0
   

Iran Air Strikes Growing in Probability

 
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 06:50 am
It is a history of Iran being ******* crazy.

Nuclear weapons will never be done away with. Somebody would lie and everyone else would be at their mercy.

That genie isn't going back in the bottle.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 06:51 am
Ticomaya wrote:
Debra_Law wrote:
Your two alternatives are misleading because there is no proof that Iran is engaged in a "nuclear weapons" program.


I know you are aware that England, France, and Germany, disagree with your staunch belief in Iran's peaceful intentions.

On the other hand, I don't know if you are aware of the difference between the absence of proof that Iran is engaged in a nuclear weapons program and a staunch belief in Iran's peaceful intentions. I must assume you're not, because the alternative would imply that you just set up a strawman, which you would never do. Right?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 06:55 am
revel wrote:
In any event, Iran is claiming it is in the "nuclear club." I think the guy thinks either that if has has nuclear weapons he won't be bombed or he wants the US to strike Iran for some crazy reason.


It's a race. If he can get them before we or Israel strike, then he can prevent us from striking (witness North Korea). It's quite a gamble, but if I were in his shoes I'd be doing exactly the same thing. I don't think I'd be quite so cocky about it, though. I have to think something else is going on there, just don't know what.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 06:59 am
Asherman wrote:
I am philosophically a Federalist, and a voting Republican. Neither of those have anything whatsoever in common with either the Italian Fascists nor the German Nazi's. I'd appreciate you recognizing the difference and refraining from the insults.

I'd like to second this, speaking as someone who disagrees with Asherman more often than not, but who reacts allergically to gratuitous comparisons with fascism.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 07:00 am
Yep, that's just the other side of the coin of gratuitous comparisons with socialism and communism.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 07:17 am
Asherman is an honorable gentleman. I don't agree with him all that much in politics, but that is another matter.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:13 am
This is the reality of nuclear rights all nations possess. Because Iran has vast wealth in fossil fuels, we can force them to continue to produce dirty energy? Are they not allowed to seek cleaner sources of energy?

Where was the Preemption Policy while North Korea developed Weapons? We had 30k Troops on the DMZ watching North Korea do as they please for like 50 years. North Korea directly threatens the USA with preemptive action, and Japan is a greater ally than Israel & is directly in the line of danger, while Iran is only a threat to Israel and somehow we are duped into risking US lives and escalating Anti-Americanism in the Middle East on behalf of Israel, in Iran?

It is not beyond the realm of possibility that North Korea will launch an attack on the US if the US goes against Iran with Force. North Korea would have no reason to think they weren’t next. The Axis of Evil was Iraq, Iran and North Korea, with two nations toppled, why would anyone expect North Korea to sit back and be a target?

Israel has made even more threats to Iran. Israel has a history of aggression against its neighbors, Iran does not. Israel is in violation of the NPT and countless UN Resoloutions, Iran is not, atleast not yet.

==========
Asherman, what makes you think only Iran will attack us - can you see the 10/1 chance yet, or will it only be clear when it hits you in the face ??


Quote:
http://images.bloomberg.com/nav/bblogo.gif

N. Korea Says It's Prepared for Pre-Emptive Strike Against U.S.

April 9 (Bloomberg) -- North Korea said it's prepared to strike first against the U.S., rather that wait for an attack, even as representatives of the two nations were making overtures in Tokyo for a resumption of nuclear talks.

``A pre-emptive attack is not a monopoly of the U.S.,'' the North's official Korea Central News Agency cited Vice Marshal of the Korean People's Army Kim Il Chol as saying. North Korea ``will never sit idle until it is exposed to a preemptive attack of the U.S.''

The rhetoric comes as representatives to the six-nation talks aimed at dismantling North Korea's nuclear weapons are gathered at the April 9-10 Northeast Asia Cooperation Dialogue in Tokyo. Delegates from North Korea, South Korea, the United States, China, Russia and Japan are attending the event.

Kim, who also serves as a member of North Korea's Defense Commission and as a minister of the People's Armed Forces, was speaking at a ceremony to mark North Korean leader Kim Jong Il's election as NDC chairman, the official news agency said.

Should the U.S. start a war, North Korea will ``mobilize their politico-ideological might and military potentials built up generation after generation,'' and ``mercilessly wipe out the enemies and thus victoriously conclude the stand-off with the U.S.,'' Kim was cited as saying.

The U.S., South Korea, Japan, China and Russia have been negotiating with North Korea for the past 2 1/2 years in an effort to get the communist state to dismantle its nuclear weapons program.

Six-Nation Talks

Six-nation talks in Beijing in November ended without an agreement after negotiators in September called for a nuclear- free Korean peninsula and economic cooperation with North Korea on energy, trade and investment. North Korea has been stalling returning to the talks, demanding that the U.S. lift financial sanctions over allegations of money laundering and counterfeiting by North Korean companies.

South Korea's chief delegate to the six-nation talks, Chun Young Woo, said the discussions are unlikely to produce a breakthrough on North Korea's nuclear program, Agence France- Presse reported today, citing the negotiator speaking after today's session of the academic security conference sponsored by the University of California Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation.

bloomberg
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:14 am
Asherman wrote:
I see, humerous [sic]and fictional numbers from a humerous and fictional character. These things can be calculated. See Hermann Kahn's Thinking the Unthinkable, among other highly regarded works on the subject of analyzing probable outcomes of various public policy scenarios.



Norammly the term pseudo-ilntellectual applies to lefties. Asherguy is the exception that proves the rule. Yeah, Asherguy gets by with posting the most out of touch drivel imaginable because he is perceived as a gentleman. Well, guys, madman Bush is now on the verge of starting WWWIII, it's time ot take the gloves off and say what needs to be said. Those who still support this madman are every bit as loony as he is.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:22 am
Lash wrote:
It is a history of Iran being **** crazy.


Iran's leadership, like ours, is crazy. The Iranian people are very secular and westernized. They love everything about America except our insane forign policy supported by the insane fundamantalist righties who still supoort madman Bush. (As the insane fundamentalists run Iran.)

Iran holds all the cards here. We are powerless against them. The imperial reign of the US died in the sands of Iraq. We to realize this now.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:22 am
Thomas wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
Debra_Law wrote:
Your two alternatives are misleading because there is no proof that Iran is engaged in a "nuclear weapons" program.


I know you are aware that England, France, and Germany, disagree with your staunch belief in Iran's peaceful intentions.

On the other hand, I don't know if you are aware of the difference between the absence of proof that Iran is engaged in a nuclear weapons program and a staunch belief in Iran's peaceful intentions. I must assume you're not, because the alternative would imply that you just set up a strawman, which you would never do. Right?


I imagine your ignorance on this matter, Thomas, results from your non-participation in the "America ... Spying on Americans" thread where DL and I had a similar discussion almost a month ago. I refer you specifically to these comments of hers:

[quote="On March 15, 2006, in the "America ... Spying on Americans" thread, Debra_Law"]Iran is not seeking to acquire nuclear weapons. They are seeking to develop the country's energy program for peaceful use to meet the needs of the Iranian people. [/quote]

[url=http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1924349#1924349]In that same post, Debra_Law[/url] wrote:
Iran, like what a multitude of other countries have already done, is seeking to develop its energy program for PEACEFUL USES to benefit the Iranian people.


[quote="Then, on March 17, 2006, in the "America ... Spying on Americans" thread, Debra_Law"]Iran is seeking to develop its nuclear technology for peaceful uses.[/quote]


Nope .... no strawman here.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:23 am
The delusional cigar man repeats a strawman and then denies it's a strawman. Too funny.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:24 am
Thomas wrote:
Asherman wrote:
I am philosophically a Federalist, and a voting Republican. Neither of those have anything whatsoever in common with either the Italian Fascists nor the German Nazi's. I'd appreciate you recognizing the difference and refraining from the insults.

I'd like to second this, speaking as someone who disagrees with Asherman more often than not, but who reacts allergically to gratuitous comparisons with fascism.


Hear hear . . .


I am often dismayed that Asherman so freqeuntly fails to see the excellence of my opinions. I don't hold it against him, though . . .
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:24 am
Perhaps, then, it would be better to respond to those assertions in the thread in which they were written, and not litter other threads with out of context references.

I mean that in the kindest possible way, of course.
0 Replies
 
blacksmithn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:26 am
Roxxxanne wrote:
The delusional cigar man repeats a strawman and then denies it's a strawman. Too funny.
Careful, he'll start hectoring you for answers about what a straw man is, what a straw man does and then commence a supercilous lecture on the subject of why he and only he is able to discern one.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:30 am
FreeDuck wrote:
Perhaps, then, it would be better to respond to those assertions in the thread in which they were written, and not litter other threads with out of context references.

I mean that in the kindest possible way, of course.


It wasn't an "out of context reference," FD, and I responded to those assertions in the other thread. But it remains the case that DL believes Iran has peaceful nuclear intentions, and my remark was accurate. Are you seriously trying to tell me I cannot reference that fact in this thread simply because someone might erroneously leap at the chance to accuse me of constructing a strawman?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:33 am
Cannot? No, feel free. Just be prepared for confusion.
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:41 am
blacksmithn wrote:
Roxxxanne wrote:
The delusional cigar man repeats a strawman and then denies it's a strawman. Too funny.
Careful, he'll start hectoring you for answers about what a straw man is, what a straw man does and then commence a supercilous lecture on the subject of why he and only he is able to discern one.


In other words, a Red Herring. Yep, been there done that. One would think that someone who often gets his head handed to him when he makes the mistake of actually allowing a case go to court would not make the same mistake of using such tactics in a forum either.

Uh-oh! 10-9-8-7 Counting down the time till he pms Lash or that sicko in Dallas and gets them to call me ugly or refer to me in the wrong gender.

BTW GUYS. My hormones were acting up when I quit the forum. I am back with a vengance. Hell hath no fury...
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:42 am
FreeDuck wrote:
Cannot? No, feel free. Just be prepared for confusion.


I'm prepared to correct you anytime you get confused, FD. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:47 am
Before we get into a runaway argument on who said what when, and what that proves, maybe we can take a shortcut. Debra, if you're still following this thread, could you please answer the following questions just so we have your position in the record?
    1) In your view, is there, or is there not, proof of a nuclear weapons program in Iran? 2) In your view, is there, or is there not, proof of the absence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran? 3) Do you personally believe that there is a nuclear weapons program in Iran? 4) In your view, what misdeed, if any, does Iran have to commit to justify a military strike against its nuclear program? What process should the prospective attacker follow to make its attack legal under international law? In particular, who carries the burden of proof, and what would you consider a proper standard of evidence?

Tico, you're welcome to answer question 4) as well. I take it your answers to 1-3 are "yes", "no", and "yes".
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Apr, 2006 08:50 am
Harpo/Chrissee/Nikki/Roxxxxxi wrote:
Uh-oh! 10-9-8-7 Counting down the time till he pms Lash or that sicko in Dallas and gets them to call me ugly or refer to me in the wrong gender.

BTW GUYS. My hormones were acting up when I quit the forum. I am back with a vengance. Hell hath no fury...


Actually, I'm going try to keep with my past practice of ignoring you for the most part, now that I've proven you to be a liar.

I suspect you'll eventually slink away and come back with another alter in due time.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 07:35:27