War with Iran?

[Crazy#41]

Many speculations about when the Israeli - American forces will attack and bomb Iran, so put this one in the list.
But is it not strange that Ayman al-Zawahiri appeared yesterday attacking Iran for the first time, was it coincidence? And Iran Daily reported the Iranian army - Revolution Guards three days maneuvers in the Gulf in Ramdan is it also coincidence?
A Source who would like to stay anonymous told the Egyptian Resistance Voice that the U.S. - Israel would attack the Iranian nuclear facilities within few days.
The attack which is also approved by European countries will start from the American - Israeli military bases in Iraq, Afghanistan, Qatar, Bahrain and Palestine.The source expected the attack to be between 10 and 11 September which coincides with several events including such as the attack on the World Trade Center in New York and the Islamic Badr battle. He mentioned that Arab and Islamic countries Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE, Qatar, Oman, Iraq and Afghanistan are informed in advance about this attack.
The website says that Hezbollah is on full alert and Syria along with the Palestinian factions postponed their negotiations with Israel for the same reason.
One other thing to add, Egyptian political analyst and strategic expert, Major General Mahmoud Zaher broke his oath of “not to write about politics during Ramadan” and said the following in his article “A Time ruled by the devil’s spirit“:The information made me break my intention [oath] is wrapped in a question says:

What will the 9/11 of this year 2008 holds for us…?? Has it been done and planted as the new pretext, global Zionists can harvest again …From my information, the answer is “Yes”.

In his article Zaher warns Arab leaders and especially Mubarak of Egypt of the consequences of following the American - Israeli plans.

http://www.roadstoiraq.com/2008/09/0...thin-two-days/

Close to 9/11..

Would make sense, to show the U.S isn't fuckin' around when it says it wants world peace.

Lucky # 7, years later....

[Crazy#41]

Nuclear experts responsible for monitoring Iran’s nuclear program have discovered that enough enriched uranium, which if processed to weapons grade level could be used to make up to six atom bombs, has disappeared from the main production facility at Isfahan, The Daily Telegraph newspaper said.

http://www.arabtimesonline.com/clien...=22164&ccid=11

I figured they were way ahead of schedule that once sought...

It's all moved to a different location, most likely underground.

[Crazy#41]

VIENNA (Reuters) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog showed documents and photographs on Tuesday suggesting Iran secretly tried to modify a missile cone to fit a nuclear bomb, diplomats said, and Tehran again dismissed the findings as forged.

http://www.reuters.com/article/world...24311020080916

[Trippin4136]

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

"US President George W. Bush will not attack Iran to halt its nuclear weapons program before his term ends in January, David Wurmser, a key national security adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney up until last year, has told The Jerusalem Post."

[Crazy#41]

The Jew Post, lol.

[Trippin4136]

Originally Posted by Crazy#41

The Jew Post, lol.

Yess??? It's also the conservative newspaper in Israel.

You laugh at the JPost but you post dozens of idiotic blogs with idiots spouting off the end of the world.

[Crazy#41]

If Bush doesn't give the go-ahead, I'm shit sure Mad Mad McCain will.

[Lcsulla]

Originally Posted by Trippin4136

You laugh at the JPost but you post dozens of idiotic blogs with idiots spouting off the end of the world.

Agreed, I am sick of the global warming stories myself.

[Lcsulla]

Zahedan, 17 Sept. (AKI) – Iran's Revolutionary Guards have been arming Taliban groups in western Afghanistan for the past year, an independent journalist has told Adnkronos International (AKI).

“The Iranian Revolutionary Guards have regularly been supplying arms to Taliban groups operating in the province of Herat," the journalist, A.B., told AKI from Zahedan, the capital of Beluchistan province in southeastern Iran.

Full story: http://www.adnkronos.com/AKI/English...1.0.2492158309

[Crazy#41]

The IRG is on the Terror watch list, put on their last year...
That's a big deal.

Meaning if the U.S soldiers are to encounter any of them in the Middle-East or anywhere in the world.. They are to apprehend or kill them.

They know exactly where they are, so what's the hold up?

[Pengin4192]

Originally Posted by Crazy#41

The IRG is on the Terror watch list, put on their last year...
That's a big deal.

Meaning if the U.S soldiers are to encounter any of them in the Middle-East or anywhere in the world.. They are to apprehend or kill them.

They know exactly where they are, so what's the hold up?

That involves invading a sovereign country. No matter how insane that country seems to be, that's a big decision to make.

[Lcsulla]

Originally Posted by Crazy#41

The IRG is on the Terror watch list, put on their last year...
That's a big deal.

Meaning if the U.S soldiers are to encounter any of them in the Middle-East or anywhere in the world.. They are to apprehend or kill them.

They know exactly where they are, so what's the hold up?

Which goes back to what many of us have been screaming to anyone who will listen. Until Iran stops killing, and supporting those who kill, Americans there is simply no reason to talk to them. If agents of a country are actively killing Americans I do not give one single shit what happens to that country.

[defcon]

Iran's President made some interesting statements today...

I don't know if there is Pod/Webcast for this, I do not have cable. I am very interested in hearing what he has to say on Larry King. I read an article on CNN, and although I am unable to post a separate thread, I have something to say.

Let me preface this, before I am berated for my statements, or rather, for my perceived understanding of his statements, by saying that I am in no way antisemitic. Some of my best friends are of the Jewish faith. Not every Jew is a zionist, and there is a difference between Judaism as an ethnicity and Judaism as a religion. There is a difference between a Jew and an Israeli. I feel bad for what happened during WWII, and while I think his position is a little extreme, after reading this article, I was floored with regard to his clarifications on this and other things. Since I know people are going to call me out as being a racist, bigoted anti-zionist, I'm just getting that out of the way.

I think that we here in the United States are prone to propaganda. Our news is obviously manipulated. I don't trust the Associated Press. I don't trust the press, period. NPR, and public sources, are about the closest I come. That being said, here is the article:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/....us/index.html

First, I love the headline - yellowish (for lack of a better term)/activist/selective journalism at its best (but that's what CNN does), "American empire nearing its end." Yes, of course, but if you didn't read the article, you might think, "Wow, so we're going to war with Iran, or at the very lleast, another blow to relations." That's a prime example of the propaganda that we've been fed.

He insisted, however, that he and his country wish no harm to Jews.

"We have no problems with Jewish people," he said. "There are many Jews who live in Iran today ... but please pay attention to the fact that the Zionists are not Jews. They have no religion ... they just have -- wear masks of religiosity. How can you possibly be religious and occupy the land of other people?"

On the Holocaust, he said an impartial group should research whether it happened as has been claimed.

"There is a claim that the extent of the calamity was what it was," Ahmadinejad said. "There are people who agree with it. There are people who disagree."

All I'm going to say is that I'm glad he clarified his position, or modified it. To me, it seems a little less extreme. I've always wondered, where does the 6 million number come from? Where is the empirical evidence? Has someone actually counted six million bodies? I'm not downplaying it in the slightest iota, but from an historical standpoint, I hate to open old wounds, but I really wonder, who is manipulating who? It was terrible. It was the most terrible series of events in the history of humanity in terms of needless loss of lives, I do not dispute this.

I approach it with a cynical viewpoint of human nature. First, it's very deep, but the people native to that region, regardless of religion, are ethnically similar...there are different sects of Judaism, ethnicities, if you will, who look just like Palestinians with all the trappings (prayer shaws, yarmukles, etc.) of Judaism. What we have here is two similar people fighting over land. One group left, the other group moved in. Regardless of the reasons, that seems to be the historical record. I will say no more than that. In 1948-49, suddenly, it was as if one group never left, and suddenly, to the other group, "yeah....you guys are going to just have to go ahead and....move aside for me."

No, Dave, I won't drink the water. There is blood in the water.


The second most possibly needlessly tragic loss of human life in world history? Hiroshima, Nagasaki, obviously a greater justification, but look at who did that. The good ole US of A. But that is another discussion.


I will stop on this point here. If anyone cares to enlighten me about the Diaspora and the whole historical context, please do. Again, don't get me wrong. My point is, Mo is speaking a little clearer now regarding his viewpoints.


At no point does he (I am not spelling his name, from here on out I'm calling him Mo) threaten violence. In fact, quite the opposite, which, in my opinion, goes to prove my point that we are manipulated. I'm not pointing fingers, but we are...and either way, the 4th Estate (media) has something to do with it.

while he insisted Iran's nuclear activities are peaceful, Ahmadinejad blamed the same powers for seeking to hinder it "by exerting political and economic pressures on Iran, and threatening and pressuring" the International Atomic Energy Agency. Those powers, meanwhile, are building or maintaining nuclear stockpiles themselves, unchecked by anyone, he said.

Exactly. Can someone objectively prove that Iran is going to nuke Israel? Can anyone do that? Can anyone empirically say that Iran will develop nuclear weapons and destroy Israel? Remember, there are Palestinian kinfolk, and as he indicates, they are valued lives, even if Iranians are by and large Persian with heavy Islamic influence. Who are we to police the world. In the words of South Park, America?! FUCK YEAH. It has always been a, "if not us, then who?" mentality. Guess what, there's this thing, called the UN, the United Nations...ummm...yeah, and it has a body called the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency. It's their job. Yet America has rarely, if ever, submitted its own self to IAEA inspections, because AMERICA is the IAEA.

Case in point:

The nuclear issue, he said, has been politicized and is not a legal struggle at all, noting the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog group, has "not detected any noncompliance or deviation" on the part of Tehran.

He accused the United States of oppressing Iraqis with six years of occupation, saying Americans were "still seeking to solidify their position in the political geography of the region and to dominate oil resources.

Davespeak says it best,

Originally Posted by http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/d/dave_matthews.html

I fear that our true motivation is about oil and our own flailing economy; about the failure to destroy Al Qaeda and about revenge.

Sounds like either our friend Dave and Mo are both terrorists and/or finally Mo is speaking some sense, or at least, we are hearing him in totality or at least amended form for the first time. The last time he was here he was cut off by some asshole from Columbia who wouldn't even let him get a word in edge wise. Amazing professor. I would love to fluster him if ever given the opportunity. At the very least, let someone have their say, wait for them to finish, and if you are a master debater (pun intended), you will obviously prevail if you handle it per the rules and have a valid point. What happened a few months ago was far from valid. We are now hearing Mo in full.

Don't get me wrong, about 60% of Dave's political views are hogwash in my opinion, but take a look at it. We have been fighting a war, that, while has some justifications, was clearly not needed IMO, and if anything, Pakistan, rather than Iraq, should have been invaded, as we are seeing how. Musharaff was, and has always been, an appeaser who was merely biding the U.S. over...but he's gone now. I would suspect that Osama, and the bulk of our enemies, are right in those mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan. I'm not saying Iraq didn't have its merits, but I think it was Bush II finishing what Bush I started.

"This is the campaign period, anyone can say anything. So we disregard that. What matters is that once someone is in office, we have to watch and see if that person will bring about some changes in policy or continue the same old path."

Wow, its clear to me that Mo is an Obama supporter. Unless, that is, he feels that McCain would be different and would give him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. I express no opinion on that. I would trust him from a military standpoint, but the mention of change, brings clear images of Obama.

Asked whether he fears a U.S. attack, Ahmadinejad told King that attacking Iran would be the "worst thing the U.S. government can do. I think that in the United States, there are enough reasonable people, smart people, who would not allow the U.S. government to make such a big mistake

Agreed. World War III. Russia, Iran, Venezuela, possibly China, vs. NATO. Any preemptive attack, unless justified by extenuating, dire circumstances, would be terrible at best and a doomsday scenario at worst.

I don't think he makes this from a threat standpoint. He makes this as someone who does not want to see war, but will gladly fight if need be. What ever happened to America being that way? I think I know the answer. 1991. We have existed, by and large, in a hegemonic, single pole system since then. The times, they are a-changing.

On hostility between the United States and Iran, Ahmadinejad told King: "The hostility has not been from our end. Up to this day, we have always been interested in having friendly relations."

Check...perhaps with the exception of the Islamic revolution in the 70s, which was a non-violent, voluntary United States withdrawal. Although Iran has been less than quiet, there statements have been in response to ours.

That's about all I have to say. G'head, hit me with your best shot.

[Crazy#41]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=31a_1222967481

Iran stops nuclear program only if it gets guarantees


By Ingrid Melander 1 hour, 19 minutes ago

BRUSSELS - Iran would consider stopping sensitive uranium enrichment if guaranteed a supply of nuclear fuel from abroad, an Iranian official suggested on Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT

For that to happen, U.N. inspectors would have to verify Iran's disputed nuclear program is wholly peaceful and a range of international sanctions against Tehran be lift More..ed. There is little prospect of either on the horizon.

Iran has previously brushed off big power offers of an assured foreign fuel supply, possibly via a production center under the impartial control of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), if it renounced enrichment.

Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador to the U.N. nuclear watchdog, said the reason why the Islamic Republic was enriching uranium was the lack of an legally binding international accord on security of fuel supply.

Asked if with such a deal Iran would shelve enrichment, he said that arrangement would be a first step but it would have to be implemented, and Iran would need to retain some enrichment as a contingency in case supplies were cut.

"This is a first step ..., then the next step is to see it really implemented," he told reporters at a Brussels conference.

If this were carried out, "then Iran would be able to reconsider the position that we have now. The situation would be different, we would have to see," Soltanieh said.

"Plus every country has to be cautious to have as a contingency plan a fuel reserve in case of interruption."

BOMB POTENTIAL

Iran is trying to master nuclear fuel-cycle technology that could yield electricity -- its stated goal -- or give it the capability to make atom bombs if the process is adjusted, which Western powers suspect is Tehran's underlying purpose.

Tehran has defied U.N. resolutions demanding it suspend enrichment and withheld cooperation needed to resolve a U.N. nuclear watchdog probe into whether it researched ways to build bombs. Iran denies the charges but not given backup evidence.

Soltanieh also said the West was trying to humiliate Iran by seeking to prevent it doing nuclear research and development.

Speaking at a think-tank in New York, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Iran would not be dragged down an "unending road" in dealings with the IAEA, adding Washington was perpetuating a "huge lie" about Iran's nuclear ambitions.

"For the United States, it is difficult to accept the peaceful nature of Iran's program because once it accepts, it can no longer oppose," Mottaki told the Asia Society.

Iran says it has no intention of making atom bombs, noting its commitment to continued IAEA inspections of nuclear sites.

It also denies blocking the IAEA inquiry but says that inspectors, egged on Iran's arch-foe the United States, are seeking unacceptable access to purely conventional military sites whose exposure would jeopardize its security.

The IAEA and Western nations say Iran must grant such access to clear up intelligence allegations of military involvement in the nuclear program. More generally, Iran should stop limiting inspector movements to declared nuclear sites, they say.

"Iran (should) implement all transparency measures ... required to build confidence ... This will be good for Iran, good for the Middle East region and good for the world," IAEA Director Mohamed ElBaradei told the annual 145-nation assembly of the U.N. watchdog in Vienna this week.

[kyledmb]

Speaking at a think-tank in New York, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Iran would not be dragged down an "unending road" in dealings with the IAEA, adding Washington was perpetuating a "huge lie" about Iran's nuclear ambitions.

"For the United States, it is difficult to accept the peaceful nature of Iran's program because once it accepts, it can no longer oppose," Mottaki told the Asia Society.

Great Quote from above.

[Crazy#41]

^^

Yes, I do like that!!


I like how Amadinajiad said "Bomb? ha. The "bomb" didn't prevent Russia's economy from collapsing.. It hasn't resolved the war in Iraq and Afghanistan"

or something like that..

[defcon]

Does anyone else get the feeling that relations with Iran will improve once the Bush administration is out of office?

[Crazy#41]

Originally Posted by defcon

Does anyone else get the feeling that relations with Iran will improve once the Bush administration is out of office?

If the McCain ticket gets processed..?
Not a chance.

Did you even hear Sarah last night and Johnny a last week?

[seekupchuck]

Originally Posted by defcon

Iran's President made some interesting statements today...

I don't know if there is Pod/Webcast for this, I do not have cable. I am very interested in hearing what he has to say on Larry King. I read an article on CNN, and although I am unable to post a separate thread, I have something to say.

Let me preface this, before I am berated for my statements, or rather, for my perceived understanding of his statements, by saying that I am in no way antisemitic. Some of my best friends are of the Jewish faith. Not every Jew is a zionist, and there is a difference between Judaism as an ethnicity and Judaism as a religion. There is a difference between a Jew and an Israeli. I feel bad for what happened during WWII, and while I think his position is a little extreme, after reading this article, I was floored with regard to his clarifications on this and other things. Since I know people are going to call me out as being a racist, bigoted anti-zionist, I'm just getting that out of the way.

I think that we here in the United States are prone to propaganda. Our news is obviously manipulated. I don't trust the Associated Press. I don't trust the press, period. NPR, and public sources, are about the closest I come. That being said, here is the article:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/....us/index.html

First, I love the headline - yellowish (for lack of a better term)/activist/selective journalism at its best (but that's what CNN does), "American empire nearing its end." Yes, of course, but if you didn't read the article, you might think, "Wow, so we're going to war with Iran, or at the very lleast, another blow to relations." That's a prime example of the propaganda that we've been fed.




All I'm going to say is that I'm glad he clarified his position, or modified it. To me, it seems a little less extreme. I've always wondered, where does the 6 million number come from? Where is the empirical evidence? Has someone actually counted six million bodies? I'm not downplaying it in the slightest iota, but from an historical standpoint, I hate to open old wounds, but I really wonder, who is manipulating who? It was terrible. It was the most terrible series of events in the history of humanity in terms of needless loss of lives, I do not dispute this.

I approach it with a cynical viewpoint of human nature. First, it's very deep, but the people native to that region, regardless of religion, are ethnically similar...there are different sects of Judaism, ethnicities, if you will, who look just like Palestinians with all the trappings (prayer shaws, yarmukles, etc.) of Judaism. What we have here is two similar people fighting over land. One group left, the other group moved in. Regardless of the reasons, that seems to be the historical record. I will say no more than that. In 1948-49, suddenly, it was as if one group never left, and suddenly, to the other group, "yeah....you guys are going to just have to go ahead and....move aside for me."

No, Dave, I won't drink the water. There is blood in the water.


The second most possibly needlessly tragic loss of human life in world history? Hiroshima, Nagasaki, obviously a greater justification, but look at who did that. The good ole US of A. But that is another discussion.


I will stop on this point here. If anyone cares to enlighten me about the Diaspora and the whole historical context, please do. Again, don't get me wrong. My point is, Mo is speaking a little clearer now regarding his viewpoints.


At no point does he (I am not spelling his name, from here on out I'm calling him Mo) threaten violence. In fact, quite the opposite, which, in my opinion, goes to prove my point that we are manipulated. I'm not pointing fingers, but we are...and either way, the 4th Estate (media) has something to do with it.



Exactly. Can someone objectively prove that Iran is going to nuke Israel? Can anyone do that? Can anyone empirically say that Iran will develop nuclear weapons and destroy Israel? Remember, there are Palestinian kinfolk, and as he indicates, they are valued lives, even if Iranians are by and large Persian with heavy Islamic influence. Who are we to police the world. In the words of South Park, America?! FUCK YEAH. It has always been a, "if not us, then who?" mentality. Guess what, there's this thing, called the UN, the United Nations...ummm...yeah, and it has a body called the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency. It's their job. Yet America has rarely, if ever, submitted its own self to IAEA inspections, because AMERICA is the IAEA.

Case in point:





Davespeak says it best,

Sounds like either our friend Dave and Mo are both terrorists and/or finally Mo is speaking some sense, or at least, we are hearing him in totality or at least amended form for the first time. The last time he was here he was cut off by some asshole from Columbia who wouldn't even let him get a word in edge wise. Amazing professor. I would love to fluster him if ever given the opportunity. At the very least, let someone have their say, wait for them to finish, and if you are a master debater (pun intended), you will obviously prevail if you handle it per the rules and have a valid point. What happened a few months ago was far from valid. We are now hearing Mo in full.

Don't get me wrong, about 60% of Dave's political views are hogwash in my opinion, but take a look at it. We have been fighting a war, that, while has some justifications, was clearly not needed IMO, and if anything, Pakistan, rather than Iraq, should have been invaded, as we are seeing how. Musharaff was, and has always been, an appeaser who was merely biding the U.S. over...but he's gone now. I would suspect that Osama, and the bulk of our enemies, are right in those mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan. I'm not saying Iraq didn't have its merits, but I think it was Bush II finishing what Bush I started.



Wow, its clear to me that Mo is an Obama supporter. Unless, that is, he feels that McCain would be different and would give him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. I express no opinion on that. I would trust him from a military standpoint, but the mention of change, brings clear images of Obama.



Agreed. World War III. Russia, Iran, Venezuela, possibly China, vs. NATO. Any preemptive attack, unless justified by extenuating, dire circumstances, would be terrible at best and a doomsday scenario at worst.

I don't think he makes this from a threat standpoint. He makes this as someone who does not want to see war, but will gladly fight if need be. What ever happened to America being that way? I think I know the answer. 1991. We have existed, by and large, in a hegemonic, single pole system since then. The times, they are a-changing.



Check...perhaps with the exception of the Islamic revolution in the 70s, which was a non-violent, voluntary United States withdrawal. Although Iran has been less than quiet, there statements have been in response to ours.

That's about all I have to say. G'head, hit me with your best shot.

Pretty much agree with everything. "MO" is sadly mistaken, however, if he believes Obama in office will change anything when it comes to our relationship and agenda with the Zionists.

[Crazy#41]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/7657066.stm

US War Plane forced to land in IRAN.

[Crazy#41]

Top Iran officials recommend preemptive strike against Israel

Senior Tehran officials are recommending a preemptive strike against Israel to prevent an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear reactors, a senior Islamic Republic official told foreign diplomats.

Well, at least then they WILL look like the bad guys.

[MistreatedLewis]

If they attack Israel I am in favor of a U.S. led regume change in Iran.

[jimibadfish]

Originally Posted by defcon

Iran's President made some interesting statements today...

I don't know if there is Pod/Webcast for this, I do not have cable. I am very interested in hearing what he has to say on Larry King. I read an article on CNN, and although I am unable to post a separate thread, I have something to say.

Let me preface this, before I am berated for my statements, or rather, for my perceived understanding of his statements, by saying that I am in no way antisemitic. Some of my best friends are of the Jewish faith. Not every Jew is a zionist, and there is a difference between Judaism as an ethnicity and Judaism as a religion. There is a difference between a Jew and an Israeli. I feel bad for what happened during WWII, and while I think his position is a little extreme, after reading this article, I was floored with regard to his clarifications on this and other things. Since I know people are going to call me out as being a racist, bigoted anti-zionist, I'm just getting that out of the way.

I think that we here in the United States are prone to propaganda. Our news is obviously manipulated. I don't trust the Associated Press. I don't trust the press, period. NPR, and public sources, are about the closest I come. That being said, here is the article:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/....us/index.html

First, I love the headline - yellowish (for lack of a better term)/activist/selective journalism at its best (but that's what CNN does), "American empire nearing its end." Yes, of course, but if you didn't read the article, you might think, "Wow, so we're going to war with Iran, or at the very lleast, another blow to relations." That's a prime example of the propaganda that we've been fed.




All I'm going to say is that I'm glad he clarified his position, or modified it. To me, it seems a little less extreme. I've always wondered, where does the 6 million number come from? Where is the empirical evidence? Has someone actually counted six million bodies? I'm not downplaying it in the slightest iota, but from an historical standpoint, I hate to open old wounds, but I really wonder, who is manipulating who? It was terrible. It was the most terrible series of events in the history of humanity in terms of needless loss of lives, I do not dispute this.

I approach it with a cynical viewpoint of human nature. First, it's very deep, but the people native to that region, regardless of religion, are ethnically similar...there are different sects of Judaism, ethnicities, if you will, who look just like Palestinians with all the trappings (prayer shaws, yarmukles, etc.) of Judaism. What we have here is two similar people fighting over land. One group left, the other group moved in. Regardless of the reasons, that seems to be the historical record. I will say no more than that. In 1948-49, suddenly, it was as if one group never left, and suddenly, to the other group, "yeah....you guys are going to just have to go ahead and....move aside for me."

No, Dave, I won't drink the water. There is blood in the water.


The second most possibly needlessly tragic loss of human life in world history? Hiroshima, Nagasaki, obviously a greater justification, but look at who did that. The good ole US of A. But that is another discussion.


I will stop on this point here. If anyone cares to enlighten me about the Diaspora and the whole historical context, please do. Again, don't get me wrong. My point is, Mo is speaking a little clearer now regarding his viewpoints.


At no point does he (I am not spelling his name, from here on out I'm calling him Mo) threaten violence. In fact, quite the opposite, which, in my opinion, goes to prove my point that we are manipulated. I'm not pointing fingers, but we are...and either way, the 4th Estate (media) has something to do with it.



Exactly. Can someone objectively prove that Iran is going to nuke Israel? Can anyone do that? Can anyone empirically say that Iran will develop nuclear weapons and destroy Israel? Remember, there are Palestinian kinfolk, and as he indicates, they are valued lives, even if Iranians are by and large Persian with heavy Islamic influence. Who are we to police the world. In the words of South Park, America?! FUCK YEAH. It has always been a, "if not us, then who?" mentality. Guess what, there's this thing, called the UN, the United Nations...ummm...yeah, and it has a body called the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency. It's their job. Yet America has rarely, if ever, submitted its own self to IAEA inspections, because AMERICA is the IAEA.

Case in point:





Davespeak says it best,

Sounds like either our friend Dave and Mo are both terrorists and/or finally Mo is speaking some sense, or at least, we are hearing him in totality or at least amended form for the first time. The last time he was here he was cut off by some asshole from Columbia who wouldn't even let him get a word in edge wise. Amazing professor. I would love to fluster him if ever given the opportunity. At the very least, let someone have their say, wait for them to finish, and if you are a master debater (pun intended), you will obviously prevail if you handle it per the rules and have a valid point. What happened a few months ago was far from valid. We are now hearing Mo in full.

Don't get me wrong, about 60% of Dave's political views are hogwash in my opinion, but take a look at it. We have been fighting a war, that, while has some justifications, was clearly not needed IMO, and if anything, Pakistan, rather than Iraq, should have been invaded, as we are seeing how. Musharaff was, and has always been, an appeaser who was merely biding the U.S. over...but he's gone now. I would suspect that Osama, and the bulk of our enemies, are right in those mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan. I'm not saying Iraq didn't have its merits, but I think it was Bush II finishing what Bush I started.



Wow, its clear to me that Mo is an Obama supporter. Unless, that is, he feels that McCain would be different and would give him the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise. I express no opinion on that. I would trust him from a military standpoint, but the mention of change, brings clear images of Obama.



Agreed. World War III. Russia, Iran, Venezuela, possibly China, vs. NATO. Any preemptive attack, unless justified by extenuating, dire circumstances, would be terrible at best and a doomsday scenario at worst.

I don't think he makes this from a threat standpoint. He makes this as someone who does not want to see war, but will gladly fight if need be. What ever happened to America being that way? I think I know the answer. 1991. We have existed, by and large, in a hegemonic, single pole system since then. The times, they are a-changing.



Check...perhaps with the exception of the Islamic revolution in the 70s, which was a non-violent, voluntary United States withdrawal. Although Iran has been less than quiet, there statements have been in response to ours.

That's about all I have to say. G'head, hit me with your best shot.

As usual.

[chr35919]

israel = huge mistake.

[jimibadfish]

Originally Posted by defcon

Does anyone else get the feeling that relations with Iran will improve once the Bush administration is out of office?

It seems that they will. The Bush name is really hated throughout the world, but most specifically in the Middle East. Someone who has shown an openness to communicating and working though our problems has a much better chance of doing positive things for our relationship.

[Trippin4136]

Originally Posted by chr35919

israel = huge mistake.

You mean the U.S. relationship with Israel or if Iran was to bomb Israel?

[Crazy#41]

Possible? Bullshit? An excuse for War?

An senior Iranian source has told Israel Insider that a weekend earthquake in Iran measuring 5.0 on the Richter scale was actually an underground nuclear bomb test.

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=79

http://israelinsider.ning.com/profil...ogPost%3A11698

[seekupchuck]

Originally Posted by Trippin4136

Yess??? It's also the conservative newspaper in Israel.

You laugh at the JPost but you post dozens of idiotic blogs with idiots spouting off the end of the world.

The Mayans were idiots? Pretty arrogant.

They claim it will be a "new age" from what I have read. Not that the world will end...Or maybe I am getting my conspiracy sources jumbled in my bong fried brain.

Seriously, you should give the Mayans more credit.

[seekupchuck]

Originally Posted by Crazy#41

Possible? Bullshit? An excuse for War?



http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=79

http://israelinsider.ning.com/profil...ogPost%3A11698

I think it is possible. I also think it could be more campaigning for our next war(this is more likely to me)

[Trippin4136]

No, I claim you are idiotic for believing that on December 21, 2012 you're going to wake up to a world any different than the day before.