• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Breaking News: US seizing mosques that bankroll Iran's regime of evil

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,861
3
76
Iraq is a good base in the middle east.

It was taken at a huge cost, but OK... here we are.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
11
76
Iraq is a good base in the middle east.

It was taken at a huge cost, but OK... here we are.
Yup, if we take Iran, we'll have 3 contiguous nations under our control, and we won't need to truck supplies into A-stan through Pakistan.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,213
126
Yup, if we take Iran, we'll have 3 contiguous nations under our control, and we won't need to truck supplies into A-stan through Pakistan.
Why not go for it all. Discover an extinct super advanced civilization with space ships armed with death rays. You could kill anyone, anywhere, anytime. Or you could continue with your less likely fantasy of taking over Iran. You pick.
 

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,861
3
76
I believe we will take Iran, but in a war of words,idealogy, and probably money.

Iraq was a great first step.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
But But But, the supreme Court says money is free speech, and free speech is a corner stone of our Country. We are for free speech aren't we?

And it sounds more like a property grab gone a muck to me, hopefully the courts will step in and assert due process of law before we all lose our rights also.
 

SamurAchzar

Platinum Member
Feb 15, 2006
2,422
1
76
Good morning cultural relativism! I see some ideas thrown around here - "Is Iran Evil?" "Shouldn't we seize Church money too"?

Let me guess the speakers of these ideas are all American. You, my friends, have lost the notion of what side you're on. If you're claiming Iran - as a state entity - is not evil, you are a bunch of idiots.

The Iranian regime opposes EVERYTHING a Liberal is fond of, and yet to rally up to support them. Why? Because your anti establishment feeling towards the USA and the old Christian establishment (instinctively associated with the GOP for you, probably), as well as Israel, which is to you the ultimate expression to how the establishment fucks the poor (Palestinians). "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", right? Well, when enemy #1 is a religious dictatorship and enemy #2 is your own country, you're a short sighted idiot.

There should be NO question whether Iran is evil. You can debate whether Israel is evil nor not, and even argue that the USA is evil, but I just can't see how you can claim Iran is not evil. Their people are surely good and progressive, but they are not calling the shots.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,531
3
0
Good morning cultural relativism! I see some ideas thrown around here - "Is Iran Evil?" "Shouldn't we seize Church money too"?

Let me guess the speakers of these ideas are all American. You, my friends, have lost the notion of what side you're on. If you're claiming Iran - as a state entity - is not evil, you are a bunch of idiots.

The Iranian regime opposes EVERYTHING a Liberal is fond of, and yet to rally up to support them. Why? Because your anti establishment feeling towards the USA and the old Christian establishment (instinctively associated with the GOP for you, probably), as well as Israel, which is to you the ultimate expression to how the establishment fucks the poor (Palestinians). "The enemy of my enemy is my friend", right? Well, when enemy #1 is a religious dictatorship and enemy #2 is your own country, you're a short sighted idiot.

There should be NO question whether Iran is evil. You can debate whether Israel is evil nor not, and even argue that the USA is evil, but I just can't see how you can claim Iran is not evil. Their people are surely good and progressive, but they are not calling the shots.
So we should kill them anyway?
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,371
3,495
126
In the not too distant past, Americans were funding the IRA much to the chagrin of the British.

Charge, Confiscate, Prosecute. No act of War has occurred, however.
 

SamurAchzar

Platinum Member
Feb 15, 2006
2,422
1
76
So we should kill them anyway?
Nope. Honestly there's no option of a forced regime change either. Just bomb their nuclear sites out of existence and let them do whatever the fuck they wish in their borders. You can't violently force people to love you, even I know that ;)
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
One has to label the SamurAchzar argument for what it is, manipulation pure plain and simple. Since Israel does not like Iran, lets trick Uncle Sucker into doing our heavy lifting for us.

As it is, I may think the Iranian agenda is problem, but I am far more convinced the Israeli agenda is evil and not conducive to any just mid east peace.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Nope. Honestly there's no option of a forced regime change either. Just bomb their nuclear sites out of existence and let them do whatever the fuck they wish in their borders. You can't violently force people to love you, even I know that ;)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is that what you would wish for Israel also, just bomb Israeli nuclear sites and be done with it? With the rickety Dismona site that would be really bad, its a graphite reactor or the Chernoble type, one accident or malfunction that cuts the cooling water and its instant China syndrome. That will poison the environment for a huge radius around the Dismona and make it uninhabitable for thousands of years.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,213
126
But But But, the supreme Court says money is free speech, and free speech is a corner stone of our Country. We are for free speech aren't we?

And it sounds more like a property grab gone a muck to me, hopefully the courts will step in and assert due process of law before we all lose our rights also.
Let's see.

Law against funding Iran. Check.
Organization caught doing same. Check.
Organization duly punished. Check.

Hint- if you illegally send money to Iran you'll be hit too.


Seizures like this have been going on forever. You still have your property. You aren't going to suddenly have your stuff taken unless you do what I said.

The hyperbole is over the top.
 

SamurAchzar

Platinum Member
Feb 15, 2006
2,422
1
76
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is that what you would wish for Israel also, just bomb Israeli nuclear sites and be done with it? With the rickety Dismona site that would be really bad, its a graphite reactor or the Chernoble type, one accident or malfunction that cuts the cooling water and its instant China syndrome. That will poison the environment for a huge radius around the Dismona and make it uninhabitable for thousands of years.
I'm sure your analogy is valid and well thought of, I just didn't understand it. You just might bomb France and Britain while you're at it. Let me help you: the idea is NOT to deprive allies from nuclear weapons, it's making sure the non-allies (not to say "enemies", as that might strike a tad too blatant to the liberals here who live in a world without enemies other than GOP) don't get them. Does this very basic evolutionary logic of self prevalence seem to work for you?

Iran should not have any nuclear weapons, just like any other Muslim country. I'm perfectly happy in a world where US is the main power and calls the shots. I'm very happy in an unbalanced world where democracy and capitalism are the main powers. I'm very happy in a world where backward Muslim countries are kept powerless, as this is why they don't threat my existence.
If history folded otherwise and USSR or the Nazis - or China - were the dominant powers, we'd not be having this discussion now - we wouldn't be having ANY discussion.
 

SamurAchzar

Platinum Member
Feb 15, 2006
2,422
1
76
One has to label the SamurAchzar argument for what it is, manipulation pure plain and simple. Since Israel does not like Iran, lets trick Uncle Sucker into doing our heavy lifting for us.

As it is, I may think the Iranian agenda is problem, but I am far more convinced the Israeli agenda is evil and not conducive to any just mid east peace.
What does Israel have to do with is? Is there one person in the world who feels safer by a nuclear Iran?

Europe is not; USA is not; Israel is certainly not, but the most ironic things is that the Arabs themselves are not. Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt are much more concerned about the nuclear ambitions of Iran than they are with Israel.

US should attack Iranian nuclear site because:
1. No Muslim fanatic should have this much power
2. This will prevent an assured Middle Eastern arms race
3. Allowing Iran to arm itself with nuclear weapons is writing a blank check for it continuing to be a rogue, violent country for years to come

I don't think that under any circumstances Israel is under a direct nuclear threat from Iran, as Iranians won't be this stupid. But the results of Iran running rampant backed by nuclear arms is devastating.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,371
3,495
126
I'm sure your analogy is valid and well thought of, I just didn't understand it. You just might bomb France and Britain while you're at it. Let me help you: the idea is NOT to deprive allies from nuclear weapons, it's making sure the non-allies (not to say "enemies", as that might strike a tad too blatant to the liberals here who live in a world without enemies other than GOP) don't get them. Does this very basic evolutionary logic of self prevalence seem to work for you?

Iran should not have any nuclear weapons, just like any other Muslim country. I'm perfectly happy in a world where US is the main power and calls the shots. I'm very happy in an unbalanced world where democracy and capitalism are the main powers. I'm very happy in a world where backward Muslim countries are kept powerless, as this is why they don't threat my existence.
If history folded otherwise and USSR or the Nazis - or China - were the dominant powers, we'd not be having this discussion now - we wouldn't be having ANY discussion.
Says you!

No one should have Nukes, says I. It's not Practical, but just as Practical as your declaration. Which, I should point out, it is too late anyway.
 

SamurAchzar

Platinum Member
Feb 15, 2006
2,422
1
76
Says you!

No one should have Nukes, says I. It's not Practical, but just as Practical as your declaration. Which, I should point out, it is too late anyway.
I do not want anyone who opposes my world view to have equal strength. What's the problem with that? Do you have out guns to burglars to level the playing field?

It is very practical from an operational point of view to destroy the nuclear program of Iran within 24 hours. It is not politically possible in the current climate, but that's another thing altogether.
The world should make sure Iran is NOT the next North Korea.

I think US should always have nukes, but this is because I'd always want to the US to remain the world most prominent power. I wouldn't want anyone else stepping up.
 

BassBomb

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2005
8,392
1
76
Funny, the Mosque I went to was telling us to return to God, rather than hate Americans. That sermon was a long time ago during the war.

Anyways, shutting down this company for sending money to Iran is interesting, but doesn't the US buy tons of Oil from Iran anyways?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,213
126
Says you!

No one should have Nukes, says I. It's not Practical, but just as Practical as your declaration. Which, I should point out, it is too late anyway.
So let's say Iran gets nukes, and uses them against someone first. You understand that it will become a large glass parking lot right?
 

TheSkinsFan

Golden Member
May 15, 2009
1,141
0
0
If you lived in Iran and saw all the people next door the Americans bombed to death who were not "government" you would have trouble seeing your own government as evil

If you were taught anything about the Americans involvement in the Iran-Iraq war then you have problems seeing who was evil and who wasn't
Actually, not so much.

So, just for the record, do you believe that the U.S. Government is evil?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
460
126
Funny, the Mosque I went to was telling us to return to God, rather than hate Americans. That sermon was a long time ago during the war.

Anyways, shutting down this company for sending money to Iran is interesting, but doesn't the US buy tons of Oil from Iran anyways?
The US buys nothing from Iran and vice versa; we have no ties of any kind since the 1979 mass kidnapping. Most of Iran's oil goes to China, France and Germany if memory serves. The bulk of US oil comes from Canada and Mexico, actually; apparently to Democrats oil is evil if pumped by the USA. (The Republicans will happily let you pump it but refuse to make you be responsible for your inevitable mess. You just can't win in Washington.)

Glad to hear that about your mosque though, that's good advice for everyone.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,371
3,495
126
I do not want anyone who opposes my world view to have equal strength. What's the problem with that? Do you have out guns to burglars to level the playing field?

It is very practical from an operational point of view to destroy the nuclear program of Iran within 24 hours. It is not politically possible in the current climate, but that's another thing altogether.
The world should make sure Iran is NOT the next North Korea.

I think US should always have nukes, but this is because I'd always want to the US to remain the world most prominent power. I wouldn't want anyone else stepping up.
Arrogance.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,371
3,495
126
So let's say Iran gets nukes, and uses them against someone first. You understand that it will become a large glass parking lot right?
What if they get them and don't use them against anyone else? Why always the assumption that the First Test happens over Tel Aviv?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY