of the Balfour Declaration right here. That sure looks like a signature to me. Lord Balfour's perhaps, maybe that's why it's called the Balfour Declaration.
Two, Jews actually did not invade Palestine. They had this little thing called the Holocaust in Europe. Those that could not emigrate to places like the UK or the US fled for their lives. Some, to Palestine. The UN actually created the state of Israel and that was unacceptable to the entire Arab world who then attacked, and lost, to the Israelis in 1948. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_War
Merriam-Webster has three definitions for the term "Invade"
1: to enter for conquest or plunder
2: to encroach upon : infringe
3 a: to spread over or into as if invading : permeate <doubts invade his mind> b: to affect injuriously and progressively
Prior to the invasion of Palestine by Jews, the British empire made a pact with Palestinians. The agreement was the palestinians help fight off the Ottoman occupation and they reserve Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinians. This was called The British Mandate of Palestine and was in effect in 1923 until the Balfour Declaration in 1948.
This list of UN resolutions is incomplete and lacking in information. You can do the research yourself. I personally sat down one night at the UN website and read all of the resolutions that have ever been put on the table on the matter and 99% of them were vetoed by the United States, even though they were fair. The only resolutions that have been passed are those favoring Israeli occupation, since the Arab World is not represented in the United Nations, certainly not Palestine.
Im sorry the problem of the jews is so difficult for you. I hope before you hit the keyboard next and pretend to educate the rest of us you read something first. Enjoy the Holocaust denial seminar next year.
It's not a problem of Jews. Get your head on straight. It's a problem of occupation. I'm not denying the holocaust. It happened. Israel exists, and has every right to exist as does the United States or Canada who both exist because of foreign occupation. That is not the point. The point is this is what happened. I'm not an anti-semite for posting facts about history. I'm sorry if truth is offensive to you, grow up.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Let me educate you. I'll try not to be as offensive as you are.
I have a copy of the Balfour Declaration right here. That sure looks like a signature to me. Lord Balfour's perhaps, maybe that's why it's called the Balfour Declaration.
Merriam-Webster has three definitions for the term "Invade"
1: to enter for conquest or plunder
2: to encroach upon : infringe
3 a: to spread over or into as if invading : permeate <doubts invade his mind> b: to affect injuriously and progressively
Prior to the invasion of Palestine by Jews, the British empire made a pact with Palestinians. The agreement was the palestinians help fight off the Ottoman occupation and they reserve Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinians. This was called The British Mandate of Palestine and was in effect in 1923 until the Balfour Declaration in 1948.
This list of UN resolutions is incomplete and lacking in information. You can do the research yourself. I personally sat down one night at the UN website and read all of the resolutions that have ever been put on the table on the matter and 99% of them were vetoed by the United States, even though they were fair. The only resolutions that have been passed are those favoring Israeli occupation, since the Arab World is not represented in the United Nations, certainly not Palestine.
It's not a problem of Jews. Get your head on straight. It's a problem of occupation. I'm not denying the holocaust. It happened. Israel exists, and has every right to exist as does the United States or Canada who both exist because of foreign occupation. That is not the point. The point is this is what happened. I'm not an anti-semite for posting facts about history. I'm sorry if truth is offensive to you, grow up.
At least I am honestly being offensive. You, however try to hide your offensive wrapped up into little factoids you pull from your rear end.
Let me educate you. I'll try not to be as offensive as you are.
I have a copy of the Balfour Declaration right here. That sure looks like a signature to me. Lord Balfour's perhaps, maybe that's why it's called the Balfour Declaration.
Merriam-Webster has three definitions for the term "Invade"
1: to enter for conquest or plunder
2: to encroach upon : infringe
3 a: to spread over or into as if invading : permeate <doubts invade his mind> b: to affect injuriously and progressively
Prior to the invasion of Palestine by Jews, the British empire made a pact with Palestinians. The agreement was the palestinians help fight off the Ottoman occupation and they reserve Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinians. This was called The British Mandate of Palestine and was in effect in 1923 until the Balfour Declaration in 1948.
This list of UN resolutions is incomplete and lacking in information. You can do the research yourself. I personally sat down one night at the UN website and read all of the resolutions that have ever been put on the table on the matter and 99% of them were vetoed by the United States, even though they were fair. The only resolutions that have been passed are those favoring Israeli occupation, since the Arab World is not represented in the United Nations, certainly not Palestine.
It's not a problem of Jews. Get your head on straight. It's a problem of occupation. I'm not denying the holocaust. It happened. Israel exists, and has every right to exist as does the United States or Canada who both exist because of foreign occupation. That is not the point. The point is this is what happened. I'm not an anti-semite for posting facts about history. I'm sorry if truth is offensive to you, grow up.
Well one has to wonder what goes through a persons mind when he calls fleeing from certain death during the holocaust "an invasion" by jews. I dunno, call me crazy but that sounds a little bit hateful.
I, for one, am American. I am and always have been ok with countries like France, Britain, and yes Israel having nuclear weapons. Why? They are our friends. Similarly, as an American, I think it bad that our enemies or potential enemies have nuclear weapons. That simple. Bad enough India and Pakistan have, and have now exported nuclear know how to the middle east. Very bad that North Korea, a country we are still technically in a state of war with, to have nuclear weapons and the missiles capable of carrying them to my city. Why is that so difficult for some of you to get? Perhaps you don't live here or live in some parralel universe.....like Canada.
I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon either but there is no proof that their program is designed for weaponization. All the existing evidence points to the contrary, that their program is for energy purposes ONLY. So all this saber rattling and sanction by the US are acts of agression by our government simply because Iran is not listening to us. They are cooperating with the IAEA and as long as the IEAE reports that Iran nuclear program is within guidelines we should stop fucking with them.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Well one has to wonder what goes through a persons mind when he calls fleeing from certain death during the holocaust "an invasion" by jews. I dunno, call me crazy but that sounds a little bit hateful.
What are you talking about?
They were given the land by the british after WWII, the land grab started after that.
Keep on rockin in the free world!!!!
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon either but there is no proof that their program is designed for weaponization. All the existing evidence points to the contrary, that their program is for energy purposes ONLY. So all this saber rattling and sanction by the US are acts of agression by our government simply because Iran is not listening to us. They are cooperating with the IAEA and as long as the IEAE reports that Iran nuclear program is within guidelines we should stop fucking with them.
I disagree. Whether or not their nuclear program is designed for weapons is irrelevant.
What matters is that a government that oppresses it's people, curbs a free press, an independent judicial system and whose overall bureaucracy is subject to the tenets of a religion is enough to oppose a nuclear program. No theocracy should be allowed to have a nuclear program. (Israel is not a theocracy). A government that bans its citizens from listening to the Beatles should not be allowed to have a nuclear program... I'm sorry. That just doesn’t compute.
The reasons I pointed out above alone, are enough to perceive an Iranian nuclear program as a threat. But there is more. I haven't even mentioned the arms race it would set off in the Middle East. Or the fact that Hezbollah is practically an extra appendage of the Iranian state. Or the fact that having a bomb, or the means to develop one on short notice would be life insurance to help preserve a corrupt Iranian government.
I disagree. Whether or not their nuclear program is designed for weapons is irrelevant.
Now you're just going against everything the IAEA, NPT, etc stand for. The rest of your arguement should be void.
What matters is that a government that oppresses it's people, curbs a free press, an independent judicial system and whose overall bureaucracy is subject to the tenets of a religion is enough to oppose a nuclear program.
I thought this was about Iran? Why are you talking about the US now?
No theocracy should be allowed to have a nuclear program. (Israel is not a theocracy). A government that bans its citizens from listening to the Beatles should not be allowed to have a nuclear program... I'm sorry. That just doesn’t compute.
And a government that occupies other people, kills innocents and has done so for over 60 years, starts wars, etc... yeah they can have a nuclear program/weapons. Because you know... war and terror and occupation by the israelis is something, but not being able to listen to the beatles.... the iranians dont deserve ANYTHING!
The reasons I pointed out above alone, are enough to perceive an Iranian nuclear program as a threat. But there is more. I haven't even mentioned the arms race it would set off in the Middle East. Or the fact that Hezbollah is practically an extra appendage of the Iranian state. Or the fact that having a bomb, or the means to develop one on short notice would be life insurance to help preserve a corrupt Iranian government.
see, now you're talking about a bomb. but before you said
I disagree. Whether or not their nuclear program is designed for weapons is irrelevant.
What matters is that a government that oppresses it's people, curbs a free press, an independent judicial system and whose overall bureaucracy is subject to the tenets of a religion is enough to oppose a nuclear program. No theocracy should be allowed to have a nuclear program. (Israel is not a theocracy). A government that bans its citizens from listening to the Beatles should not be allowed to have a nuclear program... I'm sorry. That just doesn’t compute.
The reasons I pointed out above alone, are enough to perceive an Iranian nuclear program as a threat. But there is more. I haven't even mentioned the arms race it would set off in the Middle East. Or the fact that Hezbollah is practically an extra appendage of the Iranian state. Or the fact that having a bomb, or the means to develop one on short notice would be life insurance to help preserve a corrupt Iranian government.
None of the reason's you mentioned, in your first paragraph, are good reasons to prevent a country from obtaining nuclear power for civilian use. By believing what you do you are no different than the mullahs who impose their will on the people.
As long as a nation is abiding by the rules and guidelines of the IEAE I have see no reason to prevent them from developing a nuclear program for energy purposes. Further more it would take a hell of a lot more than moments notice for a country to weaponize their program, at which point apporpriate action can be taken.
I find it absolutely ridiculous that you would even suggest that we deny a country the ability to provide power for it's people simply based on their form of government. Who are we to decide which form of government should run which country. Instaed of constantly sticking our noses in other people's business we should take a hard long look in the mirror and fix the cluster-fuck we have in our own yard.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon either but there is no proof that their program is designed for weaponization. All the existing evidence points to the contrary, that their program is for energy purposes ONLY. So all this saber rattling and sanction by the US are acts of agression by our government simply because Iran is not listening to us. They are cooperating with the IAEA and as long as the IEAE reports that Iran nuclear program is within guidelines we should stop fucking with them.
Um.....there's no proof because Iran has closed it's doors to inspectors. And they are not cooperating with the IAEA. If there is nothing to hide, open your doors.
None of the reason's you mentioned, in your first paragraph, are good reasons to prevent a country from obtaining nuclear power for civilian use. By believing what you do you are no different than the mullahs who impose their will on the people.
As long as a nation is abiding by the rules and guidelines of the IEAE I have see no reason to prevent them from developing a nuclear program for energy purposes. Further more it would take a hell of a lot more than moments notice for a country to weaponize their program, at which point apporpriate action can be taken.
I find it absolutely ridiculous that you would even suggest that we deny a country the ability to provide power for it's people simply based on their form of government. Who are we to decide which form of government should run which country. Instaed of constantly sticking our noses in other people's business we should take a hard long look in the mirror and fix the cluster-fuck we have in our own yard.
and exactly WHY does one of the world's richest oil producers need nuclear energy? if they had no energy reserves, like say France, or Israel I might understand.
Um.....there's no proof because Iran has closed it's doors to inspectors. And they are not cooperating with the IAEA. If there is nothing to hide, open your doors.
uh you are disgustingly incorrect.
do some research and educate yourself. Iran HAS been cooperating with the IAEA and "opened their doors" more than ANY country EVER has. While a country like, say, Israel has NEVER allowed any inspections, NEVER opened its doors, and NEVER even signed a damn treaty.
and exactly WHY does one of the world's richest oil producers need nuclear energy? if they had no energy reserves, like say France, or Israel I might understand.
uh, oil IS going to run out sometime soon, and people are going to want iran to SHARE their oil. you act as though they have all this oil for themselves. everyone needs to have an alternate source of energy. not just countries like france and israel.
wasting my time arguing with a charlatan like yourself is pretty annoying.
None of the reason's you mentioned, in your first paragraph, are good reasons to prevent a country from obtaining nuclear power for civilian use. By believing what you do you are no different than the mullahs who impose their will on the people.
As long as a nation is abiding by the rules and guidelines of the IEAE I have see no reason to prevent them from developing a nuclear program for energy purposes. Further more it would take a hell of a lot more than moments notice for a country to weaponize their program, at which point apporpriate action can be taken.
I find it absolutely ridiculous that you would even suggest that we deny a country the ability to provide power for it's people simply based on their form of government. Who are we to decide which form of government should run which country. Instaed of constantly sticking our noses in other people's business we should take a hard long look in the mirror and fix the cluster-fuck we have in our own yard.
The problem is that having the capacity to produce nuclear fuel, means that at the very least Iran could pass that fuel to a terrorist organization for a "dirty bomb". It also means that Iran is much, much more capable of producing a bomb in secret. No it wouldn't happen at a moments notice, but it could happen in a matter of months. That is too short! It's almost as good as having one, really. And furthermore, not being quite sure if Iran has a bomb or not is also nearly as good as them actually having one.
I love the "who are we to judge" attitude. It makes absolutely no sense when world leaders hang their homosexual citizens, or beat their women for not wearing a head scarf in public. Basically ruling by religious edit and not allowing free, open elections. Yea, who are we to say that's wrong... I wonder how you can sleep at night with kind of attitude.
Although you refer to our government as a "cluster-fuck" it's prettyfar from it.
and exactly WHY does one of the world's richest oil producers need nuclear energy? if they had no energy reserves, like say France, or Israel I might understand.
First of Iran is in discussion with the IEAE and a report is due out next month on Iran's nuclear program. Second with peak oil having been reached or soon to come I think it is extremely responsible, and good business sense, for a oil production nation to start converting to nuclear energy in order to extend their reserve allowing more of it to be sold to foreign nations.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
do some research and educate yourself. Iran HAS been cooperating with the IAEA and "opened their doors" more than ANY country EVER has. While a country like, say, Israel has NEVER allowed any inspections, NEVER opened its doors, and NEVER even signed a damn treaty.
maybe you should because you obviously didnt pay attention in school. or read any credible information.
uh, oil IS going to run out sometime soon, and people are going to want iran to SHARE their oil. you act as though they have all this oil for themselves. everyone needs to have an alternate source of energy. not just countries like france and israel.
wasting my time arguing with a charlatan like yourself is pretty annoying.
Just a quick google search... I know what the IAEA has reported recently about Iran not having a covert program. But they have not been too cooperative with IAEA, and they have all but given the UN the finger with regards to suspending their Uranium enrichment... Why do you act as if we don't know what we're talking about or didn't pay attention in school or whatever.... it's all black and white
Comments
http://www.vidly.net/video-hysterical-laughter-bloopers.html
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
For all you people out there that say "live and let live" you are living in denial if you think all humans believe as you do. If we were dealing with say Tibet, then sure "live and let live" is a fine policy.
But we're dealing with an Islamic government, who is sponsoring the overthrow of democratic governments in Lebanon, keeping the Syrians ona chain and unleashing their proxy army, Hezbollah against the Israelis. And this group of thugs is attempting to obtain the most destrutcive force on earth. How in the world can you take the view that this is not our concern, not our fight as the leader of the free world?
They have balked at diplomacy. The Russians and Saudi's have both put offers on the table to allow Iran nuclear energy, however the fuel rods would be produced in a third party country and disposed of in a third party country. That way we could monitor the situation, and make it transparent for the world. Nobody is trying to deny Iran the right to nuclear energy. We're just denying them the right to produce it in secrecy. What's the big deal here???
Who can blame the US for having reservations here? Who can blame the US for imposing sanctions? Who can blame the US for talking tough to a guy who equally tries to be a bad ass on the international stage?
We are not full of inflamatory bluster. All we're saying is that we're not gonna allow Iran to get a bomb and we're leaving all measures on the table. How is that bluster? I'm just not seeing it...
We haven't attacked Iran. We are working every means possible in the diplomacy department except having Bush fly over there and talk with Amidenijad. And seriously, who really wants that? Who really thinks that will do anything? Bush and Cheney are probably America's worst diplomats, unfortunatly.
If China and Russia would just get on board with tough sanctions then we could really make Iran think trice. As it is right now, they stand too much to lose monetarily to do that. It's all about fucking money to them. And the US takes the blame for their greed.
Talk about being a sheep. Who can't see that?
"bush and cheney worst diplomats"
they don't take much shit, i kinda like that...we've been trying talks forever over, no results.
take the names of the countries out and i could swear you're talking about the US and A ...
The US and who?
ya..i did think i knew everything 3 years ago... i hope i was wrong... because i think ive learned since than
borat reference ...
you ask: Who can blame the US for having reservations here? Who can blame the US for imposing sanctions? Who can blame the US for talking tough to a guy who equally tries to be a bad ass on the international stage?
I ask: Who can blame Iran for having reservations here? Who can blame Iran for talking tough to a guy who equally tries to be a bad ass on the international stage...?
I understand you points raised in your long post. However, you appear to be operating from the perspective Iran is the only one who is doing wrong and that the US is the sole leader in the world. Let me ask, if a nation had invaded Canada and Mexico, and was talking as if the US were next, how would the US respond...?
Why should Tibet be "live and let live"? How do we know that the Tibetan monks weren't inciting the Myanmar (Burma) monks? At the very least maybe the monks could be deemed insurgents. To China, Tibet is a problem, since China is not a democracy why haven't we started economic sanctions? Why haven't we asked the UN to authorize sanctions so that we could have Japan and South Korea send in troops? Why haven't we blockaged the Hong Kong port?
Wasn't it Israel who just recently conducted military incursions both into Lebanon (because a soldier was supposedly kidnapped) and into Syria (damaging its nuclear plant). Is it the religion that offends or the actions?
Wasn't it Israel who built a wall around Gaza? Isn't it Israel who seemingly at their pleasure will turn off gas supply lines to Gaza, water lines, electricity and deny them the right to move back and forth to earn a living or see family. Does that sound like the actions of a democratic nation. Israel has nothing to militarily fear from Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq (before/after the war), Pakistan, India, or Saudi Arabia. If you listen to the ground swell in the so called Christian movements, Israel is seen as problem.
Saudi Arabia has very little diplomatic creditability left within the middle east.
The U.S. does not permit international inspections of its nuclear facilities. The nuclear plants built in Israel were done in secret and are not subjected to international inspections. Israel is more of threat to that region than any other country, thus, if the U.S. was serious, it would have Israel open its nuclear program to inspection along with Iran, that way everyone would be on the same playing field. Oh, that disposal dump would be on our soil at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, U.S.of A.
Tell me, knowing that a person hates you and wants to control you, would you give them power of attorney over you? What they're asking from Iran is I'll make it for you and provide it to you when I think you "deserve" it. Iran is saying fuck you, a) I can make it myself and b) you hate me, why would I do this.
Saying the Bush/Cheney administration is seeking a diplomatic solution with Iran is like saying Israel is willing to give the Palenstine their own State, not gonna happen?
Just like the U.S. needs it ties to Saudi Arabia, China and Russia need its ties to Iran. There's no sheep in this senario just a practical realization to the alternative.
Greed is the compensation of power.
The Jews dislocated millions of palestinians and established a state called Israel.
Israel continued to expand it's borders, occupying the fertile land.
In 1967 the "Arab World" stood against this atrocity and attacked Israel. With the assistance of Britain and the United States, Israel defeated the entire "Arab World" expanded it's borders into Syria, Lebanon and Egypt.
The UN passed a resolution demanding the withdrawl of Israel to it's pre-1967 borders. Israel failed to comply. A resistance group rose in southern Lebanon to fight the occupation, the group is now known as Hezbollah.
In 2000 Hezbollah succeeded in pushing Israel out of Lebanon, 33 years since the beginning of the occupation. All the while, the UN failed to influence Israel due to United States veto powers.
In 2001 "Terrorists" attacked the world trade center towers in New York City. Osama Bin Laden, leader of a "terrorist" faction called Al-Qaeda (by the US) claimed responsibility, citing the destruction of Lebonese holy sites (towers) as the cause for the attack.
George W Bush, president of the United States claimed Saddam Hussein had involvement with Al-Qaeda, was harboring terrorists and developing "Weapons of Mass Destruction". The Bush Administration claimed the Iraqi regime needed to be removed from power.
Now, the president of Iran, Ahmenidenijad says that the Israeli regime (Zionists he claims) need to be "wiped from the pages of time" for their atrocious invasion of Palestine and 33 year occupation of Lebanon and Syria.
There is a little bit of hipocracy going on here when the US can take such actions against Iraq, but Iran cannot take action against Israel. Especially since Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Jordan and the rest of the "Arab World" have been dealing with the dislocation of Palestine and the expansion of Israel directly. While the US was a completely 3rd party to the situation in Iraq, with the exception of actually putting Saddam in power and providing him with biochemical weapons.
Iran tried peaceful diplomacy with the United States and Israel under the reformist government. As is typical of both countries they ignored it. Now the Supreme Leader of Iran has empowered fundamentalists.
The United States of America has cost millions if not billions of lives in other regions like Cuba due to their sanctions. US sanctions on a specific component of AIDS treatment has cost thousands of lives in Cuba alone and continues to do so, all the while, Cuba has extended the olive branch to the United States offering to send their international medical force to Illinois in the wake of hurricane Katrina, the US government, with their pompous attitude refused and many died and are still suffering in New Orleans.
This shit is wrong and the US is fucked up.
Back to Poli Sci for you pal. For one, The Balfour Declaration was not signed.....by anyone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917
Two, Jews actually did not invade Palestine. They had this little thing called the Holocaust in Europe. Those that could not emigrate to places like the UK or the US fled for their lives. Some, to Palestine. The UN actually created the state of Israel and that was unacceptable to the entire Arab world who then attacked, and lost, to the Israelis in 1948.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_War
In 1967, after Egypt, Syria, Jordan and others massed their armies at the Israeli borders and cut off their only vital port Israel launched a pre-emptive and succesful air assault on Egypt. This, only after suffering years of bombardment on it's norther border with Syria. Again, the Arabs lost.
Here is another little factoid for ya Ahmadnijad. Prior to 1967 Jordan occupied Jerusalem and the West Bank and Egypt occupied Gaza........illegally. Now I don't see any Palestinians going boom in Amman now do you? Kinda inconsistent isn't it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six-Day_War.
I know a little something about this because I actualy read. In 1967 the United States was actually very much against the war and the Johnson administration did little to help the Israelis because he had his own little problem........Vietnam.
In 1973, again the Arabs attacked, and lost. This time, admittedly, with US help. Need more support or will you just take my word for it now?
I love how you try to simplify the problem on the Lebaneese border as an issue with two soldiers. True it was a justification. But the bigger issues was the unrestrained launching of Katyusha rockets supplied by Iran and Syria falling on Northern Israeli civillian settlements.
Im sorry the problem of the jews is so difficult for you. I hope before you hit the keyboard next and pretend to educate the rest of us you read something first. Enjoy the Holocaust denial seminar next year.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I have a copy of the Balfour Declaration right here. That sure looks like a signature to me. Lord Balfour's perhaps, maybe that's why it's called the Balfour Declaration.
Merriam-Webster has three definitions for the term "Invade"
1: to enter for conquest or plunder
2: to encroach upon : infringe
3 a: to spread over or into as if invading : permeate <doubts invade his mind> b: to affect injuriously and progressively
Prior to the invasion of Palestine by Jews, the British empire made a pact with Palestinians. The agreement was the palestinians help fight off the Ottoman occupation and they reserve Palestine as a homeland for the Palestinians. This was called The British Mandate of Palestine and was in effect in 1923 until the Balfour Declaration in 1948.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_UN_resolutions_concerning_Israel_and_Palestine
This list of UN resolutions is incomplete and lacking in information. You can do the research yourself. I personally sat down one night at the UN website and read all of the resolutions that have ever been put on the table on the matter and 99% of them were vetoed by the United States, even though they were fair. The only resolutions that have been passed are those favoring Israeli occupation, since the Arab World is not represented in the United Nations, certainly not Palestine.
It's not a problem of Jews. Get your head on straight. It's a problem of occupation. I'm not denying the holocaust. It happened. Israel exists, and has every right to exist as does the United States or Canada who both exist because of foreign occupation. That is not the point. The point is this is what happened. I'm not an anti-semite for posting facts about history. I'm sorry if truth is offensive to you, grow up.
At least I am honestly being offensive. You, however try to hide your offensive wrapped up into little factoids you pull from your rear end.
Well one has to wonder what goes through a persons mind when he calls fleeing from certain death during the holocaust "an invasion" by jews. I dunno, call me crazy but that sounds a little bit hateful.
I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon either but there is no proof that their program is designed for weaponization. All the existing evidence points to the contrary, that their program is for energy purposes ONLY. So all this saber rattling and sanction by the US are acts of agression by our government simply because Iran is not listening to us. They are cooperating with the IAEA and as long as the IEAE reports that Iran nuclear program is within guidelines we should stop fucking with them.
What are you talking about?
They were given the land by the british after WWII, the land grab started after that.
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
I disagree. Whether or not their nuclear program is designed for weapons is irrelevant.
What matters is that a government that oppresses it's people, curbs a free press, an independent judicial system and whose overall bureaucracy is subject to the tenets of a religion is enough to oppose a nuclear program. No theocracy should be allowed to have a nuclear program. (Israel is not a theocracy). A government that bans its citizens from listening to the Beatles should not be allowed to have a nuclear program... I'm sorry. That just doesn’t compute.
The reasons I pointed out above alone, are enough to perceive an Iranian nuclear program as a threat. But there is more. I haven't even mentioned the arms race it would set off in the Middle East. Or the fact that Hezbollah is practically an extra appendage of the Iranian state. Or the fact that having a bomb, or the means to develop one on short notice would be life insurance to help preserve a corrupt Iranian government.
Now you're just going against everything the IAEA, NPT, etc stand for. The rest of your arguement should be void.
I thought this was about Iran? Why are you talking about the US now?
And a government that occupies other people, kills innocents and has done so for over 60 years, starts wars, etc... yeah they can have a nuclear program/weapons. Because you know... war and terror and occupation by the israelis is something, but not being able to listen to the beatles.... the iranians dont deserve ANYTHING!
see, now you're talking about a bomb. but before you said so what ARE you even talking about
None of the reason's you mentioned, in your first paragraph, are good reasons to prevent a country from obtaining nuclear power for civilian use. By believing what you do you are no different than the mullahs who impose their will on the people.
As long as a nation is abiding by the rules and guidelines of the IEAE I have see no reason to prevent them from developing a nuclear program for energy purposes. Further more it would take a hell of a lot more than moments notice for a country to weaponize their program, at which point apporpriate action can be taken.
I find it absolutely ridiculous that you would even suggest that we deny a country the ability to provide power for it's people simply based on their form of government. Who are we to decide which form of government should run which country. Instaed of constantly sticking our noses in other people's business we should take a hard long look in the mirror and fix the cluster-fuck we have in our own yard.
Um.....there's no proof because Iran has closed it's doors to inspectors. And they are not cooperating with the IAEA. If there is nothing to hide, open your doors.
Im not going to bother with another history lesson.
and exactly WHY does one of the world's richest oil producers need nuclear energy? if they had no energy reserves, like say France, or Israel I might understand.
uh you are disgustingly incorrect.
do some research and educate yourself. Iran HAS been cooperating with the IAEA and "opened their doors" more than ANY country EVER has. While a country like, say, Israel has NEVER allowed any inspections, NEVER opened its doors, and NEVER even signed a damn treaty.
maybe you should because you obviously didnt pay attention in school. or read any credible information.
uh, oil IS going to run out sometime soon, and people are going to want iran to SHARE their oil. you act as though they have all this oil for themselves. everyone needs to have an alternate source of energy. not just countries like france and israel.
wasting my time arguing with a charlatan like yourself is pretty annoying.
The problem is that having the capacity to produce nuclear fuel, means that at the very least Iran could pass that fuel to a terrorist organization for a "dirty bomb". It also means that Iran is much, much more capable of producing a bomb in secret. No it wouldn't happen at a moments notice, but it could happen in a matter of months. That is too short! It's almost as good as having one, really. And furthermore, not being quite sure if Iran has a bomb or not is also nearly as good as them actually having one.
I love the "who are we to judge" attitude. It makes absolutely no sense when world leaders hang their homosexual citizens, or beat their women for not wearing a head scarf in public. Basically ruling by religious edit and not allowing free, open elections. Yea, who are we to say that's wrong... I wonder how you can sleep at night with kind of attitude.
Although you refer to our government as a "cluster-fuck" it's prettyfar from it.
First of Iran is in discussion with the IEAE and a report is due out next month on Iran's nuclear program. Second with peak oil having been reached or soon to come I think it is extremely responsible, and good business sense, for a oil production nation to start converting to nuclear energy in order to extend their reserve allowing more of it to be sold to foreign nations.
Just a quick google search... I know what the IAEA has reported recently about Iran not having a covert program. But they have not been too cooperative with IAEA, and they have all but given the UN the finger with regards to suspending their Uranium enrichment... Why do you act as if we don't know what we're talking about or didn't pay attention in school or whatever.... it's all black and white
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2006-11/15/content_733403.htm