223 MPH Iranian Missle

[CryingForTheHorses]

Was reading on the web how Iran has tested a underwater missle capable of going 223MPH and can destroy ship and subs. What do you think?, Geeze Iran flexing its muscles for the last while. Do these guys really think the USA is a pushover or should I say the UN?.Whats with these guys.Should the UN let them do what they are doing. Nuclear Reactors) Are we wrong in not letting them.OR is it all propaganda "trying" to intimidate.

[Tom]

I think very soon it will suc to be iranian.
They are leaving many smart nations no alternative but war.
Let's hope we don't hold back on this one.
And nmo more of this demacracy crap - take out the probelm and mov eone. Leave them sufficiently destroyed so they have no time for anything else for a few decades but surviving.

[lsbets]

I think very soon it will suc to be iranian.


I would say you're a few centuries behind in that assesment. :lol: :lol:

[Light]

Can one of you I hate Iran people explain to me what aggressive acts Iran has done to another country or people in the recent past that would qualify it as a threat to anyone?

Before you answer,just be aware that Iraq and Iran were never mentioned as a threat until the current administration decided they needed an excuse to invade. And be aware that I never heard anyone mention either country as a threat before the administration badmouthed them.

In other words,I have no respect for people who cannot think for themselves and simply parrot what George,Dick and Condi say. If I needed to hear all this crap,I could easily record George's propaganda speeches and play it over and over again.Sure King George.Right.Whatever you say. People parroting George,Dick and Condo seem to behave as Zombies . Devoid of reality or originality or compassion or commonsense. They just speak dead words that have been force fed by right wing media and worship a leader bordering on the absurd. What a pity.

[PaceAdvantage]

I guess 27 years is too long ago for you Light, but then again, with the "new" President of Iran being one of those hostage takers, that alone may qualify for many Americans as an "aggressive" act....

[Light]

And that incident implies what?

[PaceAdvantage]

I was simply answering your inquiry:

"explain to me what aggressive acts Iran has done to another country or people in the recent past that would qualify it as a threat to anyone?"

[Light]

I find that a very weak excuse to denounce Iran today.Is that the best you can come up with?

The hostage crisis was part of the 1979 Iranian revolution expelling America from Iran including the U.S.controlled Shah puppet.

[Light]

Oh Yeah,I forgot to mention that the American Shah puppeteer was installed in Iran in 1953 after the CIA helped to overthrow Mossadegh, who was the democratically elected president of Iran. Yes democratically elected by Iran but the U.S. installed an undemocratic unelected puppet. Then you had revolution and a hostage crisis 25 years later Who would have thunk it,ey Agnes.You know those A-RABS..Of course they don't mention this on Fox. Just people portrayed as fanatics. But who are the real Fanatics,George?Hmm?

[lsbets]

Umm, first Sleeper Cell Light, Iran is not an Arab country. So your A-Rab comment, is, well, just wrong.

I know, you don't consider Hezzbolah to be terrorists. So, I guess you don't see the bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, or any of the other acts committed by Hezzbolah (who are trained, backed, and funded by Iran) to be aggresive acts towards another country.

Iran has been mentioned as a threat by every administration since Carter. So again, your premise that they have not been mentioned as a threat by anyone until Bush, is, once again, wrong.

Light, are you aware that if Iran were stupid enough to wipe Israel off the map (as their President has said he wants to do) that would also wipe out whatever relatives you have left in the West Bank and Gaza?

You seem to admire any terrorist as long as they kill Jews and Christians. Iran wit nuclear weapons would be a very bad thing, and most sane, intelligent people can understand why.

[chickenhead]

I believe they open and close most public speeches, and in general like to chant "Death To America". That seems fairly aggressive. I can't think of any reason why I would want someone with "Death to America" on their minds to have nuclear weapons, but maybe that is just me.

Also, from what I know, I agree with you Light that installing the Shah was a mistake, throughout their history the Persians have been a fairly advanced people, allowed science to flourish, etc. We could be and should be natural allies, but at this moment we're not. But unlike you I don't see it as all us that is keeping that from happening, we may have played a big part in radicalizing them, which was a mistake for sure, but they are radicalized, I don't think pretending they're not does any good.

[Tom]

No blind following here, Light. I've advocated destroying Iran since 1979.
Call me cutting edge!

[Light]

Yes Iran's disposition is basically anti-American and chickenhead does see how America helped build that attitude.

But simply chanting "Death to America" is not grounds for invasion. There is freedom of speech for people who disagree with American foreign policy.

If this was Israel,the U.S. would say what it says today Israel has a right to defend itself . So Iran doesn't? Iran sits between Iraq and Afghanistan,both invaded by the U.S.

IMO all this badmouthing of Iran is nothing more than an excuse for military intervention just like in Iraq. Fortunatly,things are not going so hot for the invaders in Iraq and Afghanistan and It would be Hitleresque foolishnish on our part to invade Iran. Speaking of Hitler,this country after country invasion based on flimsy excuses is very Hitleresque.

[JustRalph]

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9362/

Does Iran sponsor terrorism?
Yes. The State Department calls the Islamic Republic of Iran the world’s “most active state sponsor of terrorism.” Iran continues to provide funding, weapons, training, and sanctuary to numerous terrorist groups based in the Middle East and elsewhere. But reformist elements in the Iranian leadership and an increasingly discontented public are questioning the country’s hard-line policies, rigid fundamentalism, and anti-Western bent.

What sort of government rules Iran?
Since a 1979 revolution led by the Ayatollah Khomeini toppled the American-backed regime of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the country has been governed by Shiite Muslim clerics committed to a stern interpretation of Islamic law. Iran today has two main leaders: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the popularly elected president, and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the supreme leader. Ahmadinejad is a conservative nationalist, anti-American, anti-Western, a man who experts say is indifferent to the international opinion. Hard-liners like Khamenei still dominate the Iranian military and intelligence services.

What is the government’s stance on al-Qaeda?
According to the U.S. State Department, Iran is unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qaeda members it detained in 2003. Iran also refuses to publicly identify the detainees on security grounds and transfer custody of the detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for interrogation and trial. In 2004, Iranian judiciary officials said they tried and convicted Iranian supporters of al-Qaeda, but no details were provided.

What other terrorist groups does Iran support?
Iran mostly backs Islamist groups, including the Lebanese Shiite militants of Hezbollah (which Iran helped found in the 1980s) and such Palestinian terrorist groups as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. It was also reportedly involved in a Hezbollah-linked January 2002 attempt to smuggle a boatload of arms to the Palestinian Authority. Iran has given support to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, a Kurdish separatist movement in Turkey, and to other militant groups in the Persian Gulf region, Africa, and Central Asia. Some reports also suggest that Iran’s interference in Iraq include funding, safe transit, and arms to insurgent leaders like Muqtada al-Sadr and his forces.

What terrorist activities have been linked with Iran?
The U.S. government first listed Iran as a terrorist sponsor in 1984. Among its activities have been the following:

In November 1979, Iranian student revolutionaries widely thought to be linked to the Khomeini government occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Iran held fifty-two Americans hostage for 444 days.
Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.
Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.
U.S. officials say Iran supported and inspired the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed nineteen U.S. servicemen.

Does Iran have weapons of mass destruction?
Yes. According to the CIA, Iran possesses chemicals that can induce bleeding, blistering, and choking, as well as the bombs and artillery shells to deliver these agents. Iran also has an active biological weapons program, driven in part by its acquisition of “dual-use” technologies—supplies and machinery that can be put to either harmless or deadly uses. Finally, with help from Russia, Iran is building a nuclear power plant, but U.S. officials say that Iran is more interested in developing a nuclear weapon than in producing nuclear energy.

Does Iran have missiles that can deliver weapons of mass destruction?
Yes. Iran has hundreds of Scuds and other short-range ballistic missiles. It has also manufactured and flight-tested the Shahab-3 missile, which has a range of 1,300 kilometers—enough to hit Israel or Saudi Arabia. Moreover, Iran is developing missiles with even greater range, including one that it says will be used to launch satellites but that experts say could also be used as an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Which countries have supplied Iran with missile technology?
Russia, China, and North Korea. ever heard of these guys?

[chickenhead]

For the record I'm not any happier about Israel having the bomb. I'm not interested in an invasion of Iran, but I am interested in stopping them from having nuclear weapons. I don't want anyone having nuclear weapons, but you are never going to eradicate them from those that do have them, so I'll accept the next best thing, keeping anyone new from getting them.

[lsbets]

Notice how Sleeper Cell Light conveniently ignores the acts of war that Iran has committed against the United States. Three fairly major acts of war and several other incidents since 1979. No need tojustify anything vis a vis attacking Iran. They have been at war with us for a long time.

But, I think most of us know where Light stands when it comes to those who we are at war with.

[Light]

JR

That list depends on your point of view.When Palestinians detonate explosives strapped to their bodies in the streets of Tel Aviv filled with Israeli shoppers it is terrorism. When Israelis fire missiles from helicopter gunships into streets in Gaza filled with frightened Palestinians it is counter-terrorism. Why?

The CIA is a terrorist organization which has included assasinations and overthrowing of foreign governments.If intelligence was faulty in Iraq(and I believe manufactured),then why is it not faulty with Iran?

[lsbets]

The seizing of an embassy is considered to be an act of war.

The bombing of the Marine barracks was an act of war.

The bombing of Khobar Towers was an act of war.

Nothing to do with a point of view, just cold, hard facts that our own Jihad Johnny doesn't want to face.

[Light]

LS

The incidents you mentioned were a response to internal meddling by the CIA in Iranian affairs.

[lsbets]

LS

The incidents you mentioned were a response to internal meddling by the CIA in Iranian affairs.

Thanks for the laugh Light. Man you are warped. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Light]

I think a warped person is someone who thinks killing innocent people is a necessary evil..

[lsbets]

I think a warped person is someone who thinks killing innocent people is a necessary evil..

Define innocent. You seem (and correct me if I am wrong) to think that the killing of our Marines who were in Lebanon as peacekeepers was okay, you seem to think that the killing of our Airmen in Khobar Towers was okay, and I would assume that you think the killing of those who Hezzbolah kidnapped in Lebanaon was okay. You also seem to feel that the acts of terrorists in Iraq are okay, and those acts kill a lot more Iraqi women and children than US soldiers or Iraqi soldiers. Plus, you also seem to think that when a Palestinian blows up a bus full of Jewish schoolchildren its okay.

So, it seems from statements you have made in the past that those is our military are guilty of something, those who who were American and in Lebanon were guilty of something, those Iraqis who get killed by your "freedom fighters" must be guilty of something, and you also seem to think that all the world's Jews are guilty of something.

So please, define innocent as you see it, because all I see from you is a hate.

[Light]

LS

None of the killings you cited are ok with me. It is people like you who consider the other side expendable.

[lsbets]

LS

None of the killings you cited are ok with me. It is people like you who consider the other side expendable.

Well you certainly have a habit of justifying all of the above listed items, so I'm not sure I believe it when you say they are not okay with you.

BTW - what are people like me?

[Snag]

"Before you answer,just be aware that Iraq and Iran were never mentioned as a threat until the current administration decided they needed an excuse to invade. And be aware that I never heard anyone mention either country as a threat before the administration badmouthed them."


Light, do you really think that because you never heard anyone mention Iran or Iraq as problems that they never were threats? You make statements such as this without offering any support and then, when it is pointed out to you that you are wrong, you divert the subject.

[MONEY]

Was reading on the web how Iran has tested a underwater missle capable of going 223MPH and can destroy ship and subs.

Is it a 2 or 4 door?

[Light]

BTW - what are people like me?

You wouldn't like my answer

[Light]

Light, do you really think that because you never heard anyone mention Iran or Iraq as problems that they never were threats? You make statements such as this without offering any support and then, when it is pointed out to you that you are wrong, you divert the subject.

Then tell me when it was in vogue to trash talk Iran like today since the Iran Cronta affair and Reagan. Tell me when it was in vogue to trash talk Iraq before Bush and 911. Americans are uneducated politically and culturally of what goes on in other countries and to a large part unaware politically what goes on in this country.They only hear headline news. You think grandma from Poukippsee making apple pie is going to buy a copy of the Radical free press?

[Tom]

I think a warped person is someone who thinks killing innocent people is a necessary evil..

You mean like Sadamm Hussien, the new president of Iran, Osama Bin Laden and the millions of muslems who worship and support him? Yes, I agree, very warped. What is your suggestion when these mad dogs attack? Do a little historial reading - you will se how close the muslem world was to the Nazis during WWII - they learned their lessons well. When the Russians overran Hitler's bunker, one of the last grouips defending him were the muslem SS.
WWII never ended n the middle east.

[Tom]

JR

When Israelis fire missiles from helicopter gunships into streets in Gaza filled with frightened Palestinians it is counter-terrorism. Why?




duh?
Because they did not do it FIRST!
The targets of the palestinean mad dogs are innocent people. The Israeli targets are the murderous animals who started the attacks. If the concern for innocent bystanders is so great, why do the terroist cowrds hide amoung them in the first place?
Many of the so-called innocents are supporters of the dogs anyway, so thier deaths are not any loss - in fact, consider them a bonus!

[lsbets]

You wouldn't like my answer

LOL - I love how you always get to the verge of saying what you really think and then don't because you probably know how it would go over. Trust me, any negative things that a lover of Islamic terrorism has to say about me don't phase me in the least. My guess is you know that, but you didn't like the reaction when you exposed yourself previously so you're not likely to do so again (unless I can goad you into it ;) ).

[Snag]

Light, you keep making my point for me. No one here was trash talking. The thread started by pointing out the fact that missles were being tested. You said that you had never heard of Iran or Iraq being a problem. Now you want to divert and talk about someone trash talking.

And, leave my grandma out of this!!

[JustRalph]

Light, I defer to my co-counsel.........LS and Tom............go back and reread their posts...........then make believe that I have the same opine. Oh yeah, it won't be make believe if it is true..............you get the point

[lsbets]

Co-counsel? Man JR - could you see me or Tom in court? We'd both be jailed for contempt.

Me "You're honor, opposing counsel is simply a moron and not worthy of my time."

Tom "Objection overruled? You're a POS judge. A worthless POS!"

We'd be calling you to find a way to get us out.

[JustRalph]

Co-counsel? Man JR - could you see me or Tom in court? We'd both be jailed for contempt.

Me "You're honor, opposing counsel is simply a moron and not worthy of my time."

Tom "Objection overruled? You're a POS judge. A worthless POS!"

We'd be calling you to find a way to get us out.

but it would be fun! ;) :lol: :lol:

[Light]

Re: Definition of warped person

You mean like Sadamm Hussien, the new president of Iran, Osama Bin Laden and the millions of muslems who worship and support him?


So why are you leaving out the person who has killed more human life than all of them combined? The Devil himself. GW.

[Light]

Re: Why are Israeli targeted killings not considered terrorism


Because they did not do it FIRST!


If you want to talk about who threw the first stone.....Israeli's invaded Palestine through immigration and Zionists used acts of Terrorism on Palestinians to scare them away and killed many of them. Many of them still have the deeds to their homes. Please.This is old stuff. Spare me your ignorance.

[Light]

Trust me, any negative things that a lover of Islamic terrorism has to say about me don't phase me in the least.

I am not a lover of any kind of Terrorism,but you certainly don't make any bones about your love of American Terrorism.

The reason I wont tell you what I think of you is cause you couldn't handle it.

[Light]

RE: Trash talking Iran

Light, you keep making my point for me. No one here was trash talking.


Then you're not listening. Remember the I hate France thing. This is running along the same path of racism. Don't believe me.Just ask Tom what he thinks of Iran.

[lsbets]

I am not a lover of any kind of Terrorism,but you certainly don't make any bones about your love of American Terrorism.

The reason I wont tell you what I think of you is cause you couldn't handle it.

Nice cop out. Chickenshi*t as usual. Come on, reveal yourself (Not that most folks haven't figured you out already).

[lsbets]

[B] Many of them still have the deeds to their homes. Please.This is old stuff.

Is that it? Do you still have the deed that Daddy passed down after he abandoned his home because some Jews moved in next door?

[Tom]

Co-counsel? Man JR - could you see me or Tom in court? We'd both be jailed for contempt.

Me "You're honor, opposing counsel is simply a moron and not worthy of my time."

Tom "Objection overruled? You're a POS judge. A worthless POS!"

We'd be calling you to find a way to get us out.

I got a contempt of court fine once when I was facing a traffic charge - not having the stiucker on my plate.....cost $25 for the traffic fine and $150 for my comments to the judge!

Worth every penny of it!:)

[Tom]

Re: Definition of warped person

So why are you leaving out the person who has killed more human life than all of them combined? The Devil himself. GW.

You are not getting the flow of this thread...because HE did not attack first!
You bother bees, you get stung. You steer clear, you don't.
Why is it you are so defensive of a Hitler-trained mass murderer like SH?

[Tom]

Re: Why are Israeli targeted killings not considered terrorism



If you want to talk about who threw the first stone.....Israeli's invaded Palestine through immigration and Zionists used acts of Terrorism on Palestinians to scare them away and killed many of them. Many of them still have the deeds to their homes. Please.This is old stuff. Spare me your ignorance.

The Jews were ther long ago. THEY were driven out by anciet terroists. They came back and LEGALLY settled there under UN sanctions. You see, the Palestineans were on the wrong side of the war - they were nothing but Nazi-wanna be's - you pay for crap like that. Are you a Hitler supporter as well?

[Light]

Nice cop out. Chickenshi*t as usual. Come on, reveal yourself (Not that most folks haven't figured you out already).

I'm still not gonna tell you what I think of you cause you need to find that out for yourself.You need to give up the red meat, start practicing meditation,burn some incense and adorn your house with flowers.

[Light]

Are you a Hitler supporter as well?

No.But since Bush has filled Hitler's shoes you are the essense of a Nazism.

[lsbets]

I'm still not gonna tell you what I think of you cause you need to find that out for yourself.You need to give up the red meat, start practicing meditation,burn some incesne and adorn your house with flowers.

Sure, okay. Advice for happy living from someone as full of hate as you have proven to be is, umm, well, worth nothing.

Once again you make statements, are challenged, and run away. Just like those Palestinians who ran away because they didn't want to live near Jews.

[Light]

LS

You call me "chickensh*t" and I am full of hate? It is you who has been in charge of a killing machine. The ultimate hate you can bestow on a fellow man is to kill him.

[lsbets]

LS

You call me "chickensh*t" and I am full of hate? It is you who has been in charge of a killing machine. The ultimate hate you can bestow on a fellow man is to kill him.

Come on, keep going Light, let it flow, let it all out.

Are you saying I am a murderer? Or a war criminal? Don't stop at killing machine. Let everyone here know what you think of those who serve in our military (I already know). Let it all out. Come on, keep going, give in to the dark side ........ :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Light]

LS

I don't think you should be leading me with this line of questions. You have deep issues,and I see through you more than you think. Your last reply is trying to make light of what I said. But this is no joke.

[lsbets]

LS

I don't think you should be leading me with this line of questions. You have deep issues,and I see through you more than you think. Your last reply is trying to make light of what I said. But this is no joke.

I'm leading you and once again you back down when challenged. I'm not trying to make light of you, I am making light of you. Just like the first time you ever replied to anything I posted, you start down a path and then run away. When you develop the courage to stand up when challenged, maybe I'll respect you a bit more. Until then, more laughter.

[Light]

Keep laughing LS. You're gonna need it.

[lsbets]

Keep laughing LS. You're gonna need it.

And why is that? Come on, answer. Oh heck, I know you won't.

[Light]

You know what I mean

[lsbets]

You know what I mean

Nope, I don't. As I told you the first time you ever directed a comment to me, I've never slept so well in my life and I am damned proud of everything I have done, so fill me in, what do you mean? Or are you just not going to answer again because you're afraid that if you clearly spell out your thoughts vis a vis those in our military you will turn off 95% of the board, including most of those who might otherwise agree with you? Are you really that scared to spell out an unpopular position? Wow, what a man of courage.

[Light]

What do you think I mean? An average reader can figure it out. You're a military man,you're supposed to use your wits,remember?

[lsbets]

What do you think I mean? An average reader can figure it out. You're a military man,you're supposed to use your wits,remember?

You could mean plenty of things. Why are you so scared to say what you think? Come on Light, show some balls and say what's on your mind.

About the only concrete thing you said is I was in charge of a killing machine, which I assume is a reference to the company I commanded in Iraq. I asked if you meant that I was a murderer or a war criminal. You declined to answer. Then you said keep laughing, I'm gonna need it. I asked what you meant. You could mean I'm going to hell or you could mean one of your Palestinian brothers is coming to my house to get revenge on me because their life sucks. You had made a reference before about coming to my house and attacking my family, so with you I'm not sure what you mean. But, as usual, you don't have the courage to really speak your mind.

[Light]

LS

I don't think I should tell you. It's your life.You'll find out.

[lsbets]

LS

I don't think I should tell you. It's your life.You'll find out.

Ah, the brave Light is consistant if nothing else. Your warped perception of my life is meaningless, but I wanted to see if you had the guts to publicly tell the board what you think. I'm sure no one is surprised that you lack the courage to be honest, even anonymously.

[Light]

I'm not telling you out of respect for you. It's not appropriate to speak about something very personal about you or anyone on the internet.

[lsbets]

I'm not telling you out of respect for you. It's not appropriate to speak about something very personal about you or anyone on the internet.

Ah, okay. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

[Cue Twilight Zone music here]


BTW Light, just how many people has George Bush killed? I'm curious to see what data source you rely on for your figures.

As we all know, there are no accurate numbers as to the number of "innocent" Iraqis killed during this 2nd Iraq war, so either way, you are just pissing into the wind.

[Tom]

No.But since Bush has filled Hitler's shoes you are the essense of a Nazism.

And YOU are the essence of ignorance.
Bye Bye, dispstick - you are not worth the effort to talk to.
I think ls is right - everyone knows what you are.

[Light]

BTW Light, just how many people has George Bush killed? I'm curious to see what data source you rely on for your figures.


Since he is the commander in chief and most vocal for the war,it looks like a no brainer that those who died in his war are his responsibility. As of April4 2006.

2,343 Americans Dead. At least 17,269 U.S. troops have been wounded in Iraq.

280 Americans Dead. At least 705 wounded in Afghanistan.

Source:http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/

Iraqi deaths I also attributed to Bush cause they died as a result of Bush's war. The bombings by Iraqi's against Iraqi's also would not have taken place without this war promoted by Bush.

Iraqi civilian dead: Approxametly 35,000. Have no data on wounded civilians or Iraqi miltary causualties..

Source: http://www.iraqbodycount.net/database/

Not to mention the countless lives this war has devastated of families and friends on both sides of the wounded and dead.

[Light]

And now you got people on this board and in this country wanting to invade Iran. Isn't there enough carnage to satisfy the thirst for blood in the data I just presented.Because I am against this human atrocity,I am called a terrorist lover and Nazi by Tom and LS.I'm no Jesus,but this is an example of how someone like Jesus could be crucified.

[NoDayJob]

Just busted another hernia truss laughing. Best thread in a long time. Let's keep it going and see if we can hit at least 150 pages and 50,000 views.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Ponyplayr]

Not all of us want to invade Iran. I for one don't.

I want the USA to Nuke them! Save quite a few american lives that way.

[Tom]

Not all of us want to invade Iran. I for one don't.

I want the USA to Nuke them! Save quite a few american lives that way.

Here! Here!

[Indulto]

Tom and ponyplayr,
How will “nuking” Iran save American lives in Iraq? And even if we leave, what about all our “liberated” friends there?

Originally posted by Light:

And now you got people on this board and in this country wanting to invade Iran. Isn't there enough carnage to satisfy the thirst for blood in the data I just presented.Because I am against this human atrocity,I am called a terrorist lover and Nazi by Tom and LS.I'm no Jesus,but this is an example of how someone like Jesus could be crucified.Lighten up, Light. This is a horse-racing forum. None of us has enough clout to influence future events in Iran.

I’ve been reading your posts here for several months now and I still can’t figure out where you’re coming from. On one hand you’ve expressed some interesting opinions against the war in Iraq, how we got there, and about our role in the Middle East, generally, that aren’t without merit. On the other hand, your motivation (to the extent you reveal it) and behavior don’t seem consistent with the image you are attempting to project here which is most flatteringly described as that of a philosophical seeker of truth and global peace in a just world.

When not threatened by your opponents, you can be quite eloquent. Under pressure, however, your responses to challenges are often hostile and you seldom defend your positions in any detail. You make it difficult for several here NOT to associate some of them with an anti-Jewish, pro-fundamentalist Muslim bias – an increasingly frequent characterization you choose to neither confirm nor deny.

This last post of yours implies a martyred self-image that finally compels me to question your credibility. There are legitimate reasons to criticize the actions of this administration, but I don’t regard you as a legitimate spokesman for that position. If I’m wrong, help me understand why. But please – no more self-pity.

My initial reaction to any perceived Iranian threat – subject to change with expanded awareness – is that more apparent justification exists for cooperative world action against Iran than ever existed for action against Iraq. I can only hope this administration has finally learned how wrong it was to proceed without the same support from other nations it enjoyed in Afghanistan, and how flawed its objectives and preparations were for establishing a new government in Iraq. Perhaps our future participation in preventive military actions will be more proportionate to our actual share of the threat posed by the common enemy.

Unlike Iraq, there appears to be a sizeable pro-western faction in Iran that desires a secular democracy. It is conceivable that this group would be wiped out unless a planned military operation included adequate preparation to prevent such an occurrence. How we would accomplish prevention of an Iranian nuclear capability using an all-volunteer army while continuing to police civil unrest in both Iraq and Afghanistan is beyond me. Can you enlighten me, Light?

[Light]

Indulto

The fundamental problem for peace is this world is that human beings do not know who they are.They think they are seperate from eachother.One race or another or this or that. Their essence has nothing to do with race,politics,power or worldly possesions. It has to do with the universal sacredness of being. If you recognize it,you would never cross it.You could not kill another,cause you would be killing yourself. Most of us are spiritually immature to see ourselves or others in anything else but worldly terms. Thus people on both sides will continue to slaughter eachother cause they are lost. But life is for learning.

Since my disposition is to see both sides,I simply point out the side that's being ignored in these discussions because both sides are right and both sides are wrong. To say otherwise is an illusion.

[Tom]

Light makes the assucation:
".....I am called a terrorist lover and Nazi by Tom....."

I am going to to call you out,Light, and to your face, call you a LIAR!


Here is my orignal post about the Nazi connection to the muslems:
(underline to make clear what I said)
"The Jews were ther long ago. THEY were driven out by anciet terroists. They came back and LEGALLY settled there under UN sanctions. You see, the Palestineans were on the wrong side of the war - they were nothing but Nazi-wanna be's - you pay for crap like that. Are you a Hitler supporter as well?"


This is your reply:

Originally Posted by Light
No.But since Bush has filled Hitler's shoes you are the essense of a Nazism.

Now it looks to me like YOU called ME a Nazi.

I am wating for an apology for your blatant lie.

[JustRalph]

Indulto

The fundamental problem for peace is this world is that human beings do not know who they are.They think they are seperate from eachother.One race or another or this or that. Their essence has nothing to do with race,politics,power or worldly possesions. It has to do with the universal sacredness of being. If you recognize it,you would never cross it.You could not kill another,cause you would be killing yourself. Most of us are spiritually immature to see ourselves or others in anything else but worldly terms. Thus people on both sides will continue to slaughter eachother cause they are lost. But life is for learning.

Wow! What a load of crap.............. and you have obviously achieved a higher state of being.............

I especially like this line

It has to do with the universal sacredness of being.

yep, and if Iran gets the bomb........Israel and others could no longer enjoy the luxury of "Being" therefore somebody is going to have to put an end to this little problem before it is too late. I am surprised we are into April and it hasn't happened yet.

[Indulto]

yep, and if Iran gets the bomb........Israel and others could no longer enjoy the luxury of "Being" therefore somebody is going to have to put an end to this little problem before it is too late. I am surprised we are into April and it hasn't happened yet.JR,
Maybe the CIA isn't the only intelligence agancy with problems?

"The Jews were ther long ago. THEY were driven out by anciet terroists. They came back and LEGALLY settled there under UN sanctions. . Tom,
Does your support include Jewish settlers from the U.S. who left comfortable surroundings to put their adopted countrymen at risk just to satisfy their self-righteous, religion-based claim that they have a God-given right to property -- even that which may have belonged to prior Arab residents who had no quarrel with Jews, but were forced out during wartime? Do you think these selfish fanatics should be mentioned in the same breath as Holocaust survivors, Kibbutz residents, and other truly brave Israelis who aren't going to be led to any showers -- nuclear or otherwise?
Originally posted by Light:
The fundamental problem for peace is this world is that human beings do not know who they are.They think they are seperate from eachother.One race or another or this or that. Their essence has nothing to do with race,politics,power or worldly possesions. It has to do with the universal sacredness of being. If you recognize it,you would never cross it.You could not kill another,cause you would be killing yourself.

Most of us are spiritually immature to see ourselves or others in anything else but worldly terms. Thus people on both sides will continue to slaughter eachother cause they are lost. But life is for learning.

Since my disposition is to see both sides,I simply point out the side that's being ignored in these discussions because both sides are right and both sides are wrong. To say otherwise is an illusion.

Light,
Nice attempt to slough off questions regarding your motivation and avoid further confrontation. If you were truly an objective observer, you would point out the good with the bad on BOTH sides. I hope you’re not going to tell me next that your “insights” are based on religion rather than philosophy. Where does “universal sacredness of being” come from anyway?

It’s easy to make broad generalizations when expressing an opinion without backing them up with details to support that position. Lefty does it all the time. You are proof that the practice is as prevalent on the left as it is on the right.

[Tom]

My support of Israel is uninversal - my condemnation of Islam the same.
Islam threatens the world and must be dealt with everywhere.
We can learn from Israel. Islam was in bed with the Nazis during WWII - they deserve what they got. The Jews were run out of the area long before.

[Indulto]

Re: Why are Israeli targeted killings not considered terrorism

If you want to talk about who threw the first stone.....Israeli's invaded Palestine through immigration and Zionists used acts of Terrorism on Palestinians to scare them away and killed many of them. Many of them still have the deeds to their homes. Please.This is old stuff. Spare me your ignorance.Light,
You equate targeted killings with suicide bombings. Both you and Tom are FOS to think timing or sequence is any justification for either.

What makes them different is that the Israelis aren't sacrificing their children for their own benefit. And don't give me any BS about the hopelessness of the Palestinians. Their greatest enemy was their own corrupt leadership that wouldn't allow them relief from their desparation and destitution. And what about their "friends" in Muslim countries who ignored their plight, even as they ignored their own citizens.

Don't make comparisons with Bush and Hitler when Arafat and the Nazi had more in common, especially hatred. Bush's problem is too much love -- for himself and his financial backers. The two most outrageous, obscene utterances in my adult lifetime were Kahane's "the only good Arab is a dead Arab" and Bush's "I believe God wants me to be President."

[Tom]

FOS?
I think I got it! :mad:;)

How would you suggest Israel deal with a society that encourages the crap the palestineans keep pulling?

[Indulto]

FOS?
I think I got it! :mad:;)

How would you suggest Israel deal with a society that encourages the crap the palestineans keep pulling?Tom,
It is too late for a Palestinian State. Hamas are fanatics who will never co-exist with the Israelis.

As always, any solution involves money so maybe something like "Eminant Domain" is the answer. All Palestinians who cannot be vetted as non-threatening to peaceful co-existance must leave -- with compensation -- for another Muslim country and a fresh start, similar to the U.N. Mandate that resulted in Jewish emigration from Europe.

Those who remain -- Jewish, Christian, or Muslim -- should be subject to a policy of zero-tolerance for ethnic violence with no exemption or protection for the families of terrorists. You want to kill someone of another ethnic group, it's not just murder anymore, and you take your family to the grave with you because they let you become the way you are. No virgins -- just Mom and Dad.

The Muslim countries that previously ignored the Palestinans should provide land, at least of the quality that can support Kibbutz-like communities. The U.N. should provide medical care, education, and law enforcement until self-government can relieve them. Exploiters of cheap labor no longer deterrred by violence would create a viable economy.

Thanks for asking. Any comments?

[hcap]

Whether you agree with him or not, Light has brought up the value of conscience.

That little voice that many of us drown out, should be listened to rather than fearing an exagerated threat. From Hinduism, the classical allegory of Vedanta philosophy...

It is like seeing either rope or the snake. When we see the rope our vision and perception is clear, ..

But, as soon as some darkness - ignorance - comes we confuse the rope with snake. Again, someone demonstrates to us by throwing light on the object or by picking it up that what one has mistakenly believed to be the snake is in fact the rope. The important point to note here is that at no point of time the rope ever had turned into a snake; the rope was always the rope. It was our ignorance produced due to clouding of our mind, etc. that caused us to mistakenly see the snake in the rope.

When empathy and feeling for the other billions of souls on this planet is more active through conscience, ropes are not always snakes.

Give Light a break. Instead doubt this administration. They have earned your skepticism. When they say snake, you can pretty much assume they are only describing themselves

“An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.”
... Mahatma Gandhi

[JustRalph]

HCAP, you are being paid the DNC aren't you? Very funny, you are..........

why am I talking like Yoda? Oh well........the point is the same........

[Snag]

Indulto

The fundamental problem for peace is this world is that human beings do not know who they are.They think they are seperate from eachother.One race or another or this or that. Their essence has nothing to do with race,politics,power or worldly possesions. It has to do with the universal sacredness of being. If you recognize it,you would never cross it.You could not kill another,cause you would be killing yourself. Most of us are spiritually immature to see ourselves or others in anything else but worldly terms. Thus people on both sides will continue to slaughter eachother cause they are lost. But life is for learning.

Since my disposition is to see both sides,I simply point out the side that's being ignored in these discussions because both sides are right and both sides are wrong. To say otherwise is an illusion.

Light, using your disposition is to do NOTHING in life. If everyone followed your example, there would be no right or wrong, no left or right, no reps or dems. We could live together and just come to you for enlightnment whenever we had a question. I think that life style went out the door in the 70's. It didn't work then and it doesn't work today. There are alot of vegie gardens going unattended right now.

By the way, you may want to be sure to tell everyone that your "universal sacredness of being" position is not on your words on your post. http://homepage.mac.com/biodanza/BIODANZASITE/Pages/WHATISBIODANZA.html

Light, what did you mean by "Thus people on both sides will continue to slaughter eachother cause they are lost". I am going to assume you mean to place all of us here in the lost column. What are we "lost" from?

[twindouble]

For century's now humanity has struggled with good an evil, the only thing that has become clear to most is there isn't and never will be a utopian world that some subscribe to. With that undeniable historical fact one could say those that attempt to perpetuate the idea border on insanity and are venerable to all
predators




T.D

[Light]

Regarding: Sacredness of Being

Wow! What a load of crap..

This view is apparently shared by Tom

more criticism regarding Sacredness

Nice attempt to slough off questions regarding your motivation and avoid further confrontation

And I get criricized for not finishing what I start. This is why. You simply don't understand. I am not hear to convince anyone and certainly wouldn't want to take on that task.

If you didn't understand my post,so be it. I am no better than anyone and feel free to equate me with the lowest forms of life. Size does not matter. An invisible microbe can drop a man to his knees and wipe him out.You also can't see the air you breathe and you can't see your thoughts.

You also can't see your spirit. When you die,all these concept you have of Iran,Islam,America,politics etc.will also die. You will not be an American.You will go back to the source of your creation. Your physical brain that houses your present conceptions will die. You will be left with the truth.

So why wait to be dead to know the truth? Your physical body houses your spirit. If you recognize it,you will see it in others. If you see it in others,you will regard it as sacred as your own. Thus my term:The sacredness of Being.

If you think today's politics has nothing to do with man's state of spitituality,you truly are blind. Not a derogatory statement,just a fact.All our technology started as a thought. Alll our politics also started as a thought. Our thoughts are influenced by our spiritual balance. Have greed in your heart and it will materialize. Have compassion in your heart and it will materialize. It all comes from the power of your spirit.

[Tom]

Crap.
Where's my apology for your lie?
How does lying fit into your spiritual self?

[Light]

You need to apologize to an entire race of people that you have continually put down for the last several years on this board.There are several million of them and 1 of you.Sorry you lose.

[lsbets]

Seems like Light is trying to rebuild that man pf peace imaged he had fostered before he started quoting David Duke on here.

Of course, he still has not said what people like me are, other than people like me, and I won't like it.

Yeah, real peaceful loving guy. Okay .........

Now his response when challenged by someone who leans to the left - "you simply don't understand"

So, the lesson learned is you can throw around all the crap you want, blow up when challenged and start spewing hate, and then when challenged even further claim that you are being crucified just like Jesus.

There are probably some good medications that could help at least a little bit with the Jesus complex. On the other stuff, I don't know if there's any help out there.

[Indulto]

Now his response when challenged by someone who leans to the left - "you simply don't understand"

So, the lesson learned is you can throw around all the crap you want, blow up when challenged and start spewing hate, and then when challenged even further claim that you are being crucified just like Jesus.

There are probably some good medications that could help . . .
lsbets,

Not an inaccurate summary, but what lesson is to be learned from labeling me left-leaning? Should I take it as a compliment or be concerned that you are categorizing me for the sake of convenience or condemnation? Being right hardly equates to being correct, and being fiscally conservative and morally bankrupt aren’t mutually exclusive, but classification without clarification is certainly confusing.

Contemplating the naval version conjures up left-listing which in darker days led to blacklisting.

[lsbets]

Nothing negative at all meant by left leaning. If you notice, I tend to avoid the liberal label when I intend a negative connotation and usually go with "far left". I know many people who call themselves liberal who are great, well meant people. I think it is fair to say that when looking at the American version of politics you lean to the left, just as it would be fair to say that I lean to the right. When I say left leaning (and I would apply that to many other honest posters here) I mean someone who despite however they may tend to vote can look at and evaluate things based on its own merits and not try to defend the idefensible simply because the one who has taken those indefensible positions doesn't like Bush. The far left is consumed with Bushhate and the Bushhitler, those who are left leaning disagree with much, if not all, of what Bush has done, and many probably don't like him, but they don't let that dislike of Bush cloud their ability to recognize right and wrong and dismiss the indefensible as a discussion of "conscience".

[Indulto]

I think it is fair to say that when looking at the American version of politics you lean to the left, just as it would be fair to say that I lean to the right. When I say left leaning (and I would apply that to many other honest posters here) I mean someone who despite however they may tend to vote can look at and evaluate things based on its own merits and not try to defend the idefensible simply because the one who has taken those indefensible positions doesn't like Bush.Well said, but moderate to the extreme. ;)

[Tom]

:lol:

[Light]

Seems like Light is trying to rebuild that man pf peace imaged he had fostered before he started quoting David Duke on here.

I've never heard of David Duke.I coin my own phrases.

Of course, he still has not said what people like me are, other than people like me, and I won't like it.

No.You asked me what I thought of you directly not as part of a group like you.And as I said,since it is personal and unpleasant,it's best not said. But you will find out what I mean one day.

Yeah, real peaceful loving guy. Okay .........

?

Now his response when challenged by someone who leans to the left - "you simply don't understand"

Just because someone is left leaning towards the war and Bush doesn't mean anything except that they agree with me on that point.Period.

So, the lesson learned is you can throw around all the crap you want, blow up when challenged and start spewing hate, and then when challenged even further claim that you are being crucified just like Jesus.

That's what you say,not me.

There are probably some good medications that could help at least a little bit with the Jesus complex. On the other stuff, I don't know if there's any help out there.


I'm sure you have heard that approxametly 30% of American troops coming back from Iraq have developed mental disorders.That would put you at greater risk than me.

[lsbets]

Light - you posted an article unattributed. Several of us found the tone of the article to be intiguing and searched for it. The article was written by David Duke. Claim you never heard of him, I ain't buying it - you posted it.

You said people like me. I asked what you meant. SO try to spin your way out, but your last post basically shows that on top of everything else you are pretty damned dishonest, especially since everyone here can read and see that you're full of it.

[Light]

You're confused. I believe that was Snag who posted the link.

[lsbets]

You're confused. I believe that was Snag who posted the link.

Sorry Light, you're wrong as usual. In case you're confused because of your condition, I am not referring to this thread. You remember, it was about 2 months ago. Completely shattered the image you were trying to build as this peace loving guy when it was found out that the source for your posts was the grand wizard himself. I'm sure you hoped people would forget, but I'm sure most haven't. Steve Statman was pretty disturbed when he uncovered the source of your posts. I don't blame him, its pretty disturbing to know there are people sick enough to quote America's favorite Nazi.

[Steve 'StatMan']

Yes, Light. You'd posted the link we requested, and we found the same materials posted in several spots, and the originator was David Duke, former head of the KKK, the 'white supremisist' group whose favorite 'clandestine' thing is to gather en mass dressed up at night in white robes, burn crosses on lawns of blacks, jews, other minorities, and in years past moreso than lately, lynch people (either pull fathers from their houses, beat them up and hang them, or sometimes set the house on fire with terrorized family trapped inside). Their other favorite thing is to travel to towns (usually unwelcomed) promoting rallys and circulating papers and propaganda completely filled with the worst repetitive insults and threats anti-black and anti-jewish. I was surprised at your initial reaction 'so what if I quote a criminal'. However, if you didn't grow up in the U.S.A. or study the post-Civil War history of the U.S. South, you might not be aware of what 'the klan' does what they and stand for. But they want the jews dead, and would be very glad if the muslims and the arabs do what they can't legally do themselves, so it's easy fall for someone who is upset with Isreal and/or jews to fall for some of their rhetoric, which they spread throughout the net in modest and not-so-modest ways. This is why we we so shocked to see you arguing as a 'man of peace' but quoting these types of sources.

[Steve 'StatMan']

Here's the link from that thread, and starting at Page 4, where quotes and things started happening.

I had noticed that it came in a thread you originally started, titled 'Ultimate Hypocrites'. I didn't want to p*ss you off then and point that out, and I don't really want to do that now either. But I'm responding because the discussion and the thread are relevant.


http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25170&page=4


Frankly, I'm trying to stay out of off-topic as much as possible. Had double my worst year ever at the windows last year, and frankly, my betting game went totally down the tubes since I started reading and posting in Off Topic in Aug-Sept '04, when the Bush-Kerry Election Arguments, Iraq War Arguments, Red/Blue arguments, Farenheight-911 arguments, etc. were raging.

As for me, I need to focus on being a successful bettor again. We all care about this crap much more that the politicians do.

[Light]

LS

Like Dylan said"what's the sense of changing horses in midstream"? Did you run out of things to say in this thread and have to dig up some dirt in another? I allready successfully defended myself from this accusation in that thread and don't see the point of rehashing my defense. Just read the thread.

[Indulto]

I allready successfully defended myself from this accusation in that thread and don't see the point of rehashing my defense."To see ourselves as others see us."

Good night, Light. Be sure to turn it off when you leave.

[hcap]

JustRalph Red State Swami
HCAP, you are being paid the DNC aren't you? Very funny, you are..........

why am I talking like Yoda? Oh well........the point is the same........
Ok, no Vedanta philosophy for you Mr Swami

Let's try some ole time religion.

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesH/bushjes.jpg

"Please george, re-read that bit about "the meak shall inherit the earth"

"But JC, I gotta do wha I gota do"

"Oy gevalt what a dolt"

[JustRalph]

Hcap, I feel that my soul is already liberated.

It's "the Meek" not the "Meak"

[Indulto]

Hcap,

Are you overdosing on Danish Pastry? Now you’ll have the religious right demonstrating in the streets claiming you’re not just ridiculing the man, but reviling his religion. Where do you even find this stuff or are you the “artist?”

Thanks to you, I now view churches as meak-packing plants. Even if the meek should inherit the earth, the Republicans would still own the mineral rights.

[betchatoo]

You're going to make the meek inherit the earth? What a rotten thing to do to the meek!

[Indulto]

You're going to make the meek inherit the earth? What a rotten thing to do to the meek!B2,
Would you like it better if the ending justified the meanies?

[betchatoo]

B2,
Would you like it better if the ending justified the meanies?

If the ending is justified, what side will you align with?

[Tom]

Hcap,

Are you overdosing on Danish Pastry? Now you’ll have the religious right demonstrating in the streets claiming you’re not just ridiculing the man, but reviling his religion. Where do you even find this stuff or are you the “artist?”

Thanks to you, I now view churches as meak-packing plants. Even if the meek should inherit the earth, the Republicans would still own the mineral rights.


:lol::lol:.......meak packing plants!
You are killing me!

Funny, though, how the catholic church thinks it OK for anyone at all to come into this country, one they do not pay to support, yet are not free with entry into Heaven which they think they own!

Hcap is offensive for sure, but in this part of the world we have enough faith in our Gods that a cartoon is not threatening to us.

BTW...catch South Park this weekend and next Wednesday - they are "doing" the muslem cartoon thing and it is hilarious.

[Indulto]

If the ending is justified, what side will you align with?B2,
Many would laugh at the suggestion that I would wind up among the meek and I doubt mineral rights would do me any good. According to Rev. Falwell, I'd have to drill upwards to get them. That wouldn't bother me except that now I'll never meet John McCain. ;)

[betchatoo]

B2,
Many would laugh at the suggestion that I would wind up among the meek and I doubt mineral rights would do me any good. According to Rev. Falwell, I'd have to drill upwards to get them. That wouldn't bother me except that now I'll never meet John McCain. ;)

But at some point you will almost certainly meet John Kerry. I'm sure he'll vacillate between sides

P.S. The "If the ending is justified, what side will you align with?" was an attempt at a pun, unfortunately it's only writers and printers who might get it. Is obscure humor better than none at all?

[Tom]

*g r o a n *

I get it now!

[Indulto]

Originally posted by betchatoo:

P.S. The "If the ending is justified, what side will you align with?" was an attempt at a pun, unfortunately it's only writers and printers who might get it. Is obscure humor better than none at all?B2,
You've added a new dimesion.:cool: Don't worry, I'll return the favor, eventually.

Originally posted by Tom:



Funny, though, how the catholic church thinks it OK for anyone at all to come into this country, one they do not pay to support, yet are not free with entry into Heaven which they think they own!

Hcap is offensive for sure, but in this part of the world we have enough faith in our Gods that a cartoon is not threatening to us.Tom,
I’m glad you occasionally find my material as funny as I do yours, but I’m compelled to distance myself from two items in your post:

First, I don't find hcap offensive. In this thread, I was merely teasing him, not disagreeing with him. I don’t even find you offensive with far greater justification. If your actions matched your words, the Congresswoman of the hour would appear demure in comparison.

Second, I don’t believe the Catholic Church has a monopoly on dogma and intolerance. In my own experience, Catholics generally appear more tolerant of those outside their religion than many other Christian sects that claim to know who’s going where. While I agree that the government should tax all property prayed upon, I disagree that the Church wants just anyone to come into this country -- only Mexican Catholics likely to accept their dogma as well as their sponsorship.

[RaceIsClosed]

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9362/

Does Iran sponsor terrorism?
Yes. The State Department calls the Islamic Republic of Iran the world’s “most active state sponsor of terrorism.” Iran continues to provide funding, weapons, training, and sanctuary to numerous terrorist groups based in the Middle East and elsewhere. But reformist elements in the Iranian leadership and an increasingly discontented public are questioning the country’s hard-line policies, rigid fundamentalism, and anti-Western bent.

What sort of government rules Iran?
Since a 1979 revolution led by the Ayatollah Khomeini toppled the American-backed regime of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the country has been governed by Shiite Muslim clerics committed to a stern interpretation of Islamic law. Iran today has two main leaders: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the popularly elected president, and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is the supreme leader. Ahmadinejad is a conservative nationalist, anti-American, anti-Western, a man who experts say is indifferent to the international opinion. Hard-liners like Khamenei still dominate the Iranian military and intelligence services.

What is the government’s stance on al-Qaeda?
According to the U.S. State Department, Iran is unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qaeda members it detained in 2003. Iran also refuses to publicly identify the detainees on security grounds and transfer custody of the detainees to their countries of origin or third countries for interrogation and trial. In 2004, Iranian judiciary officials said they tried and convicted Iranian supporters of al-Qaeda, but no details were provided.

What other terrorist groups does Iran support?
Iran mostly backs Islamist groups, including the Lebanese Shiite militants of Hezbollah (which Iran helped found in the 1980s) and such Palestinian terrorist groups as Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. It was also reportedly involved in a Hezbollah-linked January 2002 attempt to smuggle a boatload of arms to the Palestinian Authority. Iran has given support to the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, a Kurdish separatist movement in Turkey, and to other militant groups in the Persian Gulf region, Africa, and Central Asia. Some reports also suggest that Iran’s interference in Iraq include funding, safe transit, and arms to insurgent leaders like Muqtada al-Sadr and his forces.

What terrorist activities have been linked with Iran?
The U.S. government first listed Iran as a terrorist sponsor in 1984. Among its activities have been the following:

In November 1979, Iranian student revolutionaries widely thought to be linked to the Khomeini government occupied the American Embassy in Tehran. Iran held fifty-two Americans hostage for 444 days.
Observers say Iran had prior knowledge of Hezbollah attacks, such as the 1988 kidnapping and murder of Colonel William Higgins, a U.S. Marine involved in a U.N. observer mission in Lebanon, and the 1992 and 1994 bombings of Jewish cultural institutions in Argentina.
Iran still has a price on the head of the Indian-born British novelist Salman Rushdie for what Iranian leaders call blasphemous writings about Islam in his 1989 novel The Satanic Verses.
U.S. officials say Iran supported and inspired the group behind the 1996 truck bombing of Khobar Towers, a U.S. military residence in Saudi Arabia, which killed nineteen U.S. servicemen.

Does Iran have weapons of mass destruction?
Yes. According to the CIA, Iran possesses chemicals that can induce bleeding, blistering, and choking, as well as the bombs and artillery shells to deliver these agents. Iran also has an active biological weapons program, driven in part by its acquisition of “dual-use” technologies—supplies and machinery that can be put to either harmless or deadly uses. Finally, with help from Russia, Iran is building a nuclear power plant, but U.S. officials say that Iran is more interested in developing a nuclear weapon than in producing nuclear energy.

Does Iran have missiles that can deliver weapons of mass destruction?
Yes. Iran has hundreds of Scuds and other short-range ballistic missiles. It has also manufactured and flight-tested the Shahab-3 missile, which has a range of 1,300 kilometers—enough to hit Israel or Saudi Arabia. Moreover, Iran is developing missiles with even greater range, including one that it says will be used to launch satellites but that experts say could also be used as an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Which countries have supplied Iran with missile technology?
Russia, China, and North Korea. ever heard of these guys?

Don't forget the US, in the 1980s (Iran-Contra).

[Tom]

Indulto,
I single out the catholics because I amonce - and pretty much ashamed to say so.
They harbored Nazis, they hid child molesters, they are encouraging people to break the laws, and they calim to be tax exempt, so they do not in my opinion, have any right to speak out politically. The catholic church is coming down on the wrong side of every issue. I can't support them anymore and have told them so. Guess I'm going to Hell...or maybe THEY are! I suggested my local bishop read about Jim Jones and included a package of Kool Aid in my letter. Singed it, Keep that Faith baby - Cheers! :lol:

[hcap]

Indulto are you overdosing on Danish Pastry? Now you’ll have the religious right demonstrating in the streets claiming you’re not just ridiculing the man, but reviling his religion. Where do you even find this stuff or are you the “artist?”I was responding to accusations by JR that I was channeling yoda, when I related a Vedanta parable. Decided to westernize it a bit.

Christianity and bush are not necessarily synonomous, even tho' he claims that he talks often to his heavenly father. Iraq is an example of war as a first resort. Not even the Christian doctrine of a "just" war

Meak, Meek.
My spelling vs bushs'

That's what happens when one letter gets fudged.
Ya know IRAQ, IRAN

As Yogi Yoda would say "It's Deja Vous all over again."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060408/wl_mideast_afp/usirannuclearmilitary_060408061934;_ylt=AqlY12ndkA MMI.mG8QtKN2Ws0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MT Y-

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The administration of
President George W. Bush is planning a massive bombing campaign against
Iran, including use of bunker-buster nuclear bombs to destroy a key Iranian suspected nuclear weapons facility, The New Yorker magazine has reported in its April 17 issue.

The article by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said that Bush and others in the White House have come to view Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a potential Adolf Hitler.

Boy, hitler has nine lives. Emanuel Goldstein anyone??

[Ponyplayr]

:jump: :jump: :jump: Outstanding!!!

[twindouble]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The administration of
President George W. Bush is planning a massive bombing campaign against
Iran, including use of bunker-buster nuclear bombs to destroy a key Iranian suspected nuclear weapons facility, The New Yorker magazine has reported in its April 17 issue.

The article by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said that Bush and others in the White House have come to view Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a potential Adolf Hitler.

Boy, hitler has nine lives. Emanuel Goldstein anyone??[/QUOTE]

Without even considering nuclear weapons we have enough reasons to take out Iran but there are those that think Iran's rain of terror on their people, us and others through out the world including Israel is acceptable. Theses same people viewed Saddam, Seria and Saudi Arabia the same way. You can thank OBL for opening our eyes to what these throw back facist bastards have in mind for us and the free world.

The truth of the matter is a nuclear Iran wouldn't threaten this country or the majority of the western countries at this point and I would wager they already have enough enriched material to create dirty bombs to pass off to any terrorist group and there's many of them. I wonder what one is in your back yard?

For some, 911 plus all other attacks on us and others is history. The fact that Russia, China, North Korea had a hand in getting Iran this far on the pretence of peaceful use of nuclear technology is also being ignored. It seems these same people have more trust in them than they do our own government.

Intellectual pin heads like Professor Lord Churchill has wrapped up everything in a neat little package to include all that the west and mainly this country did wrong for the last 200 years and gives support to those that want to destroy us. An American using the right to free speech at the same time surrendering his country that gave him that right. Likewise we have the right to answer him in anyway we can and protest strongly driving him into oblivion.

Democrats, left, center or right want just one thing and that's to gain power again and it doesn't matter to them if they drag this country down or anyone who apposes them. Worst of all our security is of no concern of theirs.

T.D.

[lsbets]

Hcap - if the current diplomatic route of dissuading Iran from building nuclear weapons does not work, what would you recommend we do? At that point there are really only two choices - let them get them or take some sort of military action to destroy the production capability.

In you last post you seem to say that a nuclear Iran is not really much of a threat to us or the western world. Or at least that they are not as bad as many think they are. I could not disagree more. Preventing a nuclear armed Iran should be at the top of our national priority list, regardless of what party is in power. In the course of normal business at the Pentagon, contingency plans are drawn up for taking action against a large number of countries and targets, so that if it becomes neccesary we are prepared. I would be alarmed if we did not have plans to deal with Iran.

Ahmadinejad is viewed as a potential Hitler not because people want to see him that way, but because of his promises to wipe nations off the face of the earth. Letting him have nuclear weapons would be a very bad idea. If we were to allow Iran to develop nukes, and he makes good on his promise to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, the following actions would result in a global disaster of unprecendented proportions, as Israel retaliates and destroys the rest of the Middle East. The outcomes of such a scenario are good for no one - Muslim, Israeli, or anyone in the west.

[Tom]

.....If we were to allow Iran to develop nukes, and he makes good on his promise to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, the following actions would result in a global disaster of unprecendented proportions, as Israel retaliates and destroys the rest of the Middle East. The outcomes of such a scenario are good for no one - Muslim, Israeli, or anyone in the west.


Not so fast.....let's not rush to judgement. :rolleyes:

[CryingForTheHorses]

Just busted another hernia truss laughing. Best thread in a long time. Let's keep it going and see if we can hit at least 150 pages and 50,000 views.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

PA is going to give me a prize for starting the best off topic thread in PA history!!

[46zilzal]

don't agree? KILL seems to be the only answer...amazing

[lsbets]

don't agree? KILL seems to be the only answer...amazing

Okay Dr - how would you recommend we handle the Iran situation?

[Indulto]

Meak, Meek.

My spelling vs bushs'

That's what happens when one letter gets fudged.

Ya know IRAQ, IRAN

As Yogi Yoda would say "It's Deja Vous all over again."

. . . The article by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh said that Bush and others in the White House have come to view Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a potential Adolf Hitler.

Boy, hitler has nine lives. Emanuel Goldstein anyone??hcp,
Do I detect a note of playfulness from the most serious slayer of dragons on this board?

Thanks for the laughs, intentional or otherwise.

Without minimizing the fact that -- like the despicable dictator he desires to duplicate --Ahmadinejad was elected to his position based on the hatred he disseminates, so far he is still all talk and no action while the President is now known and feared as a man of action. So which is the greater threat, an aggravator or an aggressor? Some regard Bush as an annointed annoyer. Sadaam was an aggressive aggravator. Will Ahmadinejad become an aggravating aggressor? Let’s hope that time does NOT provide the answer.

Light,
If the President can call upon modern history's foremost fanatic for political purposes, I suppose you should be permitted such latitude as well. But hateful peace promotion would appear to be an oxymoron, or at least, moronic.

[hcap]

Pre-emption is a failed policy.
Containment is not. As we are trying with kim jong evil.
Let the UN do it's job and really support diplomacy. Boltan lacks those skills big time.

Congressman Ron Paul....

"Even with the horrible results of the past three years, Congress is abuzz with plans to change the Iranian government.

"Already the coordinating propaganda has galvanized the American people against Iran for the supposed threat it poses to us with weapons of mass destruction that are no more present than those Saddam Hussein was alleged to have had.

"It's amazing how soon after being thoroughly discredited over the charges levied against Saddam Hussein the neocons are willing to use the same arguments against Iran.

"It's frightening to see how easily Congress, the media, and the people accept many of the same arguments against Iran that were used to justify an invasion of Iraq."

" Lack of support for the war in Iraq was said to be supportive of Saddam Hussein and his evil policies. This is an insulting and preposterous argument. Those who argued for the containment of the Soviets were never deemed sympathetic to Stalin or Khrushchev. Lack of support for the Iraq war should never be used as an argument that one was sympathetic to Saddam Hussein. Containment and diplomacy are far superior to confronting a potential enemy, and are less costly and far less dangerous – especially when there's no evidence that our national security is being threatened."

[lsbets]

How would you contain a nuclear Iran?

[twindouble]

hcap; Can you imagine what it's like to be responiable for the security of over 250 million people, not counting our allies through out the world or our economic well being. Where would you draw the line when it comes to risking that security?


T.D.

[46zilzal]

" Lack of support for the war in Iraq was said to be supportive of Saddam Hussein and his evil policies. This is an insulting and preposterous argument. Those who argued for the containment of the Soviets were never deemed sympathetic to Stalin or Khrushchev. Lack of support for the Iraq war should never be used as an argument that one was sympathetic to Saddam Hussein. Containment and diplomacy are far superior to confronting a potential enemy, and are less costly and far less dangerous – especially when there's no evidence that our national security is being threatened."
interesting comparison

[lsbets]

Hey Doc, I'm still waiting for your ideas on how to handle Iran's nuclear ambitions.

[46zilzal]

Hey Doc, I'm still waiting for your ideas on how to handle Iran's nuclear ambitions.
You dress up in your G I Joe outfit and go over there and kill each and every one of them.

[lsbets]

You dress up in your G I Joe outfit and go over there and kill each and every one of them.

My aren't you clever. When asked for ideas, you come up empty. I'm shocked.

[46zilzal]

that was an idea....I am sure you will "sign up" if given that opportunity

[lsbets]

that was an idea....I am sure you will "sign up" if given that opportunity

If action becomes neccesary I will proudly go once again. While you might view those who wear the uniform of the US with disdain, I do so without hesitation and with nothing but pride for what we stand for and what we do.

[46zilzal]

Mom, apple pie and Chevrolet....Yes I saw that commercial

[46zilzal]

"Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy." Henry Kissinger

Ain't it wonderful when the guy heading YOU out to put your ass on the line feels like THIS about you?

[lsbets]

So 46, once again you have no ideas of your own to present, just sarcasm and vitriol. Even an attempt to ask how you would like to see us address a serious problem results in nothing of substance.

You're basically pretty worthless, aren't you?

[46zilzal]

So 46, once again you have no ideas of your own to present, just sarcasm and vitriol. Even an attempt to ask how you would like to see us address a serious problem results in nothing of substance.


Hey YOU go figue out the world with worthless chatter that won't change a thing and I will watch

[lsbets]

Hey YOU go figue out the world with worthless chatter that won't change a thing and I will watch

Didn't say you'd change anything, just asked for your ideas. I guess you don't have any. You never hesitate to chime in with thoughts on other people's ideas and actions, I thought maybe you'd have a few of your own. I guess not.

[46zilzal]

wu wei

[hcap]

If action becomes neccesary I will proudly go once again.War is the last resort. How do we know when it IS necessary. When George Bush and Dick Cheney say so? We tried that.

How are we containing the third axis of evil guy kim jong IL?

How did we contain the soviets?

There are many scenarios that would be less damaging than dropping neutron bombs. It is up to youse guys to demonstrate a real imminent threat.

Duh, just like youse guys demonstrated re: saddam. If you recall that was job #1
Of course you can bring up the failed pe-emption justification of Iraq-passing one to a terrorist. Gee as I recall that was bull, If you recall that was job#2


BTW, a nuclear Iran would be contained by overwhelming threat of retaliation by us and Israel for one.

Now here are some real worries. How are we dealing with nuclear proliferation from left over nukes in the fractured remains of the soviet union, or for that matter the threat of a coup in pakistan by fundies. The problem of osama been forgotten is also more than a minor worry.

Bomb em all. Preferably neutron bombs. Damn the blowback. Who cares that we murder and maim hundreds of thousands in the process.
Bush could pronounce "neutron" a hell of a lot easier anyway.

There is no simple solution, but surgical strikes are wishfull thinking by the adherrents of the Slim Pickens school of yeehaaw diplomacy.

[Tom]

So 46, once again you have no ideas of your own to present, just sarcasm and vitriol. Even an attempt to ask how you would like to see us address a serious problem results in nothing of substance.

You're basically pretty worthless, aren't you?

He is 6 foot 3 inches and has a phd.

That's "piled higher and deeper" in case you were wondering.

And he thinks Kissinger is still in power. Must be he has an old newspaper.

[lsbets]

Hcap - deterrance works great if the folks you are trying to deter care about nuclear anihilation. There is good reason to believe that the dude in Iran would welcome it.

[46zilzal]

He is 6 foot 3 inches and has a phd.

I don't have a PhD

[hcap]

How can you be secure in knowing that he would indeed be suicidal enough and that the threat from Iran for instance is any greater than from Korea.

Kimmy boy is loonie as well. Should we neutron them as well? Is kim afraid of nuclear anhilation? Or is he suicidal too? Enough to pull the trigger?

The dudes in Iran are not suicidal. I doubt their leaders are interested in being burnt to a cinder or irradiated to death. There is a strong youth moment and pro-western leanings. Just what would it take to justify killing a good portion of this peacefull civilian populace? A nebulous threat that may well be exagerated as Iraq was? Let's be sure. Or we will playing out Spielberg's precognition Minority Report. Didn't work.

Your answer implies that anyone, anywhere that bush and cheney suspect are not rational with the INCLINATION to be anti-american or saber rattlers and possible threats down the road are candidates for anhilation. Maybe saber rattling on our part is show. If it works fine. But the reality of doing it is not.

[lsbets]

How can you be secure in knowing that he would indeed be suicidal enough and that the threat from Iran for instance is any greater than from Korea.


I'm not secure in knowing that he is, although there are reasons to belive he might be.

Are you secure in knowing he is not? How comfortable are you with that knowledge and the worldwide ramifications if you are wrong?

[Tom]

I don't have a PhD

My mistake - doctors don't need those, huh?
You don't have any suggestions of answers, either. Bush may be wrong on some things, but at least he has the guts to make a descion. that appears to be well beyond your capabilities. You are afaid to take a stand - only sit on the sidelines, provclaim your neutrality (Ha!) and criticize those doing things.
That is the epitomy of a coward, don't you think?
Like the two guys in the balcony on the Muppets show? Not a part of anything, taking no risk, just cat calling from the sidelines.
Ignoring repeared questions of how YOU would handle Iran, while continually attacking those with real opinions. You offer nothing. Your participation in all discusisons is meanlingless.
People like you are why the world is so messed up. You are very.....french.

[46zilzal]

not taking sides is simply not taking sides: nothing more, nothing less

the RUTABAGA needs all the criticism he so RICHLY deserves

Risk? risk what??

[hcap]

How can we be secure that Kim Jong is not gonna be suicidal. There are reasons to believe he is mad as a hatter. The gulags in North Korea and the human suffering is many times worse than in Iran. He already has nukes.

When do we know when? Our intel? The cia was even wrong about the collapse of the soviets. It seems to me that the philosophy of erring on the side of let's do them before they do us, is making it easy to rationalize murder and catastophe.

The world wide consequences of Iran going nuclear is less worse than Pakistan being toppled and their nukes exported. I think this is more of a worry. Should we wipe out Musharraf's internal enemies now and not take any chances? Nuke the countryside? There are more nukes and fissionable material in the old soviet empire. What to do. Occupy the fractured soviet ex-states and impose martial law and anyone who resists, arrest?
HOW FAR DO WE GO?

[Ponyplayr]

Are these the innocent Iranian citizens you are worried about maiming?
I hope the blow back gets them all.If not we are screwed!
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=14388

[Tom]

not taking sides is simply not taking sides: nothing more, nothing less

the RUTABAGA needs all the criticism he so RICHLY deserves

Risk? risk what??

Do you really believe the crap you post?
:confused:

[Tom]

The world wide consequences of Iran going nuclear is less worse than Pakistan being toppled and their nukes exported. I think this is more of a worry. Should we wipe out Musharraf's internal enemies now and not take any chances? Nuke the countryside? There are more nukes and fissionable material in the old soviet empire. What to do. Occupy the fractured soviet ex-states and impose martial law and anyone who resists, arrest?
HOW FAR DO WE GO?

One at a time, hcap......we are on course, just a behind schedule. Don't you get it yet? :lol:

[Ponyplayr]

How about this?

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm

[Ponyplayr]

Or this....From the mouths of the Iranian Leaders


http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sr&ID=SR3906

[Light]

According to a noted Pscho-analysist,there are 2 types of hate in man.

Rational hate is expressed in a reaction to a threat to one's freedoms. Irrational hate does not wait for the incident to occur,they create it. Such people are usually found among leaders of racist mobs and organizations.

[Light]

They can also be found in the White house

[hcap]

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/10001

...He went on, “Nuclear planners go through extensive training and learn the technical details of damage and fallout—we’re talking about mushroom clouds, radiation, mass casualties, and contamination over years.

...The attention given to the nuclear option has created serious misgivings inside the offices of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he added, and some officers have talked about resigning. Late this winter, the Joint Chiefs of Staff sought to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans for Iran—without success, the former intelligence official said. “The White House said, ‘Why are you challenging this? The option came from you.’ ”

...There’s no pressure from Congress” not to take military action, the House member added. “The only political pressure is from the guys who want to do it.” Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”

[JustRalph]

They can also be found in the White house

You don't know the half of it you anti american bastard. Take a look into the midwest.........there you will find a building hatred of you and your kind.

[Tom]

East coast, too, Ralph! :D

[Light]

You don't know the half of it you anti american bastard. Take a look into the midwest.........there you will find a building hatred of you and your kind.

I don't have to go to the midwest to find hatred. It's all over this thread.

[46zilzal]

You don't know the half of it you anti american bastard. Take a look into the midwest.........there you will find a building hatred of you and your kind.

disagree and you're AGGIN 'EM like the Hatfields and the McCoys!!

[hcap]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/08/AR2006040800916.html

Now, according to the Washington Post, we learn that President Bush was warned specifically by the CIA in January, just a few weeks before the State of the Union, that the Niger story was not true.

"After that, the Pentagon asked for an authoritative judgment from the National Intelligence Council, the senior coordinating body for the 15 agencies that then constituted the U.S. intelligence community. Did Iraq and Niger discuss a uranium sale, or not? If they had, the Pentagon would need to reconsider its ties with Niger. The council's reply, drafted in a January 2003 memo by the national intelligence officer for Africa, was unequivocal: The Niger story was baseless and should be laid to rest. Four U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge said in interviews that the memo, which has not been reported before, arrived at the White House as Bush and his highest-ranking advisers made the uranium story a centerpiece of their case for the rapidly approaching war against Iraq."


"Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”

These guys believe in their divine destiny without having any sense of the divine.

[Snag]

The problem is not so much that Iran and Korea will use a bomb, it's that they will supply some small group with the bomb or the material to construct one. There are a number of weird people and organizations out there with alot of money that want to use anything against us. We have contained NK for a while now with econ and other sanctions. We have a harder time doing that right now with Iran. We know that the UN will do nothing. We know that no one in Europe will do anything. We know there is no Mid East country that will do anything.

There is no way that doing nothing solves this problem. It now is a matter of what and when do WE do something.

[twindouble]

The problem is not so much that Iran and Korea will use a bomb, it's that they will supply some small group with the bomb or the material to construct one. There are a number of weird people and organizations out there with alot of money that want to use anything against us. We have contained NK for a while now with econ and other sanctions. We have a harder time doing that right now with Iran. We know that the UN will do nothing. We know that no one in Europe will do anything. We know there is no Mid East country that will do anything.

There is no way that doing nothing solves this problem. It now is a matter of what and when do WE do something.

Hi Snag, welcome to our private war. :D Just watch our for Tom, I hear he's working on a secrete weapon that will cause your key board to blow up in your face. :D Good points on who's on our side.

T.D.

[Indulto]

Originally posted by hcap(1):
There is no simple solution, but surgical strikes are wishfull thinking by the adherrents of the Slim Pickens school of yeehaaw diplomacy.
Originally posted by hcap(2):
"Speaking of President Bush, the House member said, “The most worrisome thing is that this guy has a messianic vision.”

These guys believe in their divine destiny without having any sense of the divine.The above is why -- despite Statman’s word’s of wisdom -- I can’t resist returning to off-topic.
Originally posted by hcap(0):
It seems to me that the philosophy of erring on the side of let's do them before they do us, is making it easy to rationalize murder and catastophe.
hcap,
Hill Street Blues logic notwithstanding, we ARE obliged to consider ALL our options given changed world conditions. It might be worth comparing what happened on 9/11 with what could have happened if the conspirators had been more patient and made even further inroads while our guard was still down. Is it possible that we actually paid a minimal price for having our eyes opened to the new threat posed by fanaticism, religious or otherwise?

The policy of “Containment” was based on “rational” leaders controlling the launch button. Nuclear and chemical weapons actually or potentially in the hands of fanatics and madmen have changed the rules of engagement.

On the other hand, the price paid since 9/11 is exponentially higher, but we are not any safer. The only thing we can be sure of about military action is that we can never be sure of the political outcome. Things have not exactly worked out as planned in Iraq, Afghanistan, or even here in the U.S. Why should we think the outcome in Iran, N. Korea, or Pakistan can be predicted and orchestrated?

The conclusion that offense is the best defense is based on the assumption that there is no reasoning with the enemy and therefore the only way to prevent destruction is to destroy those who would destroy us. Is there any reason to challenge the assumption that no negotiation or compromise is possible?

The knee-jerk accusations of appeasement or “giving in to terrorists” or madmen is what needs to be “contained.” We need to review which of the opposition’s demands or objectives aren’t in our interest and why. We also have to determine exactly whose interests are or aren’t being served and how that relates to the greater good.

We need to understand exactly why our leaders can’t or won’t negotiate before they continue to risk lives and life quality on both sides. There will never be total agreement, but secrecy only stimulates suspicion and inhibits support.

Perhaps some perspective can be gained by using some Reagan campaign logic, i.e., Are you better off now than ...”, and honestly trying to answer these questions in your own mind:

-Suppose you were an Iraqi, would you say that your life now is worse than it was 1) before shock and awe, 2) once U.S. troops established control on the ground, 3) after terrorism and the insurgency took hold, or 4) since the elections took place?

-What if you were an Iranian, would you look at Iraq and be convinced the same thing could happen to you, especially if the disciples of George UU retain power?

-As an American, is your life better now than it was 1) before 9/11, 2) before military action in Afghanistan, or 3) before the invasion of Iraq? What about your children’s lives?

Weren’t we safer when WE didn’t pose a threat to anyone else, but were secure in our ability to defend ourselves much like the character in “Kung-Fu?” Without the former Soviet Union to deter us, have we become the threat we were deterring?

It violates everything America HAD come to stand for to say that military action is the first option. And even when it is the final one, it should only be done WITH the cooperation of all countries threatened. George UU has not lived up to the standards set by his predecessors, and we are the worse for it. We have not only sacrificed lives, but our principles and constitutional freedoms as well.

UU -- Double U – Unqualified, Unforgivable too (chanted to the tune of the Campbell’s BBQ beans jingle)

[hcap]

IndultoIt violates everything America HAD come to stand for to say that military action is the first option. And even when it is the final one, it should only be done WITH the cooperation of all countries threatened. George UU has not lived up to the standards set by his predecessors, and we are the worse for it. We have not only sacrificed lives, but our principles and constitutional freedoms as well. Yes.

War should be THE last resort, as all of us believe, but how will we know all other avenues of conflict resolution have been tried? Do we trust incompetant leaders again?

How do we know the obviously incompetant administration is even capable of intelligent diplomacy? For that matter, how do we know they are even capable of rational judgements if the joints chiefs of staff are telling them the nuclear option is not viable-forget morally-but practically in terms of inflaming the region psychologically and emotionally. According to Hersh this is the case.


BLITZER: And you're saying that some senior military officers are prepared to resign?

HERSH: I'm saying that, if this isn't walked back and if the president isn't told that you cannot do it -- and once the chairman of the joint chiefs or some senior members of the military say to the president, let's get this nuclear option off the table, it will be taken off. He will not defy the military in a formal report. Unless something specific is told to the White House that you've got to drop this dream of a nuclear option -- and that's exactly the issue I'm talking about -- people have said to me that they would resign.

When pressed for names, Hersh refused:

HERSH: You know why? Because this is a punitive government right now. This is a government that pretty much has its back against the wall, as you've been saying all morning, in Iraq.

And in the military -- you know, one thing about our military is they're very loyal to the president, but they're getting to the edge. They're getting to the edge with not only Rumsfeld but also with Cheney and the president.


HERSH: The critical point, it seems to me, is that we're not talking. This president is not talking to the Iranians. They are trying very hard to make contact, I can assure you of that, in many different forms.

....And there's no public pressure on the White House to start bilateral talks. And that's what amazes everybody. When I was in Vienna, seeing officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the one thing they all said is everybody knows Iran is trying to do something. They're cheating. They're not near. There's plenty of time. And instead of talking about bombing, let's talk about talking.

[Tom]

Talk with Iran.....hahahaha.
Like talking to....YOU!

[Indulto]

Talk with Iran.....hahahaha.
Like talking to....YOU!Tom,
Is it possible for you to propose a plan that people between the far Left and far Right (and outside Far Rockaway) could support?

[Light]

If Tom says anything more positive than to exterminate them like rats, it would be like a 30-1 upset.

[Snag]

Not here to speak for Tom but his post #2 to this thread pretty much says it all. The last time Iran lost some reactors, it took them along time to rebuild. Surgery is needed here again IMHO. For those that think we need to talk some more, there are 3,000 reasons not to wait. Next time it could be 100 times that many with a nuke dirty bomb.

[twindouble]

....And there's no public pressure on the White House to start bilateral talks. And that's what amazes everybody. When I was in Vienna, seeing officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the one thing they all said is everybody knows Iran is trying to do something. They're cheating. They're not near. There's plenty of time. And instead of talking about bombing, let's talk about talking.Quote; hcap;

Oh how nice it would be if we could turn back the clock and undue all the wrongs that lay at our feet plus many others, then just sit down and settle all our differences. How peaceful it would be and noble prizes will be given out left and right. Well it's to freaking late for that hcap, we are all ready at war and we have been with Iran right along, they are just another island in the middle east and we are hopping in their direction, the last island is the mother of hate and distruction and you know what and who it consists of.


What come to mind is my neighbors German Shepherd, he was abused from the day he was a pup by his master, well he grew up and was one mean bastard, sure he was kept in check with a fence and chain. But when anyone walked by he would charge the fence, tearing at it trying to reach them. Then one day he got loose and the neighbors were alerted. Many went looking for him with shot guns, when they did find him they shot him 4 or 5 times while he was in attack mode. It was said he still showed his viciousness trying to get up to attack again before he died with last shot to the head.

That's what we are dealing with, want to talk about it?


T.D.

[Tom]

Tom,
Is it possible for you to propose a plan that people between the far Left and far Right (and outside Far Rockaway) could support?

I would not agree to anything the left would compromise on. The only sane course is to ignore libs and go out and git 'r done. Libs will only get in the way.

[Tom]

If Tom says anything more positive than to exterminate them like rats, it would be like a 30-1 upset.

I would never nuke rats - it would be inhumane!

[Indulto]

What come to mind is my neighbors German Shepherd . . .
It was said he still showed his viciousness trying to get up to attack again before he died with last shot to the head.

That's what we are dealing with, want to talk about it?T.D.TD,
I liked the story about the bear better.

The bear was a threat, potentially greater than that of the dog. Yet you didn't go out and shoot the bear. Was it because the bear wasn't an imminent threat? You liken the Iranians to a vicious dog. You obviously wouldn't destroy all dogs, or even German Shepherds, yet you don't differentiate between between sane, peace-loving Muslims and the religious fanatics. The latter are admittedly already a danger to Israel, and with the potential for distributing WMDs, pose a future threat not only us, but much of the rest of the world.

Iraq was run by a vicious, greedy minority who routinely tortured and executed their opponents. Very easy to villify the SH family and the Baathists. but does Iran fit the same mold? Iran is run by a religious majority controlled by religious leaders who don't allow their opponents any political power, but they don't torture or execute them either. They tolerate the pro-Western faction, they don’t punish them. What does that tell you? Rabid dogs? I don't think so.

Yes there are dangerous people with high profiles in Iran just as there are in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and elsewhere. We need to DEAL with them, not destroy them. Let’s line up the other countries who agree that Iran’s nuclear ambitions need to be prevented and push even harder for more economic sanctions and, as an absolutely last resort, a cooperative non-nuclear military action through the U.N. We’re more likely to get that support if we start showing respect for the sovereignty of other nations

It's become pretty obvious that you're no right-wing fanatic. I also know that it's easy to talk tough in cyberspace and cheaper to excise life's frustrations through the keyboard instead of a shrink. Tom enjoys projecting an image that belies his compassionate nature and gets away with it because he's so damn funny and insightful. He inspires a lot of imitators, but no clones.

From now on I’m going to respond to anyone else (other than JR) who spouts Nuke 'em crap as Tom, Jr. (TJ1, TJ2, etc.) ;)

H&M1

[Ponyplayr]

Yes there are dangerous people with high profiles in Iran just as there are in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and elsewhere. We need to DEAL with them, not destroy them. Let’s line up the other countries who agree that Iran’s nuclear ambitions need to be prevented and push even harder for more economic sanctions and, as an absolutely last resort, a cooperative non-nuclear military action through the U.N. We’re more likely to get that support if we start showing respect for the sovereignty of other nations

Who are you going to line up..Russia
Who do you think is building the Reactor we can only hope they use Chernobyl technology.
China...They are the ones selling arms and technology.
Our President once said we should never seek a permission slip to defend our honor. This is the time to stand alone and get the job done

[Snag]

[QUOTE=Indulto]
Yes there are dangerous people with high profiles in Iran just as there are in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and elsewhere. We need to DEAL with them, not destroy them. Let’s line up the other countries who agree that Iran’s nuclear ambitions need to be prevented and push even harder for more economic sanctions and, as an absolutely last resort, a cooperative non-nuclear military action through the U.N. We’re more likely to get that support if we start showing respect for the sovereignty of other nations

Indulto, who would you suggest be lined up to talk to Iran? I've already pointed out that there is no one besides the US and our friends in Israel that have the backbone to stand up and tell like it is. The libs of the world don't want economic sanctions because it hurts the common guy in Iran. Using the UN is a joke. If that is the answer, why was there not an out cry when Iran called for the elimination of Israel.

Again, who would you suggest we get to stand up with us to talk to Iran?

[twindouble]

Indulto;

The bear was a threat, potentially greater than that of the dog. Yet you didn't go out and shoot the bear. Was it because the bear wasn't an imminent threat? You liken the Iranians to a vicious dog. You obviously wouldn't destroy all dogs, or even German Shepherds, yet you don't differentiate between between sane, peace-loving Muslims and the religious fanatics. The latter are admittedly already a danger to Israel, and with the potential for distributing WMDs, pose a future threat not only us, but much of the rest of the world. Quote;

This dog was back in 1948 or there about before the government started taking control of everything do. The bear was here yesterday but that's another subject.

Why should I differentiate from those peace loving Muslims when they did little or nothing to prevent what's going on or public support for us. As it stands now there's no way we or anyone else can distinguish who's who in the Arab world or what their intentions are as this struggle goes on. Sure there's moderates out there but they have their heads in the sand to save their own fanny or they are powerless to do anything.


It's become pretty obvious that you're no right-wing fanatic. I also know that it's easy to talk tough in cyberspace and cheaper to excise life's frustrations through the keyboard instead of a shrink. Tom enjoys projecting an image that belies his compassionate nature and gets away with it because he's so damn funny and insightful. He inspires a lot of imitators, but no clones. Quote;

I haven't been inspired by anyone here or any dumb ass politician that exists today. I try to respect anyones opinion unless I think it's way off the map. I have no desire to blow anyone up but I know when we are at war, so there's no doubt in my mind what course we are on and what we are dealing with.


Iraq was run by a vicious, greedy minority who routinely tortured and executed their opponents. Very easy to villify the SH family and the Baathists. but does Iran fit the same mold? Iran is run by a religious majority controlled by religious leaders who don't allow their opponents any political power, but they don't torture or execute them either. They tolerate the pro-Western faction, they don’t punish them. What does that tell you? Rabid dogs? I don't think so. Quote;

When it comes to Iran those that run the country are a minority that disquise themselves with the robes they wear, in reality is they are fanatical Fascist with just power in mind. To call them religious fly's in the face of Muslim beliefs and ours.

The dog analogy covered only those that we are at war with and Rabid is a good discription of them.

T.D.

[Light]

The U.S. also practices terrorism on a regular basis. I don't see any criticism of our CIA/NSA terrorist history of training foreign armies,assainations,torture,supporting massacres, and attempts to overthrow governments. Are you saying Iran's terrorism is bad and ours is good? If so,how can anyone have any respect for this double standard?

[Snag]

The U.S. also practices terrorism on a regular basis. I don't see any criticism of our CIA/NSA terrorist history of training foreign armies,assainations,torture,supporting massacres, and attempts to overthrow governments. Are you saying Iran's terrorism is bad and ours is good? If so,how can anyone have any respect for this double standard?

Light, you have to keep up with the thread. We explained that to you a long time ago.

[JustRalph]

Are you saying Iran's terrorism is bad and ours is good? If so,how can anyone have any respect for this double standard?

Name one case where an American operative blew up a bus full of innocent people? Name one case where an American used chemical weapons on children? Name one case where an American Operative killed 3 thousand innocent people in one day? Name one case where American's attacked a foreign Naval vessel while it was in port, refueling? How about sleeping Marines, Airmen in their bunks, while they were performing peace keeping duties in a foreign land? There is a damn big difference between your so called types of terrorism and the actions of foreign intelligence agents acting as they have for 250 years............The CIA/NSA don't routinely target innocent persons.

[Light]

The CIA/NSA don't routinely target innocent persons.

The Human Rights Watch has found that the United States repeatedly has not taken all feasible precautions to avoid civilian casualties, as required by international humanitarian law. It doesn't matter if you die directly or indirectly,you're still dead. And please don't ask me to name all the terroristic atrocities commited by our "covert operations". The list is endless.

[lsbets]

Name one case where an American operative blew up a bus full of innocent people? Name one case where an American used chemical weapons on children? Name one case where an American Operative killed 3 thousand innocent people in one day? Name one case where American's attacked a foreign Naval vessel while it was in port, refueling? How about sleeping Marines, Airmen in their bunks, while they were performing peace keeping duties in a foreign land? There is a damn big difference between your so called types of terrorism and the actions of foreign intelligence agents acting as they have for 250 years............The CIA/NSA don't routinely target innocent persons.

JR - I didn't think any of your questions would be answered.

[Snag]

Light, if they were covert operations, how come we know about them? What is your source?

[Indulto]

Light, if they were covert operations, how come we know about them? What is your source?Light is his own source of enlightenment.

Clinton's internal covert operation with an intern was not undercover, but his pressing leaking exposure was exposed by leaks to the press.

[Tom]

The Human Rights Watch has found that the United States repeatedly has not taken all feasible precautions to avoid civilian casualties, as required by international humanitarian law. It doesn't matter if you die directly or indirectly,you're still dead. And please don't ask me to name all the terroristic atrocities commited by our "covert operations". The list is endless.

Well there you go...Human rights WATCH! How can anyone respect a group who sits by and WATCHES human rights go down the toilet? The US is Human Right ACTIVISTS.
Were was the HRW when genocide was committed several times in Africa? Wehr wehr they when the Taliban destroyed Afghasnistan's people? when SH murdered twns of thousand?

You just don't get it. The US NEVER, read that slowly NEVER, targets civilians - the other side ALWAYS target them. It is sad that we are not able to go in and just pick out the terrorists, but we can't. How about placing some blame where is belongs - on the mad dog terrorist dictators we are chasing?
Or doesnt' that fit into your little agenda here?

[Light]

Baiting me? O,K, let me wet your appetite. Here are some Hor Dourves in Quiz form.

1)Who supported,armed and trained Afghanistan troops and Bin Laden against Russia. Hint: it wasn't Mr. Rogers.

2)Who provided secret financial assistance to Al Queda up to 1992? It's a toughie.

3) In the Iran Contra scandal the CIA guns for drugs deal in Central America funded the weapons sales to what nation?

To those who keep talking about the 3000 who died the WTC be aware that in the first 2 months of bombing Afghanistan,4000 civilians were killed.They were labeled Taliban sympathizers by the Pentagon. Hmm.That means Bin Laden can justify his side by saying the 3000 civilians killed in the WTC were Bush supporters.

Bonus round: What agency of the U.S. worked with Pakistan to create and install the Taliban.Hint:Starts with a C. O.K.next letter is I. You guys are too sharp.

[Indulto]

Baiting me? O,K, let me wet your appetite. Here are some Hor Dourves in Quiz form.

1)Who supported,armed and trained Afghanistan troops and Bin Laden against Russia. Hint: it wasn't Mr. Rogers.

2)Who provided secret financial assistance to Al Queda up to 1992? It's a toughie.

3) In the Iran Contra scandal the CIA guns for drugs deal in Central America funded the weapons sales to what nation?

To those who keep talking about the 3000 who died the WTC be aware that in the first 2 months of bombing Afghanistan,4000 civilians were killed.They were labeled Taliban sympathizers by the Pentagon. Hmm.That means Bin Laden can justify his side by saying the 3000 civilians killed in the WTC were Bush supporters.

Bonus round: What agency of the U.S. worked with Pakistan to create and install the Taliban.Hint:Starts with a C. O.K.next letter is I. You guys are too sharp.Light,
That's more like it! Didn't it feel good? Your most entertaining post by far!

[Indulto]

Who are you going to line up..Russia
Who do you think is building the Reactor we can only hope they use Chernobyl technology.
China...They are the ones selling arms and technology.
Our President once said we should never seek a permission slip to defend our honor. This is the time to stand alone and get the job doneHow did invading Iraq defend our honor? Please be specific.

[JustRalph]

Baiting me? O,K, let me wet your appetite. Here are some Hor Dourves in Quiz form.

1)Who supported,armed and trained Afghanistan troops and Bin Laden against Russia. Hint: it wasn't Mr. Rogers.

2)Who provided secret financial assistance to Al Queda up to 1992? It's a toughie.

3) In the Iran Contra scandal the CIA guns for drugs deal in Central America funded the weapons sales to what nation?

To those who keep talking about the 3000 who died the WTC be aware that in the first 2 months of bombing Afghanistan,4000 civilians were killed.They were labeled Taliban sympathizers by the Pentagon. Hmm.That means Bin Laden can justify his side by saying the 3000 civilians killed in the WTC were Bush supporters.

Bonus round: What agency of the U.S. worked with Pakistan to create and install the Taliban.Hint:Starts with a C. O.K.next letter is I. You guys are too sharp.

Apples to oranges............... and it's "Whet" in that context.......

[Tom]

Baiting me? O,K, let me wet your appetite. Here are some Hor Dourves in Quiz form.

1)Who supported,armed and trained Afghanistan troops and Bin Laden against Russia. Hint: it wasn't Mr. Rogers.

2)Who provided secret financial assistance to Al Queda up to 1992? It's a toughie.

3) In the Iran Contra scandal the CIA guns for drugs deal in Central America funded the weapons sales to what nation?

To those who keep talking about the 3000 who died the WTC be aware that in the first 2 months of bombing Afghanistan,4000 civilians were killed.They were labeled Taliban sympathizers by the Pentagon. Hmm.That means Bin Laden can justify his side by saying the 3000 civilians killed in the WTC were Bush supporters.

Bonus round: What agency of the U.S. worked with Pakistan to create and install the Taliban.Hint:Starts with a C. O.K.next letter is I. You guys are too sharp.


Except that you are judging those events with the benefit of hindsight.
At the time, the USSR was the major threat, and our policies were successful in defeting them and in their downfall. The rest happened after we left Afghanistan. We failed to keep our eye on them, failed to keep a presence there.
(Listen up here, 46)

We are not making that mistake this time around - we are staying until the job is done and stable governments are not only set up, but able to take care of things on thier own. 46 calls this leadership!

If you recall, Bin Laden was against the USSR and had not given us reason to not trust him at that point in time.
So when you judge history, don't blame people for not having the knowledge of tday at hand. There was a time when Bin Laden was a good thing. One of the things Olie North got in trouble for was taking $25,000 to install a state of the art home security system at his home. He did this becasue he was one of the first to see Bin Laden for what he would become and he was in fear for his life. So old Olie was one of the first to bring us in on the Bin Laden threat. Must be Clinton didn't read that DPB.

And I might add, thanks to our intervention which brought donw the USSR, guess how many Eastern European people no enjoy freedon? More than a few. Gernamy, for one. Poland, etc. etc.

You guyts seeing a pattern here - history shows that every time we go to war, we leave a trail of freedom behind us, freedom that would not exist without our intervention.
France,
Germany,
Poland,
all those other wee nations in W Europe,
Afghnaistan,
Iraq,
Japan,
Phillipines,
China!

Fact is, without the US money and soldiers, most countries would have failed the ultimate test of a nation - the ability to survive. More of the world than not directly owes their very existence today to our unselfish interventions.

And one idiot here calls us terrorists!
Depends on your perspective. To some, we ARE terroiststs - a good thing!

[Tom]

Apples to oranges............... and it's "Whet" in that context.......


Maybe it was "wet" in his context! :lol:

[Ponyplayr]

How did invading Iraq defend our honor? Please be specific.
The following is a quote from good old Bill.
"It was an elaborate plan devised by the Iraqi government and directed against a former president of the United States because of actions he took as president," Clinton said. Bush led the coalition that drove Iraq from Kuwait in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. "As such, the Iraqi attack against President Bush was an attack against our country and against all Americans," Clinton said.

The attempt at assassinating Bush was an act of war.
This alone was all we needed to insert troops into Iraq.
Except we had a President who preferred to insert cigars into a female humidor!

[Indulto]

The following is a quote from good old Bill.
"It was an elaborate plan devised by the Iraqi government and directed against a former president of the United States because of actions he took as president," Clinton said. Bush led the coalition that drove Iraq from Kuwait in the 1991 Persian Gulf War. "As such, the Iraqi attack against President Bush was an attack against our country and against all Americans," Clinton said.

The attempt at assassinating Bush was an act of war.
This alone was all we needed to insert troops into Iraq.
Except we had a President who preferred to insert cigars into a female humidor!PP,
Thanks for the quote. You’ve raised an interesting point, but Clinton apparently wasn’t concerned enough about the “attack” to act upon it, and, IF he indeed considered it a matter of honor, does his record in that department validate that perspective?

Defending our “honor” was never one of our stated goals in invading Iraq, and if it had been, who would have considered it sufficient justification for war? If your position is that successful defense of our honor was a positive result of the invasion, do you think it alone was worth the casualties we suffered?

[Tom]

Who said anyhting about honor?
Attempting to kill a US President is absolutely grounds for war.

For icing on the cake, they fired on Us Airplanes.
Then they violated the agreement to end the Gulf War by throwing the UN Inspectors out.

For me, that was a slam dunk right there, and WMD were not even needed to be mentioned. We went to war, we won, Iraq agreed to certain terms for a cease fire, and to allow SH to stay in power.

They reneged.








Case closed- the war is back on.

[hcap]

How can anyone in their right mind :lol:
continue to be a bush cargo culter??

Iraq, now Iran?
Colin Powell just came out of the closet.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060411_bush_leak_plame_libby_powell/

"On Monday, former Secretary of State Colin Powell told me that he and his department’s top experts never believed that Iraq posed an imminent nuclear threat, but that the president followed the misleading advice of Vice President Dick Cheney and the CIA in making the claim. Now he tells us.

...Powell said. And the Niger reference in Bush’s State of the Union speech? “That was a big mistake,” he said. “It should never have been in the speech. I didn’t need Wilson to tell me that there wasn’t a Niger connection. He didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know. I never believed it.”

AND now from the mastermind himself....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/11/AR2006041101888.html

Joby Warrick of the Washington Post reports on the latest evidence of WMD fabrications from the Bush administration:

On May 29, 2003, 50 days after the fall of Baghdad, President Bush proclaimed a fresh victory for his administration in Iraq: Two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops had turned out to be long-sought mobile "biological laboratories." He declared, "We have found the weapons of mass destruction."

....But even as Bush spoke, U.S. intelligence officials possessed powerful evidence that it was not true....A secret fact-finding mission to Iraq — not made public until now — had already concluded that the trailers had nothing to do with biological weapons. Leaders of the Pentagon-sponsored mission transmitted their unanimous findings to Washington in a field report on May 27, 2003, two days before the president's statement.

...."There was no connection to anything biological," said one expert who studied the trailers. Another recalled an epithet that came to be associated with the trailers: "the biggest sand toilets in the world."

From Juan Cole

"Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday was that it had enriched uranium to a measely 3.5 percent, using a bank of 180 centrifuges hooked up so that they "cascade."

The ability to slightly enrich uranium is not the same as the ability to build a bomb. For the latter, you need at least 80% enrichment, which in turn would require about 16,000 small centrifuges hooked up to cascade. Iran does not have 16,000 centrifuges.

..What is really going on here is a ratcheting war of rhetoric. The Iranian hard liners are down to a popularity rating in Iran of about 15%. They are using their challenge to the Bush administration over their perfectly legal civilian nuclear energy research program as a way of enhancing their nationalist credentials in Iran.

Likewise, Bush is trying to shore up his base, which is desperately unhappy with the Iraq situation, by rattling sabres at Iran. Bush's poll numbers are so low, often in the mid-30s, that he must have lost part of his base to produce this result. Iran is a great deus ex machina for Bush. Rally around the flag yet again.

If this international game of chicken goes wrong, then the whole Middle East and much of Western Europe could go up in flames. The real threat here is not unconventional war, which Iran cannot fight for the foreseeable future. It is the spread of Iraq-style instability to more countries in the region.

[hcap]

To all youse SPSOYD guys (slim pickens school of yeehaw diplomacy)
Including-Tom-founding member, and all youse other wham bang thank youse mam' bombers a go go. Check this out. Shock and awe yourselves into dreamland. Collateral damage up the kazoo.

http://progressive.org/mag_wx041106
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/nuclear_weapons/earthpenetrating-weapons.html?print=t

The Human Costs of Bombing Iran

So let’s look at what the human costs of dropping a tactical nuclear weapon on Iran might entail.

They are astronomical.

“The number of deaths could exceed a million, and the number of people with increased cancer risks could exceed 10 million,” according to a backgrounder by the Union of Concerned Scientists from May 2005.

The National Academy of Sciences studied these earth-penetrating nuclear weapons last year. They could “kill up to a million people or more if used in heavily populated areas,” concluded the report, which was sponsored by the U.S. Department of Defense.

Physicians for Social Responsibility examined the risks of a more advanced buster-bunker weapon, and it eerily tabulated the toll from an attack on the underground nuclear facility in Esfahan, Iran. “Three million people would be killed by radiation within two weeks of the explosion, and 35 million people in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India, would be exposed to increased levels of cancer-causing radiation,” according to a summary of that study in the backgrounder by the Union of Concerned Scientists.


Just keepa singin.. a one a two a three..

We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when,
But I know we'll meet again, some sunny day.
Keep smiling through, just like you always do,
'Til the blue skies drive the dark clouds far away.

So will you please say hello to the folks that I know,
Tell them I won't be long.
They'll be happy to know that as you saw me go,
I was singing this song.

[Snag]

After all your chest pounding links, I wonder what the stats would be if Iran sells some inriched U to set off in New York City or LA? It's always easy and safe to look backwards and finger point. Maybe you and Light should get together and tell the people in our major metro areas what to prepare for in the event of another attack. But I doubt you can do that because it hasn't happened yet.


You seem to forget that we are at war and if President Bush was not looking at all options, you would be bashing him on that point. This war has no front line. EVERYTHING is on the table, as it should be.

[Tom]

Fortunately, hcap is a silly itch, and not one taken seriously. His little tirades compensate for lack of something somewhere. I have my suspicions, but I leave it to you to decide. :D
The fact is, HE whinned like a school girl that Bush failed to stop 9-11. Now he whines when we make positive plans.

Whatever happens, you know hcap will whine about it. He is whine conneseir.

[Light]

Hcap posts the same article I read this morning in the newpaper about Powell . Powell was quoted as never believing the garbage about Iraq.

Then Hcap posts a no brainer article about what would happen in the middle East if a nuke was exploded there.

Very simple,matter of fact articles.Because of this he is labeled a chest beater and a silly itch?You guys are very immature.

[46zilzal]

Hcap posts the same article I read this morning in the newpaper about Powell . Powell was quoted as never believing the garbage about Iraq.

Have to admire Powell for understanding when to distance himself from madmen

[hcap]

Tom, did you recognize the ending song from Dr Strangelove?

We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when,
But I know we'll meet again, some sunny day.
Keep smiling through, just like you always do,
'Til the blue skies drive the dark clouds far away.

I will always think of you whenever I remember Slim Pickens riding that throbbing megatonage, hat a twirlin', yeehawing at the top of his lungs down to that russian silo. A true nuukular hero.

You must be proud to be the founding MEMBER of SPSOYD.
Take a bow.

Meanwhile, did you consider how many Iranians will die?
Let's hope we are only scaring the evil towlheads, and bush is jest a foolin around' fool. Besides you know you can really trust these guys

[46zilzal]

Tom, did you recognize the ending song from Dr Strangelove?


isn't it strange how that mentality has been re-born...hey maybe that's what these guys are born-again COLD warriors?

[JustRalph]

Have to admire Powell for understanding when to distance himself from madmen


If everybody used that criteria........you wouldn't have any friends at all?

[hcap]

Light,

Tom is afraid. Fear is a mighty master. I think the Vedanta story about ignorance clouding judgement and mistaking a rope for a snake, is as good an explanation as any. But whenever any of us bring in consciousness or conscience, we are accused of being Yodalike.

Just remember who kicked Darth Vaders ass :rolleyes:

[hcap]

Originally Posted by 46zilzal
Have to admire Powell for understanding when to distance himself from madmen
JR, fewer wars.

[CryingForTheHorses]

Light is his own source of enlightenment.

Clinton's internal covert operation with an intern was not undercover, but his pressing leaking exposure was exposed by leaks to the press.

Nobody died when Bill Lied!!

[Indulto]

Nobody died when Bill Lied!!With inspiration from B2 and apologies to Melanie Safka, the following is sung to the tune of “Look what they’ve done to my song:”

Nobody died when Bill lied, Mac
Nobody died when he lied
Well he took the stand
And he raised his hand
Then he turned the truth upside down, Mac
But nobody died when he lied

Nobody’s dead in Bill’s bed, Fred
Nobody’s dead in his bed.
But his sordid sex life
Didn’t include his wife
When his intern took her turn, Fern
But nobody’s dead in his bed.

He balanced budgets on his watch, Satch
He balanced budgets on his watch
But security was breached
So he wound up impeached
And the Democrats lost their seats, Clete
But he balanced budgets on his watch.

His missle missed Mister Q., Sue
His missle missed Mister Q.
He took a shot in the Dark
But it missed its mark
Now you get all the credit for Libya, Dubya
Cause his missle missed Mister Q.

[Tom]

Tom, did you recognize the ending song from Dr
Strangelove? Of course - one of my favorite movies:jump:

We'll meet again, don't know where, don't know when,
But I know we'll meet again, some sunny day.
Keep smiling through, just like you always do,
'Til the blue skies drive the dark clouds far away.

I will always think of you whenever I remember Slim Pickens riding that throbbing megatonage, hat a twirlin', yeehawing at the top of his lungs down to that russian silo. A true nuukular hero.

You must be proud to be the founding MEMBER of SPSOYD.
Take a bow. My work here is done. Hi Ho Silver! Away!

Meanwhile, did you consider how many Iranians will die? Not enough.:eek:


Do you really think we area going to use a nuke on Iran? Even I know we won't do that. Sheez. Get a line to the earth, dude.

[Tom]

Nobody died when Bill Lied!!

Not true. Clinton failed to take Bin Laden when he was offered him gift wrapped. He failed AGAIN because he didn't want to upset the royal family nearby. He focused so much on his lie that he allowed Al Qeda to grow and flourish,
So, many, many died because Billy lied.

[Indulto]

Originally Posted by Tom:

Quote: Nobody died when Bill Lied!!

Not true. Clinton failed to take Bin Laden when he was offered him gift wrapped. He failed AGAIN because he didn't want to upset the royal family nearby. He focused so much on his lie that he allowed Al Qeda to grow and flourish,
So, many, many died because Billy lied.Tom,
You’re right. Makes you wonder what else is lurking out there because Clinton didn’t keep his eye on the ball, and George UU had his on the wrong one.

[JustRalph]

Nobody died when Bill Lied!!


Mcshell, stop reading those bumper stickers and watch the road!

[hcap]

I know oil has absolutely nothing, nada, ZILCH, zero, nothing WHATSOEVER to do with our overseas adventures. Why should anyone even criticize "making the world safe for democracy" or "we'll kill 'em over there so they don't kill US over here"???.

Why even doubt our real good intent-ent-shee-ons??.



http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/3790447.html
Oil companies not running from Venezuela

By BRIAN ELLSWORTH
Reuters News Service

CARACAS, VENEZUELA - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has rattled oil markets with tough anti-capitalist talk, higher royalties and oil field takeovers, but petroleum companies operating in the world's fifth-largest crude exporter are hardly running scared.

With crude prices soaring and oil reserves growing scarcer, the South American nation is still an attractive proposition for top petroleum operators even as the country's socialist leader demands a bigger cut of the black gold revenues.


http://www.10news.com/news/8630144/detail.html

ABOARD THE USS GEORGE WASHINGTON -- A U.S. aircraft carrier strike group is moving into the Caribbean this week to start two months of naval exercises.

The military is dismissing allegations by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez that it is planning an invasion of his country. But analysts say the show of force sends a signal to Chavez and other Latin American leaders about U.S. strength.

"There's no other symbol of American power like the carrier," said the Southern Command's chief of staff.


BOMBS AWAY.
The only good terrorist/commie/towlhead/Islamofascist/pinko protestor is a .........

[lsbets]

You're right Hcap, part of the reason for the excercise there has to do with sending a message to Chavez (and part of it is just the military conducts excercies all the time), but a lot of that has to do with sending him a message regarding some posturing he has done ragarding his possible invasion of the Netherlands Antilles. There is some thought that Chavez might be interested in making a move on the Antilles similar to the Argentinian move into the Falklands. When we want to send a message, having a carrier float around is a good way to do it.

[hcap]

Is oil part of the equation?
Argentinian move?

http://www.gwu.edu/%7Ensarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB185/index.htm

"Washington, D.C., March 23, 2006 - On the eve of the 30th anniversary of the military coup in Argentina, the National Security Archive posted a series of declassified U.S. documents and, for the first time, secret documents from Southern Cone intelligence agencies recording detailed evidence of massive atrocities committed by the military junta in Argentina. The documents include a formerly secret transcript of Henry Kissinger's staff meeting during which he ordered immediate U.S. support for the new military regime, and Defense and State Department reports on the ensuing repression. The Archive has also obtained internal memoranda and cables from the infamous Argentina intelligence unit, Battalion 601, as well as the Chilean secret police agency, known as DINA, which was secretly collaborating with the military in Buenos Aires."


Our hands are not clean. There is a history of covert support and interventions for corporate interestsin foreign adventures. You may say corporate and national interests are closely tied. But isn't it time oversight and accountability were applied here at home instead of wasting blood and treasure on misguided foreign entanglements?

RE: Chavez

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1124-02.htm

[Snag]

Our hands are not clean. There is a history of covert support and interventions for corporate interestsin foreign adventures. You may say corporate and national interests are closely tied. But isn't it time oversight and accountability were applied here at home instead of wasting blood and treasure on misguided foreign entanglements?

RE: Chavez

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1124-02.htm

WOW!!! We now have Henry Kissinger's staff meetings to blame for "covert support and interventions.....". We started in Iran and a discussion of their missle test and now we need oversight and accountability at home over misguided foreign entanglements. Just one question, how do we know anything is misguided at the time? We have always support our interests either covertly or up close and personal. History tells us if we were right or wrong. I guess it is easier to always look backwards instead of trusting in the future. hcap, where were you with that insight when I married my first wife?

[twindouble]

Look guys, not trying to put a damper on this discorse but it begs the question as to how you all can go day in, day out, week after week in what seems to be a futile effort to change minds. Explain to me what your getting or not getting in this war of words. :bang:



T.D.

[Snag]

Very good point TD. For some I think it is a chance to express themselves without fear of a personal in-your-face interaction. They know that their point is baseless and can only be defended from afar. Others enjoy pointing out the weird angles and connections. Some are just stupid and can not support any position they take. Those are ones I like to read.


As for me, I fit most all of the above.

[twindouble]

As for me, I fit most all of the above.Quote;Snag.:lol:

I have to admit like always I do get some laughs along the way. :D

[JustRalph]

intelligent discourse feeds the mind. Keeps you aware and such. It can be fun. It provides a break from sitting in my office for hours at a time.

[Tom]

intelligent discourse feeds the mind. Keeps you aware and such. It can be fun. It provides a break from sitting in my office for hours at a time.


What does hcap's discourse feed, then?

[twindouble]

intelligent discourse feeds the mind. Keeps you aware and such. It can be fun. It provides a break from sitting in my office for hours at a time.

I can understand that, guess I do the same thing just to break up the monotony you mention. I liken intellectual discourse to a few guys handicapping a full card to come up with winners. Not bitching and moaming about everything that went wrong least week or 20 years ago pointing fingers. When it comes to world affairs or politics we have a new card in hand so we better settle our differences or we are in deep shit, we all lose.


T.D.

[Ponyplayr]

PP,
Thanks for the quote. You’ve raised an interesting point, but Clinton apparently wasn’t concerned enough about the “attack” to act upon it, and, IF he indeed considered it a matter of honor, does his record in that department validate that perspective?

Defending our “honor” was never one of our stated goals in invading Iraq, and if it had been, who would have considered it sufficient justification for war? If your position is that successful defense of our honor was a positive result of the invasion, do you think it alone was worth the casualties we suffered?

Read what this man had to say. It's a shame we don't have a Sherman around today.

http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/sherman/sherman-to-burn-atlanta.html

[Indulto]

Just one question, how do we know anything is misguided at the time? We have always support our interests either covertly or up close and personal. History tells us if we were right or wrong. I guess it is easier to always look backwards instead of trusting in the future. hcap, where were you with that insight when I married my first wife?Snag,
It's always difficult to make good decisions when one's condom size is being measured.

Absence is supposed to make the heart grow fonder, but the concept of abstinence only made Billy C's ticker beat quicker. So when Morris advised him to engage in intelligent discourse on internal matters, Bill thought he was suggesting intercourse with an intern.

[Indulto]

Read what this man had to say. It's a shame we don't have a Sherman around today.
http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/sherman/sherman-to-burn-atlanta.html (http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/sherman/sherman-to-burn-atlanta.html)
PP,
Excellent reference. Thanks for elevating the discussion.

I can only imagine that Truman was influenced by Sherman, and correctly so despite the devastation deliberated by both.

My position is NOT that war is never justified, but that

1 - The threat has been proven and is imminent

2 - All other options have been exhausted

3 - Sacrifices will be borne equally across all segments of our society and among those nations threatened

4 - Objectives are shared with and framed by all branches of our elected representatives

5 - Precautions are in place to prevent profiteering

6 - Political motivation of military and other strategic planners is minimal

7 - The only part religious intolerance plays in our decision is that practiced by those who threaten us.

I believe our military engagement in Afghanistan satisfied those criteria, but I have not been persuaded that the same is true of our invasion Of Iraq or the threatened action against Iran.

BTW nice play on my pseudonym -- I'm not insultod.

[hcap]

Watch this computer animation produced by the Union of Concerned Scientists. "bunker-buster" nuclear weapons:

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/nuclear_weapons/nuclear-bunker-buster-rnep-animation.html

1. The blast cannot reach many underground targets.

2. Because the missiles do not bore so deeply as many presume, the radioactive cloud could spread as much as one thousand miles. Three million people may be killed, while another thirty million will be at increased risk of cancer. The victims will be Iranians (the ones we suposedly hope to liberate), Afghans (the ones we supposedly liberated), Pakistanis (our supposed ally) and Indians (another ally).

3. Using nukes on a chemical weapons cache will spread toxic gasses, thereby increasing the death toll.

[Ponyplayr]

Have these concerned scientists studied the effect of a nuclear attack by Iran on NYC?..How many Canadians will die?
If they bomb LA how many Mexicans will die?
How many Americans will perish in such an attack? Or don't you care?

[JustRalph]

PP,
Excellent reference. Thanks for elevating the discussion.

I can only imagine that Truman was influenced by Sherman, and correctly so despite the devastation deliberated by both.

My position is NOT that war is never justified, but that

1 - The threat has been proven and is imminent

2 - All other options have been exhausted

3 - Sacrifices will be borne equally across all segments of our society and among those nations threatened

How in the hell are you ever gonna satisfy this one?

4 - Objectives are shared with and framed by all branches of our elected representatives

Oh yeah, this will happen.............what friggin world are you living in?

5 - Precautions are in place to prevent profiteering

sure, that is possible............

6 - Political motivation of military and other strategic planners is minimal

Where the hell did you come up with these?

7 - The only part religious intolerance plays in our decision is that practiced by those who threaten us. what?

I believe our military engagement in Afghanistan satisfied those criteria, but I have not been persuaded that the same is true of our invasion Of Iraq or the threatened action against Iran.


BTW nice play on my pseudonym -- I'm not insultod.

Why don't you just say that there is never justification for war?

[Tom]

Name me a time when there was no war going on.

Name me a war in the last 100 years that did not involve muslems.

You will find muslems participate in FAR more wars than the US does.

Tell you something????

Name me a country rebuilt by muslems after they were at war.

Your honor, goes to credibility!

Buck for buck, it pays to go to war with the US - we always leave our defeated enemies better off than they were. War with the US is like urban renewal. Only more effective.

[Indulto]

Why don't you just say that there is never justification for war?JR,
I know you're capable of more than one-line dismissals. If you disagree with some point, explain why specifically. I'm not going to bother with further detail until I see some coming my way.

[hcap]

Ponyplayr Have these concerned scientists studied the effect of a nuclear attack by Iran on NYC?..How many Canadians will die?
If they bomb LA how many Mexicans will die?
How many Americans will perish in such an attack? Or don't you care?

Or don't you care?
Give me a break. Typical scaremongering Pony.

A nuclear attack on anyone is horiffic. So far only two bombs have ever been used. Let's not make it more civilized sounding by calling it tactical.

Iran is years away from nuclear weapons. We have time to use tactics other than nuclear. War is always a last resort, nuclear war is a non resort.

[Tom]

A nuclear attack on anyone is horiffic. So far only two bombs have ever been used. Let's not make it more civilized sounding by calling it tactical.



Yup. Not so horrific for the 25 million or so who did not die in a ground assault on Japan, as was predicited. Not nearly as horrific as the way many died at the hands of the animalistic jap army on the island hoping trip to the big island.
And since those two, when has Japan ever caused a problem for anyone again?

[JustRalph]

Iran is years away from nuclear weapons. We have time to use tactics other than nuclear. War is always a last resort, nuclear war is a non resort.

how can you be so sure? I will trust the Israeli intelligence. As someone else has already said, they have their eye on them. If they really do become nuclear ready........ I am sure an Israeli F-16 will arrive shortly thereafter. I am surprised it hasn't already.

[Indulto]

how can you be so sure? I will trust the Israeli intelligence. As someone else has already said, they have their eye on them. If they really do become nuclear ready........ I am sure an Israeli F-16 will arrive shortly thereafter. I am surprised it hasn't already.Perhaps the Israelis also require the "imminent" qualifier and/or Iran's air defense has improved. Wouldn't a missle be more a more likely delivery vehicle if they were after an underground target?

[JustRalph]

Wouldn't a missle be more a more likely delivery vehicle if they were after an underground target?

maybe, but the Israeli Air Force is the 2nd best in the world....some say....or at least I have read some saying they are better than our guys. But they are trained by our guys....so what does that tell you.........and they have used Fighters to pull this kind of stuff off before...........The Israeli Colonel who died on our space shuttle was responsible for blowing up a nuke reactor in Iraq years back. See info below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osiraq

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera

Colonel Ilan Ramon (later killed in the space shuttle Columbia disaster in 2003) describes the flight:
"We fly deep within Iraq, It is all desert around us while we pass another marking point on our route. I try to concentrate on flying my F-16, but from time to time I think about the target we are about to attack, and the responsibility we've got. It's the first time in my life that I really feel responsible for the destiny of a whole nation. The view changes - a blue river in the middle of the desert. We have been here 2500 years ago... I see buildings and a deserted airfield. Somebody calls over the radio, 'Watch out for AAA fire!', and the sky gets filled with flashes of exploding rounds. I light the afterburner and pull up. Just in front of my eyes I see the earth ramparts and behind it - you can't miss - the silver dome of the reactor..."
" 'Eshkol 8' sounds the radio, 'Everybody Charlie!' - Charlie was the code name meaning all pilots have dropped their bombs."
"It was amazing - I managed to see how the bombs of the pilots in front of me hit the target and the dome collapsed into the structure ! The hits were excellent, and now we fly at high altitude back to our base. I hope they didn't start a chase, to run us out of fuel..."
"We cross the Arava and we are back in Israel. The IAF commander calls on the radio, and says: 'All you have to do now is land'... "

[boxcar]

I think a warped person is someone who thinks killing innocent people is a necessary evil..

Methinks that a "warped person" is someone who thinks the wicked are innocent people -- whose twisted mind is always calling good evil and evil good.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

The fundamental problem for peace is this world is that human beings do not know who they are.They think they are seperate from eachother.One race or another or this or that.

Typical, man-centered, ego-centric, humanistic philosophy that places the human condition only on a horizontal plane. Foolish man. Do you not know that "the fundamental problem" of mankind is that man is separated from God? This separation is the very essence of spiritual death. Man knows not his Creator. Man can have no peace with his fellow man until he has been reconciled to God through Christ.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Ponyplayr

Or don't you care?
Give me a break. Typical scaremongering Pony.

A nuclear attack on anyone is horiffic. So far only two bombs have ever been used. Let's not make it more civilized sounding by calling it tactical.

Yes, Ponyplayr, get your act straight. Only liberals are allowed to make liberal use of eupehmisms.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Watch this computer animation produced by the Union of Concerned Scientists. "bunker-buster" nuclear weapons:

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_security/nuclear_weapons/nuclear-bunker-buster-rnep-animation.html

1. The blast cannot reach many underground targets.

2. Because the missiles do not bore so deeply as many presume, the radioactive cloud could spread as much as one thousand miles. Three million people may be killed, while another thirty million will be at increased risk of cancer. The victims will be Iranians (the ones we suposedly hope to liberate), Afghans (the ones we supposedly liberated), Pakistanis (our supposed ally) and Indians (another ally).

3. Using nukes on a chemical weapons cache will spread toxic gasses, thereby increasing the death toll.

Your mission should be crystal clear, 'Cap. You need to visit the Youth in Iran to stir up their hearts (or I should I say "agitate" their hearts) against their leaders, and encourage the youthful populace to overthrow those wicked people, thereby saving themselves, the rest of the nation and the world. If the Youth -- the one's being oppressed by the religious whackjobs over there -- refuse to assume responsibility for their own lives and the ultimate safety of their own nation, then they have only themselves to blame, and should be fully prepared to suffer the consequences of their moral apathy if someone else is forced to do it for them.

'Cap, you're just the guy for this Mission Impossible.

Boxcar

[Light]

Do you not know that "the fundamental problem" of mankind is that man is separated from God? This separation is the very essence of spiritual death.
Boxcar

When I said that peace on Earth is lacking cause man does not know who he is,you think I was saying something different from your quote?

So if you believe in what you say,then you should be able to see and respect the God in your "enemies" as well as yourself.

And if you believe in the divinity of man,you would realize what a hypocrite you are calling for the annihilation of your fellow man.

[toetoe]

Sleeper Cell Light. My favorite new toy from Camping World.

Light,

Maybe we as a people are guilty of lack of involvement, but we can't be blamed for GWB's supposed sins of commission any more than we could be blamed for Billy Jeff's sins of omission, can we? Or JFK's outrageous tailbanging?

War in all of its forms involves ugly, ugly scenes of the innocent dying.

'Sacred' means 'washed in blood,' or something very similar.

Props for quoting Zimmerman, a Jew. :ThmbUp:

Back with more comments after I read the next 100 or so posts. :)

[46zilzal]

Or JFK's outrageous tailbanging?


Least he COULD get laid

[toetoe]

Okay, I've made it through post 195.

Light,

The killing going on all over the world which is NOT televised and re-run ad vomitum should be mentioned. That's a good point to raise. I maintain that the publicity and filming of, e.g., the @$$holes flying into the WTC does so much damage to the poor schmucks who just can't resist watching again and again and ..., that it almost cancels out all the goodness of our freedom of the press, one of our bedrock institutions. The schmucks in the mountains of Afghanistan Bananistan ('The Hot Rock' alert ... sorry) bury their dead and somehow move on. What do we do? We have George tell us we are strong, we are resolved, ho hum, we're in the friggin' Garden Of Eden, I guess. Then Rudy says some inspirational things, but they're just WORDS, ya know? Then, we fight over memorials, because we have to have super duper memorials, like Halls Of Fame and Top Ten lists. The guy that owned the towers can't even do what he wants with his own property! And now they've even co-opted the memorial itself, turning it into an It's-Really-Embarrassing-To-Be-An-American-Museum. What kind of people are we? We can't blame our president or our military. We're sheep that demand crummy pizza, a warm place to $h!t and a big TV. Well, what will we say or do after the next attack big enough to officially matter?

Russia were invading Afghanistan, so our choosing sides was not so evil, was it? Although if we invaded Mexico, we would resent Russia if they jumped in. Speaking of which, what is up with Cuba? I've never understood the whole thing. Anybody else ever feel that the governments care more for one another than for the people of any country? Kissinger's quote is blunt, but it's the only way to see the military. I maintain the civilians are regarded the same way in too many cases.

That guy in Iran was a kidnapper at the embassy in 1979, for God's sake! Our leaders don't last more than 8 years. What if this guy is in for life? I'd rather have a guy that was partying and being generally harmless in his college days. And this guy was attacking our own people! We have to look out for our own interests. Israel did this, Syria did that, etc. Lots of bad stuff, but our interests must come first. I do things in defense of my family that I might not do for myself.

Okay, see you in 40 posts or so.

[toetoe]

Pregnancy "scare" for Lady Hilary. Close, but no cigar.

[surfdog89]

Good to see you back....... BOXCAR ... as to this issue......We are infindels......and that religion want's to set back mankind to the stone age......... If we win this war ... and it is a war against all people who are infindels.... Mankind will be back in the stone age..... If not our Country.......... tell me a County that will stand tall........... very early in MX... coffee has not kicked in........... I do not see the "LIGHT".................. Must win this

[Snag]

Light, the problem with believing in the "divinity of man" is that some men are evil. If evil is allowed to exist, it takes over. Evil then should be removed. If you can not see or define evil, there is no right and wrong. Iran with nukes is wrong.

[Indulto]

Pregnancy "scare" for Lady Hilary. Close, but no cigar.TT,
That was a low blow, even for smoke rings.

[toetoe]

I believe Billy Jeff had designs on Tipper-illo Gore. I'll LEAVE it at that.

Okay, that's a wrap. :bang: :faint:

[Indulto]

I believe Billy Jeff had designs on Tipper-illo Gore.Finally, a rational explanation for Big Al's embracing Good Old Joe.:lol:

[toetoe]

This just in from the Uber Lieber Man press conference:

JL: Thank you, thank you. Hadassah and I ... (at this point, the transcript ends abruptly. Apparently, no one was left awake to record it. Ed.)

[Indulto]

This just in from the Uber Lieber Man press conference:

JL: Thank you, thank you. Hadassah and I ... (at this point, the transcript ends abruptly. Apparently, no one was left awake to record it. Ed.)Nah, it's just that nobody was listening once the smartest 800-pound Gore-illa in the room left the building. (Recycling is indeed appropriate, but the Big Dipper was never Gore-illa my dreams) ;)

[CryingForTheHorses]

Have these concerned scientists studied the effect of a nuclear attack by Iran on NYC?..How many Canadians will die?
If they bomb LA how many Mexicans will die?
How many Americans will perish in such an attack? Or don't you care?

If NYC was nuked during the winter months, I dont think too many canadians wold die..They would all be here in Florida

[Ponyplayr]

Pony play

Or don't you care?
Give me a break. Typical scaremongering Pony.

A nuclear attack on anyone is horrific. So far only two bombs have ever been used. Let's not make it more civilized sounding by calling it tactical.

Iran is years away from nuclear weapons. We have time to use tactics other than nuclear. War is always a last resort, nuclear war is a non resort.

Those two bombs killed about two hundred thousand Japanese and saved at least one million American lives. It also changed Japan in a positive way.
Never again will they start another war.
Jihad for Islam is the only resort the Proffit demands it. I say let them have it

[Ponyplayr]

If NYC was nuked during the winter months, I dont think too many canadians wold die..They would all be here in Florida

So true:D I've had several run into my rear bumper..

[hcap]

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_04/008657.php

TALKING TO IRAN

Last January, Flynt Leverett, who worked for Condoleezza Rice on the National Security Council, provided some initial clues:

..... In the spring of 2003, shortly before I left government, the Iranian Foreign Ministry sent Washington a detailed proposal for comprehensive negotiations to resolve bilateral differences. The document acknowledged that Iran would have to address concerns about its weapons programs and support for anti-Israeli terrorist organizations. It was presented as having support from all major players in Iran's power structure, including the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. A conversation I had shortly after leaving the government with a senior conservative Iranian official strongly suggested that this was the case. Unfortunately, the administration's response was to complain that the Swiss diplomats who passed the document from Tehran to Washington were out of line.


Read the whole article.

[hcap]

Yesterday’s Tom Friedman column

" If these are our only choices, which would you rather have: a nuclear-armed Iran or an attack on Iran’s nuclear sites that is carried out and sold to the world by the Bush national security team, with Don Rumsfeld at the Pentagon’s helm?

I’d rather live with a nuclear Iran.

While I know the right thing is to keep all our options open, I have zero confidence in this administration’s ability to manage a complex military strike against Iran, let alone the military and diplomatic aftershocks."

Friedman was an Iraq War hawk, remember.

I look at the Bush national security officials much the way I look at drunken drivers. I just want to take away their foreign policy driver’s licenses for the next three years. Sorry, boys and girls, you have to stay home now — or take a taxi. Dial 1-800-NATO-CHARGE-A-RIDE. You will not be driving alone. Not with my car.

[Snag]

hcap, of course Iran say they want to talk. They know that those like you would rather type in bold letters and point fingers rather than make the hard decisions. Iran and their leaders have already said they desire world domination. The only way to gain that position is with nukes. They have to delay us now to give them time to build enough supplies. They back almost all the outlaws in the world and would have no problem selling them bomb making parts. It's your hate for President Bush that is blinding you to the facts of this problem. Tell us, who do you trust to solve this problem?