False Fears About Iran

[barman]

You really see it that way? I think the world relies on us.

Get over yourself (and perhaps ourselves).

It's reasonable to say that at least 99% of the world's population outside the USA averages less than eight seconds a day even thinking about "us".

They are way too busy living their own lives in their own worlds with their own people to be spending much time thinking about what's going on with the people in PA, FL or TX USA

 

[ScottL]

You know what they say about history dont ya Scotty??? As far as being a force for good, yhea, its easy to say that... hell i think thats even the Navy slogan now, oh wait thats a "world force for good". Good is an ambiguous term thou isnt it? We are good to you if you stay in line and do what you are told. Iran isnt allowed to pursue a nuclear technology because some other nation told them they werent "good" enough to have one. We are good to allies and people who have the same interest as us. Those that dont, are enemies. Even thou we employ many of the same tactics as those that we condemn to be bad, yet we are good? Who says we are good and who says who are bad? The ones with the biggest guns and the petrol dollar. If this isnt the pinnacle of circular logic, what is (besides the bible anyway)?

Good, as in, "If an earthquake hits you we will send aid," or, "We'll maintain the world's strongest army, but we would rather not have to fight." -- vs Evil/Bellicose, as in, "We will foster terrorism around the world to achieve our goal of a Shia Islamic crescent." Good, as in, "We will develop nukes as a deterrent to evil," vs Evil, as in, "We will develop nukes to threaten and blackmail the rest of the world."

 

[ScottL]

A career officer in the military who actually disagreed with Ron Paul on other issues says Ron Paul is right on Iran. The head of the mossad and Benjamin Net also agree... but what do these guys know? We got guys on here who know better. Comedic fucking gold.

This actually goes against the arguments you and BM often make about a large conspiracy that funnels money to keep a military beast in power. Just like you and I, people often disagree.

By the way the former Mossad director has a beef with Netanyahu over his removal.

 

[Willie99]

those are orgs in Palestine and Lebanon that Iran has denied supporting. of course we say they do so I guess that's who you'll believe? I've learned to trust nothing that the govt tells me as truth and Iran is probably the biggest victim of terror from the West yet they don't attack back nor do they talk about getting revenge for the 1953 coup or the dozens of dead leaders, scientists, and citizens taken out by US-led opposition in the past several years.

we played this he said, she said game with Iran's neighbor and ended up with egg on our face and exposed as liars, further weakening our reputation in the region and the world. We're going down the exact same road here and will likely end up with the results...kill a bunch of brown people and accuse them of deeds they didn't do....destabilize the region even more and never allow the accusers their day in court like we allow our own citizens.

they deny it, well that's that

did you know there are no homosexuals in Iran? I suppose you believe that to?

we may not always have reliable intel, but us >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Iran

 

[ScottL]

It's even more fun and certainly more expedient when the guy just runs his mouth at the local bar about how he would love to one day pull a bank robbery and then two other guys stand up and shoot him dead just for talking that shit.

Maybe you should drink that Xanax Daiquiri a few hours earlier so it reaches your fingertips before dark.

 

[ScottL]

While we often have Extremely Differing perceptions about life as we know it, you've hit this one out of the park, New England

Actually, it's equivalent to the posts he used to make at 5:30 AM when you often stalked and accused him of being drunk off his ass multiple times. But keep the continue.....

 

[ScottL]

Get over yourself (and perhaps ourselves).

It's reasonable to say that at least 99% of the world's population outside the USA averages less than eight seconds a day even thinking about "us".

They are way too busy living their own lives in their own worlds with their own people to be spending much time thinking about what's going on with the people in PA, FL or TX USA

ayuh,er,ahnah..... As in, your response has nothing to do with my statement that much of the world relies on America, which is actually quite true.

I'm sure not many in America spend 8 seconds a day thinking about how Israel saves the lives of countless American troops by developing better body armor and tank protection in a factory on a kibbutz. But that is also true.

Oh, and in Syria those currently being slaughtered are shouting, "Where are you America?"

And the Taliban refuses to negotiate with Karzai. They want to talk directly to America.

You know, America, the country that allows you to sit safely at home while spouting nonsense and leftwing delusion on the net.

 

[rolltide]

ayuh,er,ahnah.....

Walaikum Salam

 

[barman]

Walaikum Salam

heh

 

[russ1945]

So you're ready to endorse the U.S. military invasion of mainland China, North Korea and the core countries of the former USSR? This is an interesting stance for someone who purports to eschew violent responses.

What I eschew is living in ignorant bliss.

 

[fletchisrhsm]

The United States of America has every right to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. You make it sound like Iran owns the damn thing.

Transit passage is a concept of the Law of the Sea which allows a vessel or aircraft the freedom of navigation or overflight solely for the purpose of continuous and expeditious transit of a strait between one part of the high seas or exclusive economic zone and another. The requirement of continuous and expeditious transit does not preclude passage through the strait for the purpose of entering, leaving or returning from a state bordering the strait, subject to the conditions of entry to that state.

This customary navigation rule is codified in Part III of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.[1] Although not all countries have ratified the convention,[2] most countries, including the U.S.,[3] accept these customary navigation rules as codified in the Convention.

Transit passage exists throughout the entire strait and not just the area overlapped by the territorial sea of the coastal nations. The ships and aircraft of all nations, including warships, auxiliaries, and military aircraft, enjoy the right of unimpeded transit passage in such straits and their approaches.

Submarines are free to transit international straits submerged, since that is their normal mode of operation. The legal regime of transit passage exists in the most important straits for the international trade exchange and security (Strait of Gibraltar, Dover Strait, Strait of Hormuz, Bab-el-Mandeb, Strait of Malacca).[4]

I would love to see your reaction of a battle ship and air craft carrier from Iran were heading to Louisiana to do some trolling along the pan handle and gulf coast... of course respecting the 3-mile territorial sea boundary. If i was Amajizzamoff thats exactly what i would do too. I would muster up all the navy i could and patrol the US boundaries. Imagine on vacation and your swimming with your family and you have to explain to you kids why their is war ships roaming the beaches? People would be fucking out raged!!!!!!! Hilarious, the double standard we enjoy here as Americans

 

[fletchisrhsm]

Good, as in, "If an earthquake hits you we will send aid," or, "We'll maintain the world's strongest army, but we would rather not have to fight." -- vs Evil/Bellicose, as in, "We will foster terrorism around the world to achieve our goal of a Shia Islamic crescent." Good, as in, "We will develop nukes as a deterrent to evil," vs Evil, as in, "We will develop nukes to threaten and blackmail the rest of the world."

We developed nukes to wipe out city's... ask the Japanese about your theory of "deterrent to evil"

They do want to black mail the world and i would too... you know how many nations with nukes have been a victim of shock and awe since the blitzkrieg? None. Sounds like a good enough reason to me.

We do send aid, we are giving... no question there.

We foster terrorism to not foster sharia law but to meet economic and strategic objectives. Terrorism is terrorism in my book. Why you commit terrorism is inconsequential.

Strongest army in the world but dont want to use it? You dont believe that Scotty, thats just silly to suggest. War is profitable and its a great tool for many things... if you think our governemnt values human life or if any government values human life... why do most of the leaders do all they can to avoid it but grow so hawkish when they are elected? Why do they go to war on information of allegations and commit preemptive strikes? Those people over there, for the most part are animals. We know better and strive to be better but still roll in the mud with them... that makes it worse in my book.

 

[barman]

They do want to black mail the world and i would too... you know how many nations with nukes have been a victim of shock and awe since the blitzkrieg? None. Sounds like a good enough reason to me.

QFT....rock on brother ishsm

 

[SoonerNation]

I would tell Nutmenajad, if any American is killed by an Iranian terrorist, we will not hesitate to nuke a city in Iran....period

 

[barman]

I would tell Nutmenajad, if any American is killed by an Iranian terrorist, we will not hesitate to nuke a city in Iran....period

Cool...even in the backward back rooms of Iran, I'm confident that nutmenwadjab has an email address....Get it and fire off that warning so he'll know that you're Really, Really Serial

 

[russ1945]

And now a few words from Will Rogers:

"I have a scheme for stopping war. It’s this—no nation is allowed to enter a war till they have paid for the last one."

 

[rolltide]

I would tell Nutmenajad, if any American is killed by an Iranian terrorist, we will not hesitate to nuke a city in Iran....period

i'm pretty sure Iran's "Scott L" is cutting and pasting this sentence as proof of how the infidel americans want them dead. we'll have to see if the Tehran Times picks it up so we can prove it's legit

maybe in the TT it will mention a crowd of cross-burning Americans yelling "if any American is killed by an Iranian terrorist, we will not hesitate to nuke a city in Iran" to make it even more newsworthy? The Iranian Scott L would eat that one up...hook, line, and sinker!

 

[ScottL]

Sure RT, keep comparing the ideals and thoughts of 21st century Western values to 7th century barbarism. There are no Iranian Scott Ls. They aren't allowed freedom of thought. Thank God their government can't read their minds as they'd murder them in their beds just like those in North Korea who were filmed not crying hard enough at KJI's funeral.

You think you're so fucking bright. Smug yes, bright no. You know nothing about life in the Middle East. Yet you compare us to a culture that worships death. If you think YOUR government feeds you propaganda you haven't seen ANYTHING.

 

[ScottL]

Fletcher Penned,

We developed nukes to wipe out city's... ask the Japanese about your theory of "deterrent to evil"

And yet how many more would have died on both sides had we not dropped bombs in Japan?

They do want to black mail the world and i would too... you know how many nations with nukes have been a victim of shock and awe since the blitzkrieg? None. Sounds like a good enough reason to me.

And a good enough reason to not let a regime that worships martyrdom and lives not for this life, but the next one, ever possess the most destructive weapons.

We foster terrorism to not foster sharia law but to meet economic and strategic objectives. Terrorism is terrorism in my book. Why you commit terrorism is inconsequential. Strongest army in the world but dont want to use it? You dont believe that Scotty, thats just silly to suggest. War is profitable and its a great tool for many things.

That sounds like a twisted opinion to me, based upon assumption. The US is a state sponsor of terrorism? Nah, Iran is. Economic objectives? War COSTS money. This isn't the 1950s anymore and guns vs butter.

if you think our governemnt values human life or if any government values human life... why do most of the leaders do all they can to avoid it but grow so hawkish when they are elected? Why do they go to war on information of allegations and commit preemptive strikes? Those people over there, for the most part are animals. We know better and strive to be better but still roll in the mud with them... that makes it worse in my book.

Yep, I absolutely believe our government would rather not "murder brown people" as so many in here guffaw about on a daily basis. Unfortunately terrorists like to embed themselves inside their own populations. I find it interesting that you conclude your argument by saying these people are animals. Yet you want to do nothing as they procure the weapons that could threaten the civilized world? That might get you some Valentine's Day tongue from Barman but for the rest of us it makes no sense.
====================================
I see a lot of leaping to conclusions in these threads, always by the same posters. They've decided in their own heads that everything our government says is not to be trusted. That in every instance our military is used it is for evil purposes. Yet these very same people always speak of the nations with which we have fought as innocent victims who'd never harm anyone. Now why is that?

 

[fletchisrhsm]

I see it this way Scott. If Iran is a threat, then they will be dealt with by its neighbors. I highly doubt the Saudis want them getting a nuke either. Im in no way of supporting Iran getting a nuclear weapon, lets not get this twisted. All i do is put myself into their shoes and think about what has transpired and make my opinion based on the information i have and how i would react based on it. Iran has supported terrorism, because terrorism is low budget and creates the greatest multiplier effect if i can use an economic term here. Its the biggest bang for the buck (pardon the pun). We, as a nation have also supported all types of regimes and terrorists as well throughout the 20th century. While ill contend we as a nation do want peace and im sure our leaders do as well, i will also not forget that war is very profitable for all party's involved. Again, another example of a great bang for the buck. It creates jobs at the private sector level as well as militarily. It pushes new tech and not to mention provides the banks with more incentive to loan.

But its a broken window fallacy. Paying someone to build a missile then to destroy it and then buy another. If we dont go to war, how do we justify spending more in this arena? You ever notice the last 60 years we needed a boogey man? Islamofacism is just the latest. Is it a threat? Sure it is, but so are drug cartels from Mexico, i dont see us spending the energy and dollars into wiping them off the face of the earth with all we can muster from the empty US coffers. I think we are getting to the point where we have to start prioritizing what we can and cannot afford. Spending money and precious recources on things that might transpire in a region that is half way across the globe is a luxury we cannot afford any longer. Israel and the Saudis are more then capable of defending themselves if this threat is dire as you and other claim. Its time we step aside and let people hash things out.