And you thought Bush had a hard on for Iran....

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster
Iran has never attacked anyone outside of Iran.

U.S has done more harm to the world than Iran has.

What has Iran do? List the things Iran has done. U.S has done it and then some.

LOL! 😕 Let's start with the Hezbollah arm of the Iranian government...

Let's play a game. Yes or No game. The object of the game is to answer the question with a yes or a no.

Has the U.S supported terrorist groups that are against Iran with either training or small arms? Groups the U.S themselves label as terrorist.

Simple yes or no.

I'll play if you do...

Has leadership in any country we have been allies of changed their beliefs or goals and stands on terrorism from when we first started supporting them?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

yes

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Lemon law
What I want to see is a candidate who says the Mid-east will be a nuclear weapon non use zone. And any country that first uses a nuclear weapon against any neighbor for any reason, will face the combined wrath of the entire world.

Is violence your only solution for everything!? 😀

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No violence is usually a piss poor solution, but when it comes to the future use of nukes, yes MAD is the only rational answer. And it should go for any country on earth including the USA.

No matter how irrational the leader which GWB now tests, they must know that the first use of Nukes will never never never result in a favorable outcome.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster
Iran has never attacked anyone outside of Iran.

U.S has done more harm to the world than Iran has.

What has Iran do? List the things Iran has done. U.S has done it and then some.

LOL! 😕 Let's start with the Hezbollah arm of the Iranian government...

Let's play a game. Yes or No game. The object of the game is to answer the question with a yes or a no.

Has the U.S supported terrorist groups that are against Iran with either training or small arms? Groups the U.S themselves label as terrorist.

Simple yes or no.

yes.

and?

Iran supports terrorist groups via proxy and the U.S does as well .. both with small arms and training.

Looks like U.S and Iran are the same.

Variable: I'm an American.

So, which of the two should I side with if/when the two become adversaries?

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster
Iran has never attacked anyone outside of Iran.

U.S has done more harm to the world than Iran has.

What has Iran do? List the things Iran has done. U.S has done it and then some.

LOL! 😕 Let's start with the Hezbollah arm of the Iranian government...

Let's play a game. Yes or No game. The object of the game is to answer the question with a yes or a no.

Has the U.S supported terrorist groups that are against Iran with either training or small arms? Groups the U.S themselves label as terrorist.

Simple yes or no.

yes.

and?

Iran supports terrorist groups via proxy and the U.S does as well .. both with small arms and training.

Looks like U.S and Iran are the same.

Variable: I'm an American.

So, which of the two should I side with if/when the two become adversaries?

Exactly. They're not the same. American can kick the piss out of Iran without much effort at all. That allows us the latitude to do things which the Iranians cannot.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster
Iran has never attacked anyone outside of Iran.

U.S has done more harm to the world than Iran has.

What has Iran do? List the things Iran has done. U.S has done it and then some.

LOL! 😕 Let's start with the Hezbollah arm of the Iranian government...

Let's play a game. Yes or No game. The object of the game is to answer the question with a yes or a no.

Has the U.S supported terrorist groups that are against Iran with either training or small arms? Groups the U.S themselves label as terrorist.

Simple yes or no.

yes.

and?

Iran supports terrorist groups via proxy and the U.S does as well .. both with small arms and training.

Looks like U.S and Iran are the same.

Variable: I'm an American.

So, which of the two should I side with if/when the two become adversaries?

Exactly. They're not the same. American can kick the piss out of Iran without much effort at all. That allows us the latitude to do things which the Iranians cannot.

Plus we represent good they represent evil.

 

[Aimster]

yes we represent good.
U.S has done a lot of good for the world especially under Bush.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Genx87
Well it is sending a clear msg to Iran to not follow through on your threats to destroy Israel.
We have had the same policy in place for decades with other countries in Europe or in our hemisphere. Mostly dealing with the old USSR.

When did Iran develop the capability to destroy Israel?

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Aimster
yes we represent good.
U.S has done a lot of good for the world especially under Bush.

Yes, killing terrorists and freeing a country from a dictator is "good." Sacrificing yourself for the benefit of others in the face of opposition is the bravest thing one can do.

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Aimster
yes we represent good.
U.S has done a lot of good for the world especially under Bush.

Yes, killing terrorists and freeing a country from a dictator is "good." Sacrificing yourself for the benefit of others in the face of opposition is the bravest thing one can do.

There were no terrorist inside Iraq when we invaded.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: Aimster
If anyone uses a nuke in the M.E ,
good-bye world

Doubtful.

I have to sadly somewhat agree with Aimster here. If any Pro-Western nation uses a nuke on a country in the M.E., then shits gonna hit the fan, and fast. It would end up serving as a rallying call for basically all of the M.E. to take up arms against the West, because it would be an attempt at 'oppression', and most likely religion is going to come into play and how the West is super-evil. It'd just escalate into one hell of a mess in the region.

+

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Aimster
yes we represent good.
U.S has done a lot of good for the world especially under Bush.

Yes, killing terrorists and freeing a country from a dictator is "good." Sacrificing yourself for the benefit of others in the face of opposition is the bravest thing one can do.

There were no terrorist inside Iraq when we invaded.

You are such an idiot...

Do the names Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal, Abdul Rahman Yasin or Abu Musab al Zarqawi mean anything to you? All of them were in Iraq at the time of the invasion.

After that we can start talking about the $25,000 checks that Saddam gave to the families of suicide bombers.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Aimster
yes we represent good.
U.S has done a lot of good for the world especially under Bush.

Yes, killing terrorists and freeing a country from a dictator is "good." Sacrificing yourself for the benefit of others in the face of opposition is the bravest thing one can do.

There were no terrorist inside Iraq when we invaded.

You owe me a new keyboard as my mouthful of coffee saturated it....

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Aimster
yes we represent good.
U.S has done a lot of good for the world especially under Bush.

Yes, killing terrorists and freeing a country from a dictator is "good." Sacrificing yourself for the benefit of others in the face of opposition is the bravest thing one can do.

There were no terrorist inside Iraq when we invaded.

You are such an idiot...

Do the names Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal, Abdul Rahman Yasin or Abu Musab al Zarqawi mean anything to you? All of them were in Iraq at the time of the invasion.

After that we can start talking about the $25,000 checks that Saddam gave to the families of suicide bombers.

Which one of those represented a direct threat to the United States?

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Aimster
yes we represent good.
U.S has done a lot of good for the world especially under Bush.

Yes, killing terrorists and freeing a country from a dictator is "good." Sacrificing yourself for the benefit of others in the face of opposition is the bravest thing one can do.

There were no terrorist inside Iraq when we invaded.

You are such an idiot...

Do the names Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal, Abdul Rahman Yasin or Abu Musab al Zarqawi mean anything to you? All of them were in Iraq at the time of the invasion.

After that we can start talking about the $25,000 checks that Saddam gave to the families of suicide bombers.

So you are saying we invaded Iraq because of those terrorist?
Interesting.

I think not.

I was referring to the thousands of terrorist inside Iraq now. You bring up a handful of people.

Stop trying to justify the war on Iraq. You want to look just as stupid as Bush and the Republicans that follow him be my guest

 

[Lemon law]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Aimster
yes we represent good.
U.S has done a lot of good for the world especially under Bush.

Yes, killing terrorists and freeing a country from a dictator is "good." Sacrificing yourself for the benefit of others in the face of opposition is the bravest thing one can do.

There were no terrorist inside Iraq when we invaded.

You are such an idiot...

Do the names Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal, Abdul Rahman Yasin or Abu Musab al Zarqawi mean anything to you? All of them were in Iraq at the time of the invasion.

After that we can start talking about the $25,000 checks that Saddam gave to the families of suicide bombers.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again PJ delusions ride again. Saddam was tossing out $25,000 dollar checks and the US was tossing out 25 billion dollar checks to Israel so that Israel can get away with its outrages.

Which is more evil?

All we know is that an ongoing conflict is going into year 61 and with no end in sight. But Saddam is now dead so you will have to find more evil people to blame it on. And the same with Zarqawi, he is dead too. Or we could blame a quite possible international war criminal
named Sharon, but he too is irrelevant now.

Somehow in all that trading of total evil labels, we lose sight of what is a just settlement and our own values.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: JS80
Plus we represent good they represent evil.

Strange then that Iran thinks they represent good and we are the "Great Satan."

Every time I start to feel some real faith in humanity, situations like this force me to realize we still haven't evolved that much far above the monkeys.

Abraham Lincoln said it best IMO: "Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right. "

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JS80
Plus we represent good they represent evil.

Strange then that Iran thinks they represent good and we are the "Great Satan."

Every time I start to feel some real faith in humanity, situations like this force me to realize we still haven't evolved that much far above the monkeys.

Abraham Lincoln said it best IMO: "Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right. "

Some people live by point of view and shades of gray, others live by good and evil and black and white along with shades of gray.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: JS80
Plus we represent good they represent evil.

Strange then that Iran thinks they represent good and we are the "Great Satan."

Every time I start to feel some real faith in humanity, situations like this force me to realize we still haven't evolved that much far above the monkeys.

Abraham Lincoln said it best IMO: "Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side; my greatest concern is to be on God's side, for God is always right. "

Some people live by point of view and shades of gray, others live by good and evil and black and white along with shades of gray.

But is it always wise to pick the black and the white solely from your own personal prejudices/perspectives? What if everyone else did the same?

And I do believe in genuine good and evil along with all those many shades of gray. But instead of point of view, I use objectivity for reference. In which case, it is extremely clear that all you saber-rattling armchair warmongers are whacked-out psychopathic insane. God forbid your misdeeds in foreign lands ever come home to us.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Aimster
So you are saying we invaded Iraq because of those terrorist?
Interesting.

I think not.

I was referring to the thousands of terrorist inside Iraq now. You bring up a handful of people.

like moths to a flame...

 

[mh47g]

Dear god that would be a mistake.

Leave the pile of shit middle east to destroy themselves.

 

[blackllotus]

In response to a massacre of civilians by Iranian nukes we will proceed to massacre Iranian civilians using our nukes because that would make the situation better.

 

[Aimster]

Good.
Both the Muslims and Christians will realize that no man from the heavens will appear. Maybe rid the world of these plagues.

 

[Oyeve]

Originally posted by: JS80
lol if they nuked israel, we wouldn't need to do anything. Israeli sub nukes will take out all the arab countries and there will be world peace.

Middle East would be a massive sheet of glass. Global warming would end as the sheet of glass would be turned into one global solar panel. And yes, most of the world would be at peace and maybe we can concentrate on REAL human issues like whats happening in other countries like Africa.

 

[BMW540I6speed]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Nebor

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: Aimster
Iran has never attacked anyone outside of Iran.

U.S has done more harm to the world than Iran has.

What has Iran do? List the things Iran has done. U.S has done it and then some.

LOL! 😕 Let's start with the Hezbollah arm of the Iranian government...

Let's play a game. Yes or No game. The object of the game is to answer the question with a yes or a no.

Has the U.S supported terrorist groups that are against Iran with either training or small arms? Groups the U.S themselves label as terrorist.

Simple yes or no.

yes.

and?

Iran supports terrorist groups via proxy and the U.S does as well .. both with small arms and training.

Looks like U.S and Iran are the same.

Variable: I'm an American.

So, which of the two should I side with if/when the two become adversaries?

Exactly. They're not the same. American can kick the piss out of Iran without much effort at all. That allows us the latitude to do things which the Iranians cannot.

Plus we represent good they represent evil.

There is a strong tendency to pick sides and cast the other side as evil. In this debate, US vs Iran, there are unfortunately no good guys. To wit, the US did in fact commit "evils" in average Iranians eye's, including the following:

Engineered the '53 coup to replace the democratically elected Mossadeq w/ the Shah (Mossadeq nationalized Oil and was a member of the Tudeh/Communist party); trained Savak (Iranian secret service) in ways of torture; armed Saddam Hussein in the war against Iran and turned a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons against Iran; invaded Iraq w/o any good reason and destabilized the region.

The government of post-revolution Iran is itself guilty of many crimes, including taking the Embassy hostages in '79, supporting Hezbollah & Hamas militant wings, committing many many crimes against its people, etc..

There are really no good guys here. And even if we really were the "good guys" and were considering moral arguments, we'd have to walk a razor's edge. Where are the calls that the US stop dealing with Saudi Arabia, which not only oppresses its people and executes Sharia, but is also the number one funder and promoter of Wahhabi (extreme fundamentalism) Madrassas?

Our concern should not be deciding who is good, who is evil, and who is more justified in their actions/crimes. It really should be more pragmatic: what is the best strategy for ensuring regional stability, reducing anti-americanism, and minimizing the threat of a nuclear Iran?

 

[Starbuck1975]

She needed tough talk to seal the deal with Reagan Democrats in PA...hence the timing and the aggressive nature of her "strategic" policy on Iran.