:2 cents:

What exactly is unreasonable about them wanting to stand up for and defend themselves against foreign aggressors who threaten them daily?

By "reasonable" you basically mean they should agree to whatever the US wants. That has certainly been the position of the US Government for the past 70 years. Do as we say, or die.

You think anyone in the Government gives a shit how religious people are there? It's about acquiescing to US domination. If those people under 30 years old don't accept who their Master is, we'd spin a bunch of lies about them too to engineer an attack. Or just overthrow them.

No he didn't. Thanks for playing though.

Didn't it eventually turn out that Iran masterminded 9/11? :upsidedow

U.S. District Court Rules Iran Behind 9/11 Attacks
http://www.bloomberg.com/article/201...OcZ6NT3wo.html

By reasonable I mean that their leader doesn't call for the destruction of entire races of people.

Many of their leaders now are radical Islamist. If that is what they want to believe and how they want to live their lives, I don't really give a shit. I do have issues with them forcing their will on others, but that is another thread all together. What I do have a problem with is putting a nuke into the hands of someone who might believe that if they light that bomb off in the middle of Tel Aviv they will go to heaven and spend eternity fucking 72 virgins.



The hope is that these young people will not be as radical so when you try to reason with them and talk about some give and take from both sides they won't refuse anything that isn't exactly what they want.

Thats what I expected you thought - obstruction is cost effective, military action may not be cost effective for the nation; but it would make some people - those who benefit from a sharply increased price of oil - pretty happy.

Another military adventure could easily happen - but - it will cost us, and my estimate of another 4-5 trillion could be way too low.

What happens if the israelis act on their own - well - that's much more difficult to model out, and it depends on wether (and how much) we get drawn into defending israel.

Military action would make for some great television.

I'm not gonna give you a smart ass answer. But I will bring up some history of our own country.

In 1956 Nikita Khrushchev the leader of The Soviet Union told the U.S. "We will bury you"
And those guys actually COULD do it with thousands of nuclear bombs mounted up on long distance Intercontintal Ballistic Missiles.

But it never happened.

One other thing about history...
The ONLY country to ever use atomic weapons is the United States Of America.
And we didn't use them on a military force.

Nope. We dropped them right on two major cities in Japan and killed hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children.

I'm not looking to argue whether that was "right" or "wrong". I do think that history will not look on it very kindly in the long run.

But no other country or "mad man" has ever done it since.

What would we call a country that did that to another country in 2012? Terrorists?

Large scale military action would have to be a last resort. We are so broke we can't afford the war we are still fighting.

I think we are going to put time, some money, CIA assets and things like that into the country and see if we can help push change from the inside out.

However, if Iran suddenly gets a nuke and threatens to use it I think Israel will act and that could stir up a can of worms that won't be easy to close.

Yawn. Please stick to things that have actually happened instead of repeating the same old tired lies. All Ahmadinejad has talked about is removing/replacing the Israeli regime, and how the world would be a better place without Zionism.

Why is when we talk about "wiping out" Governments we don't like, we call it "regime change", and it's perfectly acceptable? But when Iran does it, it becomes a bunch of ridiculous garbage about 'wiping out a race'?

If you're not even going to post sanely and rationally it's not worth debating.

Of course, American allies like Saudi Arabia are notorious for their democracy, moderation and fair treatment of their people.

Two questions:

1. Do you think Iran has non-nuclear bombs?
2. If you do, why haven't they detonated one in Tel Aviv?

If the best you can do is invent ridiculous situations that will never happen (the Iranians don't even want nukes, though they should), then you really have no argument at all. And spare the '72 virgin' nonsense if you want to be taken even remotely seriously; it just makes you look a total dumbass to people who have a clue.

Why should they agree to do something that's not in their interests? Would we? If Russia or China started telling us to behave in ways they like, do you think we should do it? Why don't we just mind our own fucking business?

.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=_9zcElqetqk

SHOVE IT DOWN HAIRY CUM FILLED ANUS YOU FUCKING UNRIGHTEOUS FAGGOT. muwahaha.. sighs.. i tried.

Some anonymous crank makes a Youtube video with made up subtitles. And? Thanks for playing again, dipshit.

As I said before in this thread I personally don't give a fuck about Israel or Iran.

I think we should increase our solar and wind power here in the US. We should tap into the sea of natural gas we have in the gulf and drill for a little more oil and get to the point where we have no oil needs at all from the middle east. At that time we tell Israel they are on their own. If they want to come here and live, fine by me, but if they are going to stay there and fight over a piece of dirt, they are on their own.

Once we are gone from the region those middle eastern countries they can go back to fighting each other which is exactly what they will do. That part of the world has known nothing but violence and blood in the sand since the beginning of recorded time there is no reason to think it will ever stop. Many of them are radicals with no ability to reason outside of their belief system.

If you want to believe they are just friendly, nice people (when I say this I say it about the leadership, not so much the people themselves) who would never harm anyone you are free to do so. I believe otherwise.

As for the quote. This is what it is widely reported as being: "There is no doubt that the new wave [of attacks] in Palestine will wipe off this stigma [Israel] from the face of the Islamic world." Recalling the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of Iran's Islamic revolution, he said: "As the imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map."

He didn't say that they Iran should destroy Israel simply that if Palestine attacked it would be able to wipe them out and that imam said they should be destroyed.

I don't see why we should have to wait. We get nothing from Israel. They are not sitting on anything we want or need. In fact they're an enormous drain on our economy, and have caused us nothing but problems with countries which do have resources that we want and need. The only reason for our ridiculously unqualified support is their enormous political influence here.

Such unqualified support is not just bad for us either, it's bad for Israel. Since they know they can rely on us for anything, whatever they do, there is absolutely no incentive for them to behave rationally or sanely with the countries around them.

Iran has had a civilization and culture dating back thousands of years before the US even existed. In the last 200 years Iran has attacked zero countries. How many have we attacked? What's so peace-loving about our history?

The entire history, from birth and creation to the expansion of the USA, to becoming a superpower after WWII and then the only real superpower 20 years ago, is one of violence and war. And, given the huge homicide rate, we can't even say it's just the Government.

The fact that something is widely reported/repeated doesn't make it true. What he talks about is the (Zionist) regime in Israel, ie, the political system/Government.

Nobody says we're trying to wipe out all Arabs or Muslims from the map when we overthrow and attack Arab Governments, in our 'regime changes', so it's pure baloney to pretend he's saying that about Israel.

Even if he was, though, so what? People say shit all the time. What matters is what he can actually do. Israel has the fourth largest army in the world, arguably the second best supplied military, thanks to American and German taxpayers, and hundreds of nukes. The fact they can still con sane, sensible people, which I believe you are, into thinking they're under threat is incredible.

If we ended all support for Israel tomorrow I would be fine with it.



I know we aren't innocent in all of this. Iran has supported plenty of terrorist activities. They were/are the primary funding source for the Islamic Jihad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state_terrorism are a few of their greatest hits.

While they may not have actually attacked a country with an army or occupied a place, they are not some innocent, peace loving country.



If Hillary Clinton gave a speech in which she said, "As President Obama said, Iran should be wiped off the map." the shit storm that would come from it would likely cost her her job and the republicans would rain hell down on Obama, but we let this guy just spout shit because. . . well. . . why?

You are what you say. If you don't want people to think you are some kind of crazy rogue nation don't go around saying crazy rogue shit.

Islamic Jihad was just a nom de guerre used in the past to claim responsibility for attacks in Lebanon. As it is, 'Islamic Jihad'/Hezbollah, is a Lebanese resistance group/army formed to expel Israel from their country. If Israel did not invade the country repeatedly, attack the country non-stop and partially occupy the country, there would have been no need for Hezbollah.

Hezbollah is not a terrorist group. It's not even a case of 'one man's terrorist'. It quite simply is not a terrorist group, because it exists to repel an outside aggressor and fights against the (invading/occupying) IDF. If Israel was not in Lebanon, and did not attack Lebanon repeatedly, it would not be attacked by Hezbollah.

9/11? The Taliban? :1orglaugh Clearly a very credible page, even by Wikipedia standards.

I don't know how many more times I have to repeat this but: he did not fucking say "Israel should be wiped off the map". Holy shit. Even the quote you posted had "Israel" inserted in brackets by someone else.

If you won't accept reality at this point, you never will.

Edit: what does that even mean anyway? "We just let him spout shit because... why?" Because why shouldn't he spout shit? Even if he genuinely was threatening another country, and he is not, how is that our business and why should it concern us? If he's not making serious and credible threats towards the US, then we should mind our own business.

There are many sources out there that state that the Islamic Jihad movement has been heavily funded by Iran.

Can you show me some proof of this?

Clearly we have different opinions of Iran. I am not endorsing an invasion of them. I am not saying we should wipe them off the planet. I am saying that we should be wary of them and it might be in our best interests to keep them from having nuclear weapons.

You, apparently, feel they are a sweet, innocent, misunderstood country who just want to get along with everyone and live peacefully ever after.

I don't just feel this way about Iran. I feel the same way about Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Yeman, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and pretty much any country that is run by religious zealots.

That's not true - we do get something from israel. They are our proxy army, our mercenary force, strategically located to give us infantry and bases shoudl we ever have to militarily defend the petrodollar.

Wether or not we should actually have a mercenary army to defend the petrodollar is a whole nuther level of question.

But, we do have one, and it's israel. They aren't a particularly loyal army, but with mercenaries, you get what you pay for. They are pretty intimidating, and thats what you need in a proxy force.

It's like having a pit bull - you benefit if your neighbors think the dog might go nuts.

It's all about logistics - having an armed population, and defended land with ocean access, is a critical part of the post reagan petrodollar logistics strategy.

You post about virtually every subject as if you are some kind of expert but you know and I know that you are basically full of shit...but feel free to carry on with your pastime.

obviously then you can point out the flaws pathfinder. weren't you claiming to be some mil type before you died? spell out my errors, I love to be schooled.

when it comes to war logistics and strategy, I'm actually pretty good. but, it's all pretty obvious once you understand the basic concepts. it's the execution that's tricky.

nowhere near as complex as oil and energy. altho the two are intimately connected.

I think you have this backward ,,,:2 cents:

It's no secret that Iran (and Syria) has been involved in supporting Lebanese resistance movements. So what? Those movements arose to expel Israeli occupation, and remove the, at the time, US/multi-national presence in Lebanon, which was pro-Israeli and pro-Christian. If the US, which of course supported the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, hadn't been in Lebanon, let alone been shelling innocent Lebanese, the Marines killed there would still be alive today.

Proof of what? That someone inserted the word "Israel"? He didn't even mention the word Israel in his speech. Here's a transcript of the speech from a notoriously pro-Iranian source, the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/we...ew/30iran.html

"Bracketed explanatory material is from Ms. Fathi [a New York Times 'journalist']."

The only references to "Israel" are written by her. He mentions the United States by name, so why, if he's talking about Israel and not Zionism, does he specifically say "Zionism", and not "Israel"?

It's up to you whether you want to honestly address what he actually said (the text without brackets), or what other people, with an obvious agenda and axe to grind, claim he said.

It's in the best interests of the world for nobody to have nukes, and the whole world wants a nuclear free Middle East. Guess which two countries agree with a nuclear free ME, but with one obvious exception? :1orglaugh

Iran does not even want nukes, even though they should, given the threats and actual attacks they receive constantly from war-mongering nuclear-armed countries. Iran wants nuclear power, just as many other countries have nuclear power and don't have nukes. Even Iranians that are opposed to Ahmadinejad think their country should be able to develop nuclear power.

Got any evidence to show otherwise? I can show you countless wars and attacks on foreign countries by the US and Israel in the last half a century. How many can you give me for Iran?

Actually, Israel has more religious zealots in positions of power than Syria or Jordan, both of which are secular countries. In Israel the Government relies on the support of extremist religious nuts and frequently caves in to their demands; Syria OTOH, as with formerly secular Libya, is right now under attack from Islamist terrorists supported and armed by us and the Saudis.

The Saudis, who gave us Bin Laden and, apparently, most of the 9/11 hijackers, are of course enormously fundamentalist and dangerous. But since they're considered no threat to Israeli domination of the ME, and they have oil and buy arms from us, their extremism, tyranny and involvement in terrorism is ignored.

Other countries with a formerly secular Government, but which are now controlled by religious extremists thanks to the US, include: Iraq.

If the US Government is so against Islamic extremism, why does it support it so much?

I don't think I've ever read so much utter crap in my life. I strongly suggest you claim you were just trolling, otherwise any credibility you may have had before has just expired with that nonsense.

The US is the most powerful nation on earth. We can, and do, attack any corner of the planet at will. Our Navy alone has more power than most countries' entire military. We spend almost as much on 'defense' as the rest of the world put together.

Israel has never fought a war for us; on the contrary, they have attacked us, deliberately killed American servicemen, and they constantly try (and succeed in) getting us to fight their wars for them.

:1orglaugh

Interestingly the Rockefeller's did discuss relocating every Israeli to the state of Arizona and handing them one million dollars each....but those in control of Israel said "No"

In other thread I commented saying we don't want Iran to have a nuke because they can pass it off to terrorists.

Someone responded that Pakistan has nukes too. Good point.

Pigshit.

He offered Europe in the previous post, I don't like America

When did Saudi Arabia last attack a westerner

I am just waiting for Israel to tear Iran a new asshole when they attack. Iran is a state which funds and promotes terrorism and they have already openly said they want to wipe Israel off the map. They are not interested in "Peaceful" nuclear uses. The world will be a better and safer place if Iran was a giant crater.

The problem is the US has no balls to pull the trigger and nuke that god forsaken country. It's this precise reason the whack job terrorists are so openly brave to attack the US and kill our ambassador, and have all those stupid rallies promoting hate against the US.

I look back and remember when the US had the balls to push the envelope, even if it was not ethical thing to do. Remember Nagasaki and Hiroshima? Was it ethical thing to kill those innocent people? Nope but it was the right thing to do to get revenge for Pearl Harbour. And the Japanese surrendered and the world trembled at the feet of the US from that point on.

This same principle should be applied Iran. Our leadership should grow a set of balls and wipe out Iran first and foremost. Then wipe out that backstabbing pretend to be our friend Pakistan. And then see how of these terrorists run scared back to their caves if they knew we meant business. The thinking by the would be terrorists would be this:

"If the US was that violent to nuke and destroy Iran, just think what they will do to the other muslim terrorist countries if they tried to attack the US again".

It's a simple deterrent and you can bet those whack job terrorists would think twice before they attempted another attack on the US if they knew the US would retaliate afterwards on the terrorist's home country with extreme prejudice. The time for diplomacy and ass kissing is finished. The US needs to re establish the greatness our nation once proudly had and put fear in our enemies :thumbsup

This is a good policy and I think we should implement it on a micro level.

If someone in your neighborhood commits a crime in my neighborhood I'll be at your house later that night to pop one of your family members in the head.

Pakistan have nukes. USA made an unauthorised military move in the county to kill Bin Laden
I'd say that is fucking around.
How does that fit into your theory?

You forget one thing. These terrorist are suicidal. They don't give a fuck if a nuke goes off. They are doing it for their God.

Since 9/11? I dunno. When was the last time an insurgent killed a Westerner in Iraq?

You went full retard, man. When trolling, never go full retard.

It says the 'Bin Laden' escapade was a crock of shit and/or Pakistan authorized it.

Well I know I will get shit for this but, what gives us the right ( THE USA ) To tell other countries not to have nukes when we do? It's always been weird that we can tell others not to do something or we will kill them but on the other hand we have a ton of them ourselves? Makes no sense.

That's quite true.

Unfortunately, the United States is also bankrupt to the tune of $16 trillion dollars.

I have no use for Pakistan, Iran, Iraq or Syria...but I'm just thankful you're not in a position to make decisions.

If you're truly serious and not just trolling above - you haven't the faintest clue of the rammifications of what you propose.

You are wrong.

iran needs nukes to balance out that crazy region. If everyone had guns that dipshit in the movie theatre would have been taken out. If everyone had guns, no one would mess with anybody. Let's for arguement sake say guns are nukes, therefore....
ds

Sneaking into a country and killing someone vs fucking directly with that country are two totally different things. The USA did not attack Pakistan or provoke them. However, if they did the same exact thing to us, we would "liberate" them.