War! The fear mongering is here, again!

@TuringEquivalent,

Here is information concerning one of the major studies/surveys that got those silly numbers.

More holes in it then can be counted...................

This remind me of surveys that "show" that 30 percents of all college women had been rape victims during their college careers.

Nonsense on it face.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_surveys_of_Iraq_War_casualties#Criticisms_and_countercriticisms

0 Replies

@TuringEquivalent,

Where the comparison of South Africa to Iran is valid is in terms of sanctions. The international community sanctioned South Africa to encourage them to change their political positions (and you don't have a problem with that.) Was that an act of war? From your posts it doesn't seem like you believe it was; it sounds like you believe the sanctions on South Africa were justified and appropriate. A large part of the international community (but critically not China or India, both major Iranian customers) is talking about sanctioning Iran and you have stated that you consider that an act of war. How can you reconcile your different positions? Why are "US dollars" so important to Iran but not to South Africa or for that matter Libya? Sanctions were used against Libya starting in 1986 because of Libya's efforts to get WMD and were so successful that Bush declared victory and eased them in 2004. It seems like there is a direct analogy between Libya and Iran - Sanctions over WMD. No one called the Libyan sanctions an act of war.

0 Replies

An excellent article in the Guardian about Iran's particular dynamic.

Quote:

In other words, confident statements by the White House and state department that Iran is buckling under sanctions pressure appear to blithely ignore the possibility that the regime is being pushed into a corner from which it will come out punching, not negotiating. One result may be an acceleration of its nuclear activities – the opposite of what Obama wants. And then there is the unpredictable Gulf tinderbox. Fearing fatal insurrection at home and with their oil exports blocked, Khamenei and the mullahs, egged on by trigger-happy Revolutionary Guards, may choose to export chaos instead.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/05/iran-strait-of-hormuz-threat

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

For SURE, Iran will develop nuclear weapons as fast as it POSSIBLY can.

I live in a port city.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

I live in a port city.

Robert Heinlein had a short story written back when the US was the only holder of atom weapons and he had New York taken out by a nuke in the hold of a ship in the harbor.

Poor New York in fiction and in fact the target city for the bad guys.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Yeah; maybe I shoud move.

David

0 Replies

@TuringEquivalent,

Your views are noble and I agree to your basic asumptions, but there are some big diffrences you did not meantion in your text.

Iran had a change (or revolution) in government since 1945. A government which has since oppressed it's people and has a violent retoric towards the western world and Israel like no other state in this world.

The government is dominated by very religious people, thus not basing it decisions on arguments/facts/the reality, but religion (or at least their interpretation of it)

A nuclear bomb thus is way more dangerous in the hands of Iran (and it's nut government) than with the United States.

2 Replies

@tyler89,

WELCOME to the forum, Tyler

David

0 Replies

@tyler89,

That's a rather simplistic approach if you don't mind me saying it. The Iranian government is unpopular, but has not always oppressed its people, it really depernds on who has the Ayatollah's ear at the moment. The current lot gained prominence as a direct result of dubya';s escapades in Iraq. We should be trying to isolate the mullahs, not bolster them up.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

The current lot gained prominence as a direct result of dubya';s escapades in Iraq.

I withdrew my support
as of the death of Saddam.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I should have proof read more thoroughly. Still it doesn't change the situation that the regime in Iran is unpopular, we should be trying to isolate it. Pumping up the anti-Iran rhetoric allows the Mullah's to similarly paint their internal opponants as Western stooges. Any attack on Iran will unify the whole of the middle east against the West, with the obvious exception of Israel and those pro-Western leaders (note leaders, not countries).

I live in a port city too, I think there's a far greater risk of terrorists getting hold of material from the former Soviet Union, North Korea or Pakistan, than from Iran. If Iran were to set off a nuclear strike in America or Europe that would erffectively be the end of Iran. The mullahs aren't that stupid.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

I should have proof read more thoroughly. Still it doesn't change the situation that the regime in Iran is unpopular, we should be trying to isolate it. Pumping up the anti-Iran rhetoric allows the Mullah's to similarly paint their internal opponants as Western stooges. Any attack on Iran will unify the whole of the middle east against the West, with the obvious exception of Israel and those pro-Western leaders (note leaders, not countries).

I live in a port city too, I think there's a far greater risk of terrorists getting hold of material from the former Soviet Union, North Korea or Pakistan, than from Iran.
If Iran were to set off a nuclear strike in America or Europe that would erffectively be the end of Iran.

The mullahs aren't that stupid.

How does their I.Q. rate relative to Atta et al on 9/11/1?

Izzy, woud u have us believe
that if Atta coud have caused a nuclear detonation
on 9/11/1, he 'd NOT have done so, out of concerns
based upon the principles that u have attributed to the Iranians??

I hope that u will forgive my skepticism
of your evaluation of the mullahs' intelligence qua nuking us.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Izzy, woud u have us believe
that if Atta coud have caused a nuclear detonation
on 9/11/1, he 'd NOT have done so, out of concerns
based upon the principles that u have attributed to the Iranians??

You don't half talk a lot of bollocks Dave, Atta was in Al Qaida, an extremist Sunni terrorist organisation. They had absoluelty nothing to do with the Shia Moslem government of Iran. In fact Al Qaida's hosts the Taliban had just slaughtered a load of Iran's diplomats. Extremists like Atta hate the Shia Moslems almost as much as they hate America.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Izzy, woud u have us believe
that if Atta coud have caused a nuclear detonation
on 9/11/1, he 'd NOT have done so, out of concerns
based upon the principles that u have attributed to the Iranians??

izzythepush wrote:

You don't half talk a lot of bollocks Dave,

??????? Maybe that 's a secret English code!?

izzythepush wrote:

Atta was in Al Qaida, an extremist Sunni terrorist organisation.
They had absoluelty nothing to do with the Shia Moslem government of Iran.
In fact Al Qaida's hosts the Taliban had just slaughtered a load of Iran's diplomats.
Extremists like Atta hate the Shia Moslems almost as much as they hate America.

However that may be,
the Moslems in Iran hate us enuf to nuke us.

I notice that u ignored my question
qua whether u 'd have us believe
that Atta'd have let us go un-nuked,
if he HAD a nuclear capability on 9/11.

I prefer to choose American leaders that will not let that happen.
I find it very sad that Ron Paul is such an extreme, dangerous peacemonger.

David

2 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

I didn't ignore your question. I pointed out how ridiculous it was. The discussion is about Iran, and you started talking about Al Qaida. It's not the same thing at all, if you can't see that, and persist in your ridiculous black and white view of the world that's your problem.

You view communists as bad, but lionise the vicious murderer Pinochet. At the same time you cannot distinguish between a stateless terrorist organisation like Al Qaida and a government. It's this sort of muddled thinking that lead to the debacle in Iraq.

Please try to limit your observations to Iran, lets have a sensible conversation. And stop putting words in my mouth.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

I prefer to choose American leaders that will not let that happen.

You voted for Dubya though, and his stupidity allowed 9/11 to happen.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

I didn't ignore your question. I pointed out how ridiculous it was.

not well enuf to be understood

izzythepush wrote:

The discussion is about Iran, and you started talking about Al Qaida.
It's not the same thing at all,

Nonsense; it IS the same thing at all, to wit: fanatical Moslems that wanna kill us.

izzythepush wrote:

if you can't see that, and persist in your ridiculous black and white
view of the world that's your problem.

very much, if I get NUKED

izzythepush wrote:

You view communists as bad,

bad beyond ineffability

izzythepush wrote:

but lionise the vicious murderer Pinochet.

BECAUSE he killed communists during the 3rd World War,
(may he live in ever increasing JOY and beauty). He has my gratitude and my admiration.
I wish that I 'd had the HONOR of meeting him and shaking his hand in gratitude.
I wish that I 'd had the presence of mind to have sent him a financial contribution
in support of his anti-communist efforts.

What he did (killing commies) was JUSTIFIED; ergo, it was not murder.

izzythepush wrote:

At the same time you cannot distinguish between
a stateless terrorist organisation like Al Qaida and a government.

There is NO POINT in such a distinction.
In both cases, thay r fanatical Moslems that wanna kill us as well as thay CAN.

izzythepush wrote:

It's this sort of muddled thinking that lead to the debacle in Iraq.

Our mission was successfully accomplished when we finished off Saddam.
Beyond that point, it was a "debacle".

izzythepush wrote:

Please try to limit your observations to Iran, lets have a sensible conversation.
And stop putting words in my mouth.

I can characterize your words, as u do to ME.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

I prefer to choose American leaders that will not let that happen.

izzythepush wrote:

You voted for Dubya though, and his stupidity allowed 9/11 to happen.

HOW did his alleged stupidity do that???

Incidentally, HE is smart enuf to know that is spelled: W

R u that smart ????????

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

What happened in Iraq was a debacle from the word go. Dubya didn't even know there was a difference between Sunni and Shia Moslems. If you're concerned about fanatical Moslems maybe you should insist that your country does not carry out policies that increases their power base.

With your blanket condemnation of 'Commies,' and your refusal to afford them basic human rights, you're showing yourself to be every bit as fanatical as those Moslems you complain about.

Btw an Iranian scientist was murdered today by terrorists, what's sauce for the goose and all that.

3 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

This is a clear-cut case of bigoted hysteria replacing knowledge and a thoughtful response to the world. Al Qaeda means "the Base," and which refers to a support base for the Mujihadeen of Afghanistan during the Russian occupation--it was set up and funded by the United States and it's members were trained by Central Intelligence. Saudi Arabia matched us dollar for dollar in our funding, and their man on the scene was Osama bin Laden, a Saudi national of Yemeni descent, and a fervent believer in Wahhabism, which is extremist, fundamentalist Sunni Islam.

By contrast, Iran is the home of Twelver Shi'ism, which is mainstream Shi'ism. Essentially, you are comparing right-wing, whacko fundamentalist Catholics (Wahhabis) to middle-of-the-road, orthodox Presbyterians (Twelver Shi'ites). This is because you don't a goddamn thing about the middle east or south Asia, and don't want to know anything which conflicts with the received "truth" of your reactionary political views. If some clown like Glen Beck or Lush Lamebrain pukes up some hysterical bigotry, that's good enough for you.

What's the difference between Rush Limbaugh and the Hindenberg?

Well, one is a fat, Nazi gasbag . . .

. . . and the other is just a dirigible.

I swear to Dog, you are the poster child for invincible ignorance.

3 Replies

War! The fear mongering is here, again!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know