Originally posted by: SamurAchzar
It's either you confront them now, or you confront them later when they have nukes. You just have to choose.
In any case, Israel should confront the Iranians regardless of what happens in the US.
Jews are now facing a modern world Hitler, but this time they have weapons. I don't see any reason why they should agree to another holocaust. After all, Israel will not be a safer place when Iran has nukes.
This matter stands above any PC international relations and public opinions. Good international relations don't help you when a nuke goes off.
Originally posted by: Doboji
We should attack Iran... and then we should give Israel the green light to attack Syria...
Both those countries are ticking timebombs.
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: Doboji
We should attack Iran... and then we should give Israel the green light to attack Syria...
Both those countries are ticking timebombs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Doboji,
You sir are a ticking timebomb full of hatred---and full of the same contempt Hitler had for the slavic people---funny thing----Hitler ended up in a bunker as one hell of a lot of Slavic people fought their way to get at him.
These are human being we are talking about---and just like you and me---your way is insanity personified.
Originally posted by: piasabird
We are already at war with Iran. We are fighting terrorists with IED's in Iraq with parts that come from Iran. We have had incursions coming accross the border in Iran. Iran is a country full of liars who would love to cut off our heads, and smile while they are doing it. You can not trust anything that the leaders of Iran say. We should have destroyed their country when they attacked our embassy, but Carter was a coward and not a commander-in-chief.
Originally posted by: Doboji
We should attack Iran... and then we should give Israel the green light to attack Syria...
Both those countries are ticking timebombs.
That this latest Israelie incursion into Lebanon was just a dry run for the next Bush Cheney neocon target which is Iran.
Originally posted by: Lemon law
I somewhat thank you Lunar Ray for being the first to honestly address this thread,
In our current war with Iraq---the American people and the world agreed to let GWB go to war on fears and hype----and hype that has proved 100% untrue with the lens of 20 20 hindsight. And 3.6 years later we are still at war, no progress has been made, and the lives of the average Iraqi is now infinitely worse than under Saddam.
And now we get almost uncontravertable evidence from a highly respected journalist with sources in spades---that the next target will be Iran---and soon.
The question is what we the American people can do to prevent this war---or will we just wake up some morning and find GWB has already taken us to war with Iran---and we just have no remaining choice but to hope this one is not the same losing fiasco the Iraq war was?---or that like the Germans and Japanese---that we will finally discover we followed a madman like Tojo or Hiltler---who led our proud nation to utter ruin?
After all, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.---and we live in times that try men's souls.
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: Lemon law
I somewhat thank you Lunar Ray for being the first to honestly address this thread,
In our current war with Iraq---the American people and the world agreed to let GWB go to war on fears and hype----and hype that has proved 100% untrue with the lens of 20 20 hindsight. And 3.6 years later we are still at war, no progress has been made, and the lives of the average Iraqi is now infinitely worse than under Saddam.
And now we get almost uncontravertable evidence from a highly respected journalist with sources in spades---that the next target will be Iran---and soon.
The question is what we the American people can do to prevent this war---or will we just wake up some morning and find GWB has already taken us to war with Iran---and we just have no remaining choice but to hope this one is not the same losing fiasco the Iraq war was?---or that like the Germans and Japanese---that we will finally discover we followed a madman like Tojo or Hiltler---who led our proud nation to utter ruin?
After all, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.---and we live in times that try men's souls.
Bush's Administration, his supporters in Congress and the population who trust him are convinced we must be proactive in the solution to the world's woes. What makes up that agenda can only be speculated on but I suspect it entails more violence in foreign lands.
The same set of conditions as they exist today in the Middle East can be seen by ten people of differing political persuasion to be vastly less or more threatening to our security because each would take a somewhat different tact to resolve them. An exception being an invasion on our soil like 9/11 by an identifiable enemy where we'd all unite in a common goal which is just exactly what Bush has used 9/11 to do... apparently!
But that is exactly my point.. Not all action must be violent. There must exist commonality amongst nations in some element of our mutual existence on which to foster a peaceful end to a problem. Even to the extent of being totally defensive and isolated. Let them be as they may while we be as we may. I'd have no problem invading anywhere if that government attacked me. I'd be swift and certain it would not occur again.. Collateral damage would not be in my vocabulary... Destruction would be my objective.. but only from a totally defensive posture initially.. Just like the UN Charter provides... you don't need approval to defend..
So.. inferred in my above is just how I expect the Neocon to seize the attention of the majority of Americans if Iran is really on their radar. It won't be sold.. it will be demanded but some lone voice in the wilderness will cry out and be silenced by the herd of buffalo charging to the slaughterhouse... with righteous indignation they will go.. until reality sets in and that will be too late... Mad Cow disease devastates the herd..
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: Lemon law
I somewhat thank you Lunar Ray for being the first to honestly address this thread,
In our current war with Iraq---the American people and the world agreed to let GWB go to war on fears and hype----and hype that has proved 100% untrue with the lens of 20 20 hindsight. And 3.6 years later we are still at war, no progress has been made, and the lives of the average Iraqi is now infinitely worse than under Saddam.
And now we get almost uncontravertable evidence from a highly respected journalist with sources in spades---that the next target will be Iran---and soon.
The question is what we the American people can do to prevent this war---or will we just wake up some morning and find GWB has already taken us to war with Iran---and we just have no remaining choice but to hope this one is not the same losing fiasco the Iraq war was?---or that like the Germans and Japanese---that we will finally discover we followed a madman like Tojo or Hiltler---who led our proud nation to utter ruin?
After all, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.---and we live in times that try men's souls.
Bush's Administration, his supporters in Congress and the population who trust him are convinced we must be proactive in the solution to the world's woes. What makes up that agenda can only be speculated on but I suspect it entails more violence in foreign lands.
The same set of conditions as they exist today in the Middle East can be seen by ten people of differing political persuasion to be vastly less or more threatening to our security because each would take a somewhat different tact to resolve them. An exception being an invasion on our soil like 9/11 by an identifiable enemy where we'd all unite in a common goal which is just exactly what Bush has used 9/11 to do... apparently!
But that is exactly my point.. Not all action must be violent. There must exist commonality amongst nations in some element of our mutual existence on which to foster a peaceful end to a problem. Even to the extent of being totally defensive and isolated. Let them be as they may while we be as we may. I'd have no problem invading anywhere if that government attacked me. I'd be swift and certain it would not occur again.. Collateral damage would not be in my vocabulary... Destruction would be my objective.. but only from a totally defensive posture initially.. Just like the UN Charter provides... you don't need approval to defend..
So.. inferred in my above is just how I expect the Neocon to seize the attention of the majority of Americans if Iran is really on their radar. It won't be sold.. it will be demanded but some lone voice in the wilderness will cry out and be silenced by the herd of buffalo charging to the slaughterhouse... with righteous indignation they will go.. until reality sets in and that will be too late... Mad Cow disease devastates the herd..
It is all well and good to be proactive when you have terrorists light off 10 nuclear weapons in your major cities if you are one of the survivors, but it's too late for all those dead to be proactive then. There are in our age some catastrophes we need to be proactive about before they happen and that changes everything, no? Doesn't mean we have to kill every other nation on earth to be safe, but it does mean, I think, trying to know what's going on and eliminating real threats, by diplomacy if possible but by other means if required. It just makes no sense to me to react to the deaths of maybe hundreds of thousands of kids after they are dead.
Originally posted by: novon
That's very short-sighted. The occupier and oppressor in the region are the Zionists, not the other way around. Any long term peace will come through Israel respecting it's neighbors
and dealing with the root causes of the hostility, not the symptoms.
Iran has many Jews living in it
and a lot of the Jews in Israel are from Iran.
Ahmanedijad admitted that some of his best friends are Jews, he is not out to kill all Jews.
There is no hate for all Jewish people,
there is a hate for the oppression and violence carried out by the Zionist in Israel. It seems from the recent Lebanon war, that some in power in Israel are much more of a danger to human life than and threats neocons are creating to justify war.
If Iran is trying to go nuclear, it's both for it's long term energy security, and the detterence of the US/Israel's rampage in the mid east.
There is no way to deter every person in the middle east from fighting back, unless stability can be created through concessions, dialogue, cultural tolerence, and charity. Force will only get us in a tighter bind.
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: Doboji
We should attack Iran... and then we should give Israel the green light to attack Syria...
Both those countries are ticking timebombs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Doboji,
You sir are a ticking timebomb full of hatred---and full of the same contempt Hitler had for the slavic people---funny thing----Hitler ended up in a bunker as one hell of a lot of Slavic people fought their way to get at him.
These are human being we are talking about---and just like you and me---your way is insanity personified.
Doboji is one of those idiots who knows he is dealing with monsters so he can justify their dying by his hand. Novon, on the other hand seems absolutely convinced that Iran has peaceful intentions and will be fine if Israel plays nice. When is that going to happen. It looks pretty much to me that the area is so sick that peace can only be imposed but I am not sure of that. At any rate one of the potential madmen there already has nukes and if the other side that God also fully supports gets them their can be much deeper trouble. It may be a bit unfair but it might be best in dealing with paranoids that only one side has something real to fear. It is absolutely ridiculous to take Iranian rhetoric seriously but equally ridiculous to ignore it. In a family you don't let one of the boys run around with a knife yelling he's going to off his brothers and sisters because he wants the last pork chop, make that lamb chop or soy burger. Why would a family of nations act differently?
Originally posted by: db
Something like 23% of any population is crazy enough to march over a cliff. Keep beating the drums of fear, have the corporate media repeat your lies, and wahlah: we're in the war and it's too late. Nothing left to do now except stand behind our leaders.
Seems simple enough.
Originally posted by: Horus
Originally posted by: db
Something like 23% of any population is crazy enough to march over a cliff. Keep beating the drums of fear, have the corporate media repeat your lies, and wahlah: we're in the war and it's too late. Nothing left to do now except stand behind our leaders.
Seems simple enough.
FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST. IT'S NOT WAHLAH. IT'S VOILA! IT'S FRENCH! NOT "WHALLAAH", OR "VAHLAHH", IT'S VOILA! FOR FVCK'S SAKE IT'S THE UMTEENTH TIME I'VE SAID IT!
Spin the same old worn out record.How will the necons sell the war the war with Iran
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Originally posted by: Doboji
We should attack Iran... and then we should give Israel the green light to attack Syria...
Both those countries are ticking timebombs.
Wow, that was easy. It's always fun playing armchair general, isn't it?
You have any proposal on how we attack Iran?
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: Doboji
We should attack Iran... and then we should give Israel the green light to attack Syria...
Both those countries are ticking timebombs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Doboji,
You sir are a ticking timebomb full of hatred---and full of the same contempt Hitler had for the slavic people---funny thing----Hitler ended up in a bunker as one hell of a lot of Slavic people fought their way to get at him.
These are human being we are talking about---and just like you and me---your way is insanity personified.
Doboji is one of those idiots who knows he is dealing with monsters so he can justify their dying by his hand. Novon, on the other hand seems absolutely convinced that Iran has peaceful intentions and will be fine if Israel plays nice. When is that going to happen. It looks pretty much to me that the area is so sick that peace can only be imposed but I am not sure of that. At any rate one of the potential madmen there already has nukes and if the other side that God also fully supports gets them their can be much deeper trouble. It may be a bit unfair but it might be best in dealing with paranoids that only one side has something real to fear. It is absolutely ridiculous to take Iranian rhetoric seriously but equally ridiculous to ignore it. In a family you don't let one of the boys run around with a knife yelling he's going to off his brothers and sisters because he wants the last pork chop, make that lamb chop or soy burger. Why would a family of nations act differently?
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: Lemon law
I somewhat thank you Lunar Ray for being the first to honestly address this thread,
In our current war with Iraq---the American people and the world agreed to let GWB go to war on fears and hype----and hype that has proved 100% untrue with the lens of 20 20 hindsight. And 3.6 years later we are still at war, no progress has been made, and the lives of the average Iraqi is now infinitely worse than under Saddam.
And now we get almost uncontravertable evidence from a highly respected journalist with sources in spades---that the next target will be Iran---and soon.
The question is what we the American people can do to prevent this war---or will we just wake up some morning and find GWB has already taken us to war with Iran---and we just have no remaining choice but to hope this one is not the same losing fiasco the Iraq war was?---or that like the Germans and Japanese---that we will finally discover we followed a madman like Tojo or Hiltler---who led our proud nation to utter ruin?
After all, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.---and we live in times that try men's souls.
Bush's Administration, his supporters in Congress and the population who trust him are convinced we must be proactive in the solution to the world's woes. What makes up that agenda can only be speculated on but I suspect it entails more violence in foreign lands.
The same set of conditions as they exist today in the Middle East can be seen by ten people of differing political persuasion to be vastly less or more threatening to our security because each would take a somewhat different tact to resolve them. An exception being an invasion on our soil like 9/11 by an identifiable enemy where we'd all unite in a common goal which is just exactly what Bush has used 9/11 to do... apparently!
But that is exactly my point.. Not all action must be violent. There must exist commonality amongst nations in some element of our mutual existence on which to foster a peaceful end to a problem. Even to the extent of being totally defensive and isolated. Let them be as they may while we be as we may. I'd have no problem invading anywhere if that government attacked me. I'd be swift and certain it would not occur again.. Collateral damage would not be in my vocabulary... Destruction would be my objective.. but only from a totally defensive posture initially.. Just like the UN Charter provides... you don't need approval to defend..
So.. inferred in my above is just how I expect the Neocon to seize the attention of the majority of Americans if Iran is really on their radar. It won't be sold.. it will be demanded but some lone voice in the wilderness will cry out and be silenced by the herd of buffalo charging to the slaughterhouse... with righteous indignation they will go.. until reality sets in and that will be too late... Mad Cow disease devastates the herd..
It is all well and good to be proactive when you have terrorists light off 10 nuclear weapons in your major cities if you are one of the survivors, but it's too late for all those dead to be proactive then. There are in our age some catastrophes we need to be proactive about before they happen and that changes everything, no? Doesn't mean we have to kill every other nation on earth to be safe, but it does mean, I think, trying to know what's going on and eliminating real threats, by diplomacy if possible but by other means if required. It just makes no sense to me to react to the deaths of maybe hundreds of thousands of kids after they are dead.
If I don't ever visit your house and stomp on your begonias you'll have no reason to visit terror on my tulips..
Why would the terrorist visit my yard and detonate the nuclear devices if I'm peacefully tending my own business letting him tend to his in his own garden?
My thinking is that during the transition from proactive aggressor to defensive gardener there may be some who hold a grudge.. well I'm not going to abandon my freedoms to survive as a prisoner in my own home.. I figure they would find a means to do what they intend no matter what I did proactive like... except if I completely eliminate any possible threat by eliminating every possible terrorist. All the while I'm a prisoner until finally only I'm left alive..
Again I'd say... If attacked I would eliminate the aggressor terrorist and his government and his friends.. sooner or later I may run out of 'payback' but if I am right and stop the attacks on me by the others left around I've won.. If I am wrong and a new group comes to seek vengeance on this peaceful gardener then they too will visit the reality of their belief... I am willing to live and let live after all the other nations are sovereign too.. If they terminate me in the process.. well then I'd not much care anymore, I don't think..
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: Lemon law
I somewhat thank you Lunar Ray for being the first to honestly address this thread,
In our current war with Iraq---the American people and the world agreed to let GWB go to war on fears and hype----and hype that has proved 100% untrue with the lens of 20 20 hindsight. And 3.6 years later we are still at war, no progress has been made, and the lives of the average Iraqi is now infinitely worse than under Saddam.
And now we get almost uncontravertable evidence from a highly respected journalist with sources in spades---that the next target will be Iran---and soon.
The question is what we the American people can do to prevent this war---or will we just wake up some morning and find GWB has already taken us to war with Iran---and we just have no remaining choice but to hope this one is not the same losing fiasco the Iraq war was?---or that like the Germans and Japanese---that we will finally discover we followed a madman like Tojo or Hiltler---who led our proud nation to utter ruin?
After all, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.---and we live in times that try men's souls.
Bush's Administration, his supporters in Congress and the population who trust him are convinced we must be proactive in the solution to the world's woes. What makes up that agenda can only be speculated on but I suspect it entails more violence in foreign lands.
The same set of conditions as they exist today in the Middle East can be seen by ten people of differing political persuasion to be vastly less or more threatening to our security because each would take a somewhat different tact to resolve them. An exception being an invasion on our soil like 9/11 by an identifiable enemy where we'd all unite in a common goal which is just exactly what Bush has used 9/11 to do... apparently!
But that is exactly my point.. Not all action must be violent. There must exist commonality amongst nations in some element of our mutual existence on which to foster a peaceful end to a problem. Even to the extent of being totally defensive and isolated. Let them be as they may while we be as we may. I'd have no problem invading anywhere if that government attacked me. I'd be swift and certain it would not occur again.. Collateral damage would not be in my vocabulary... Destruction would be my objective.. but only from a totally defensive posture initially.. Just like the UN Charter provides... you don't need approval to defend..
So.. inferred in my above is just how I expect the Neocon to seize the attention of the majority of Americans if Iran is really on their radar. It won't be sold.. it will be demanded but some lone voice in the wilderness will cry out and be silenced by the herd of buffalo charging to the slaughterhouse... with righteous indignation they will go.. until reality sets in and that will be too late... Mad Cow disease devastates the herd..
It is all well and good to be proactive when you have terrorists light off 10 nuclear weapons in your major cities if you are one of the survivors, but it's too late for all those dead to be proactive then. There are in our age some catastrophes we need to be proactive about before they happen and that changes everything, no? Doesn't mean we have to kill every other nation on earth to be safe, but it does mean, I think, trying to know what's going on and eliminating real threats, by diplomacy if possible but by other means if required. It just makes no sense to me to react to the deaths of maybe hundreds of thousands of kids after they are dead.
If I don't ever visit your house and stomp on your begonias you'll have no reason to visit terror on my tulips..
Why would the terrorist visit my yard and detonate the nuclear devices if I'm peacefully tending my own business letting him tend to his in his own garden?
My thinking is that during the transition from proactive aggressor to defensive gardener there may be some who hold a grudge.. well I'm not going to abandon my freedoms to survive as a prisoner in my own home.. I figure they would find a means to do what they intend no matter what I did proactive like... except if I completely eliminate any possible threat by eliminating every possible terrorist. All the while I'm a prisoner until finally only I'm left alive..
Again I'd say... If attacked I would eliminate the aggressor terrorist and his government and his friends.. sooner or later I may run out of 'payback' but if I am right and stop the attacks on me by the others left around I've won.. If I am wrong and a new group comes to seek vengeance on this peaceful gardener then they too will visit the reality of their belief... I am willing to live and let live after all the other nations are sovereign too.. If they terminate me in the process.. well then I'd not much care anymore, I don't think..
What did Tibet do to China?