U.S. Announces Sanctions Against Iran

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: bamacre
You didn't answer the question.

Yes, I did. What exactly were you looking for?

Uhh, no, you didn't.

I asked why Iran wants nukes, and you replied with the fact that they want nukes, as if I had asked IF they wanted nukes.

Could we go with, he answered as best that he can?

 

[dennilfloss]

One could have waited and watched the power of the radicals diminish through the years as the fanatic oldies in power simply die, a process we were already witnessing, but attacking Iran or imposing harsh sanctions will simply create a whole new generation of radicals. :roll:

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: bamacre
Uhh, no, you didn't.

I asked why Iran wants nukes, and you replied with the fact that they want nukes, as if I had asked IF they wanted nukes.

Iran wants nukes for the same reason every other Islamofascist regime and group of nutjobs wants them: for the utter destruction of their enemies. I really didn't think it was necessary to point that out as it is pretty well known.

:roll:

Yeah, pretty well-known to other nutjobs dumb enough to believe it.

It is insane to think that Iran, or any country, would launch nukes pre-emptively.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: bamacre
Uhh, no, you didn't.

I asked why Iran wants nukes, and you replied with the fact that they want nukes, as if I had asked IF they wanted nukes.

Iran wants nukes for the same reason every other Islamofascist regime and group of nutjobs wants them: for the utter destruction of their enemies. I really didn't think it was necessary to point that out as it is pretty well known.

When you become more aware that a bigot is a bigot because he can't see his bigotry, the belief in preconceived and irrational prejudice you will begin also to know that rational people can never see what to you is obvious because they don't have your mental disease.

 

[alchemize]

Launching isn't the issue. It's on the back of a hezbollah truck (or 5 trucks)...

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss
One could have waited and watched the power of the radicals diminish through the years as the fanatic oldies in power simply die, a process we were already witnessing, but attacking Iran or imposing harsh sanctions will simply create a whole new generation of radicals. :roll:

This administration may seem foolish to us, but only because we aren't judging thier true intentions.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: bamacre
Uhh, no, you didn't.

I asked why Iran wants nukes, and you replied with the fact that they want nukes, as if I had asked IF they wanted nukes.

Iran wants nukes for the same reason every other Islamofascist regime and group of nutjobs wants them: for the utter destruction of their enemies. I really didn't think it was necessary to point that out as it is pretty well known.

:roll:

Yeah, pretty well-known to other nutjobs dumb enough to believe it.

It is insane to think that Iran, or any country, would launch nukes pre-emptively.

Why? Pabster knows the mind of the fanatic. In this very thread he shows us the suicidal nature of his destructive thinking.

Edit: But insane, yes.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I'd rather it not go this way, but I can support economic and diplomatic sanctions against the upper echelon of Iran after some of the stuff they've pulled. Now if we can just keep it to sanctions, and avoid further Bushco imperialism all will be, well, maybe not well, but ok.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: bamacre


It is insane to think that Iran, or any country, would launch nukes pre-emptively.

You forgot about the element of religion. When God tells you to do something, you dont ask,,, Why?

 

[CyberDuck]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: bamacre
Why do you think they want nukes?

Islamofascists always want nukes. It's like a kid getting his bag of candy at the store.

A passage from the Bible might be fitting for Pabster


Matthew 7
1"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: bamacre


It is insane to think that Iran, or any country, would launch nukes pre-emptively.

You forgot about the element of religion. When God tells you to do something, you dont ask,,, Why?

I bet the leader of Iran is as Islamic as much as Bush is Christian.

What I mean is, their God is money, and their is no money to be made in vaporizing one's self.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Another stupid move by the neo-fascists; and then the claim that Iran is a dangerous country. If you Americans citizens do nothing; it's sure to bring about a WWIII.

Fascists? Do you even know the ideological meaning behind the word or do you think your knowledgeable by quoting sensationalists reporting?

Per Merriam-Webster's definition:

Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: \'fa-?shi-z?m also 'fa-?si-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921

1 (often capitalized) : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality ? J. W. Aldridge>

Political philosophy/movement/regime - Neo-conservativism - check
Exhalts nation above individual - "Your either with us or against us" - check
Stands for centralized autocratic govt - Dick Cheney's dream of a "Unitary Executive" - check
Severe economic and social regimentation - Widening gap between rich and poor - check
Forcible suppression of oppostion - "Free speech" zones, Warrantless wiretapping of political opposition groups - check

I think that you need to hit the books a little more Rich cause you surely shouldn't be mocking someone for the use of a word that you don't even know the meaning of. Clearly the Bush administration and the neo-conservative movement itself is, by definition, fascist.

:thumbsup:

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Another stupid move by the neo-fascists; and then the claim that Iran is a dangerous country. If you Americans citizens do nothing; it's sure to bring about a WWIII.

Fascists? Do you even know the ideological meaning behind the word or do you think your knowledgeable by quoting sensationalists reporting?

Per Merriam-Webster's definition:

Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: \'fa-?shi-z?m also 'fa-?si-\
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
Date: 1921

1 (often capitalized) : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality ? J. W. Aldridge>

Political philosophy/movement/regime - Neo-conservativism - check
Exhalts nation above individual - "Your either with us or against us" - check
Stands for centralized autocratic govt - Dick Cheney's dream of a "Unitary Executive" - check
Severe economic and social regimentation - Widening gap between rich and poor - check
Forcible suppression of oppostion - "Free speech" zones, Warrantless wiretapping of political opposition groups - check

I think that you need to hit the books a little more Rich cause you surely shouldn't be mocking someone for the use of a word that you don't even know the meaning of. Clearly the Bush administration and the neo-conservative movement itself is, by definition, fascist.

You can take certain aspects of most of the governments and put together a little thing saying they are fascists though. Most communists nations you would classify as facist is you decided to pull certain things here and there to fit it into a mould you are trying to make.


Is China a facist country?


Political philosophy/movement/regime - The party - check
Exhalts nation above individual - "The party is above every individual" - check
Stands for centralized autocratic govt - "The party controls everything" - check
Severe economic and social regimentation - Rural and Urban individuals face a huge economic gap- check
Forcible suppression of oppostion - China's record speaks for itself.


See what I mean? Its easy to put a country into a mould of certain ideological beliefs if you take only certain things as your example. As a government though the United States is not a facist government. Its amazing how quick people on this board are to pigeon hole things into a set of standards they believe have been met where the reality is you have to look at a broader picture.

 

[Aimster]

haha Iran has U.S sanctions in place since 1979.

These sanctions don't do squat.

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: bamacre


It is insane to think that Iran, or any country, would launch nukes pre-emptively.

You forgot about the element of religion. When God tells you to do something, you dont ask,,, Why?

Are you talking about Bush or the Ayatollahs?

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: dahunan
Bomb them now and the younger people will become hardline fanatics - neverending cycle

I disagree. There will remain a core of "hardline fanatics" - young or old - no matter what happens in Iran. We must not allow them nuclear weapons, and we must be prepared to do whatever it takes.

I agree with both of you. I would like to see America lead by example and not jump the gun in this delicate matter. However, I also realize that the line needs to be drawn somewhere. We don't want them to obtain nukes. I would prefer to see that particular problem prevented rather than solved after it becomes an issue.

The only downside is that I fear our involvement in Iran will not end there.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Narmer
Are you talking about Bush or the Ayatollahs?

:roll:

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: dahunan
Bomb them now and the younger people will become hardline fanatics - neverending cycle

I disagree. There will remain a core of "hardline fanatics" - young or old - no matter what happens in Iran. We must not allow them nuclear weapons, and we must be prepared to do whatever it takes.

You don't seem to be against "Islamofascism" as you often claim; you are against the entire religion of Islam. If you weren't, you would never advocate the bombing of an entire populace to weed out a few bad apples. History has shown us that the absolute worst thing you can do to win the hearts and minds of anyone, anywhere, at any time, is attack them or their loved ones. Your proposal will create a whole new generation of radical "Islamofascists" from people who would be otherwise indifferent to the United States. Your goal is to turn average Muslims into Islamofascists to justify a crusade against those whose religion you fear. If it were anything else, you would realize the insanity of your plan.

 

[The Green Bean]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: dahunan
Bomb them now and the younger people will become hardline fanatics - neverending cycle

I disagree. There will remain a core of "hardline fanatics" - young or old - no matter what happens in Iran. We must not allow them nuclear weapons, and we must be prepared to do whatever it takes.

You don't seem to be against "Islamofascism" as you often claim; you are against the entire religion of Islam. If you weren't, you would never advocate the bombing of an entire populace to weed out a few bad apples. History has shown us that the absolute worst thing you can do to win the hearts and minds of anyone, anywhere, at any time, is attack them or their loved ones. Your proposal will create a whole new generation of radical "Islamofascists" from people who would be otherwise indifferent to the United States. Your goal is to turn average Muslims into Islamofascists to justify a crusade against those whose religion you fear. If it were anything else, you would realize the insanity of your plan.

I couldn't have put it any better. :thumbsup:

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Narmer
Are you talking about Bush or the Ayatollahs?

:roll:

Well, you gonna answer the question or not? BTW, how does your logic work? Do you hold some moral absolutes that are independent of events or do you base your opinion of everything on their relations to something you hold dear?

 

[Aimster]

Pabster would shit his pants if a woman with a headscarf sat next to him on the bus

 

[Narmer]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Pabster would shit his pants if a woman with a headscarf sat next to him on the bus

Call me crazy but I think he just needs to get laid. It'll make him more relax and less fearful of others.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
You don't seem to be against "Islamofascism" as you often claim; you are against the entire religion of Islam. If you weren't, you would never advocate the bombing of an entire populace to weed out a few bad apples. History has shown us that the absolute worst thing you can do to win the hearts and minds of anyone, anywhere, at any time, is attack them or their loved ones. Your proposal will create a whole new generation of radical "Islamofascists" from people who would be otherwise indifferent to the United States. Your goal is to turn average Muslims into Islamofascists to justify a crusade against those whose religion you fear. If it were anything else, you would realize the insanity of your plan.

I hate to break it to ya, but Islamofascism is on the rise. We're not talking about 1 or 2% of the Muslim population here, we're talking as much as 25%. It's a truly astonishing number of extremists with such deep hatred of "The West" they would stop at absolutely nothing in their quest of utter destruction. Your argument is the classic argument of a pacifist; Now is not the time for apathy and pacifism in the face of such a threat.

And I reject your notion that I'm "afraid" of Islam. I'm not a religious person and I could give two shits about ANY religion, much less one that advocates -- and uses -- violence to accomplish some end game.

 

[piasabird]

Iran is already killing our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, so lets just kill a few Iranian Civilians indiscriminately as payback to show them what their country is doing to civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon. If they dont feel the pain, they will not believe it exists, and they will think America is weak and afraid to attack.

Are you a coward? Iran believes America is too weak to attack. That is why they are emboldened. So we have to attack to call their bluff. If they have a death wish lets grant it now and be done with it. If they use their nuke then millions of civilians could die needlessly. So lets do them a favor and show them what it is like when millions of civilians die.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Narmer
Well, you gonna answer the question or not? BTW, how does your logic work? Do you hold some moral absolutes that are independent of events or do you base your opinion of everything on their relations to something you hold dear?

Let's see. When was the last time GWB issued a fatwah and called for jihad?

There's the answer to your question.

Religions are all cults, as I've said over and over again. I'm not a religious person. But one needn't be to see how pathetic and disgusting your analogy was.