It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tehran - Mega Capital of Iran - Photo Album (Bush doesn't want you to see this side of Iran!)

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by Conqueror
djohnsto77, you talked about only 1 executive order that is hand-picked to suit your argument. most of them are just daunting to look at (If you look at it unbiasly off course).


Why would Iran nuke london or Paris, or even israel for that matter

firstly the mullahs are so greedy and power hungry and no matter how nuts they are they know they are in a tense situation, they won't even dream of nuking ANYWHERE how do you reach thoughts like this????

Secondly, if the mullahs are really in fact religous fanatics and actually stand for the RHETORICS they say in speeches then nuking israel would be a great "sin" for them. Learn religous history and you will know what Iam talking about. Israel is sakred for the muslims too, not just jews and christians.


They'd love to nuke Tel Aviv, just read Siroos's posts! They make the best argument ever! He/she's advocating nuclear weapons and threatening Israel. I know they'd be unlikely to hit Jerusalem but Tel Aviv is a fair target for them.


What's wrong with my posts? Have I ever preached a pre-emptive strike against Israel? All I have said is that if the tiny, 50 year old state, with a population of a couple million would dare drop even one bomb on Iran, then Iran will respond with all force. Is that so strange? What kind of djungle laws do you follow where a small country should be allowed to have nukes, and a vast country with 70 million in population and several thousands of years of history and civilization should not - and were that small country should be allowed to bombard the big one, and the big one should not be allowed to defend itself or retaliate? That's absurd!

Iran has no reason to bomb Israel, and it has even less reason to bomb Paris or London. I repeat, the trouble maker is America. The agressor is America. The liar is America. The robber of the world's resources is America. I'm not against the American nation. And I respect the American constitution. But the America of today is not what the founding fathers wanted it to be. Washington, Jefferson and Franklin would be ashamed to be American today!




posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos
What kind of djungle laws do you follow where a small country should be allowed to have nukes, and a vast country with 70 million in population and several thousands of years of history and civilization should not - and were that small country should be allowed to bombard the big one, and the big one should not be allowed to defend itself or retaliate?



Err..... I don't know if you've noticed (in fact you probably haven't as you seem to have a very selective view of history) but Israel could have bombed Iran back into the stoneage at any time over the past 50 years (although that wouldn't have taken much). They haven't though. All this "they've got them and we need to defend ourselves" talk is complete and utter rubbish. Your "glorious" armed forces would have been wiped out in the blink of an eye if Israel ever had evil intentions against Iran. Quite simply, Israel couldn't give a # about Iran. All it cares about is surviving and the only way it has survived is by sitting under a nuclear umbrella that keeps away all of the nasty, repressive, despotic little regimes such as your own.

Iran, on the other hand has, since 1979, a history of warlike rhetoric that could easily be construed as demanding the destruction of Israel - in fact only a blinkered fool could see it as otherwise. Israel has never called for the destruction of Iran but you can never claim the same for the Ayatollahs.

Quite simply, Iran doesn't deserve nuclear weapons. It doesn't need them to defend itself as history has proven. The only reason it wants them is so that it can hold the world to nuclear blackmail (as has worked so well for North Korea).

Should the Iranian regime have used nuclear weapons in the war against Iraq. If your answer is no - it shows that you don't need them. If your answer is yes - it shows that you can't be trusted with them.



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 08:38 AM
link   
First off i would say around a year ago people never would of said Iranian regime, ir would of been iranian government. So screw it from now on its the American Regime.
I will just like to say that if america does take action agaisnt iran, they will pay for it. Iran is not like Iraq, they will fight back much more than iraq did, and if you think youve seen insurgence now, millions will die. America are seriously over stepping themselves on this one, they will not get the international backing as they did in iraq, plus i would think that other countires in the middle eat, or asia minor will also see america as a serious threat to them. They will help iran befor america goes on to the next country. Anyone who aggres with a war agaisnt iran are simpy "WAR MONGERS" and i hope that your soul rots in enternal pain, as you are consenting to millions of deaths just to see america take another step into becoming a empire.



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase
Surely you of all people knows how biased the mainstream media can be.

[edit on 1-2-2005 by AceOfBase]




Yes Ace I do know how biased the media can be..absolutely!




But, I also know that the citizens of Iran CAN NOT speak their mind freely.....I dare anyone of any origan especially iranian to stand in the public square in theran(spelling) with a sign saying "Down with the Iranian Government"...you won't be standing there long I can almost guarentee...



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by HardCore American
But, I also know that the citizens of Iran CAN NOT speak their mind freely.....I dare anyone of any origan especially iranian to stand in the public square in theran(spelling) with a sign saying "Down with the Iranian Government"...you won't be standing there long I can almost guarentee...


Here's one example:



BBC
A call from a US-based Iranian TV personality has prompted thousands of Iranians to protest for more freedoms.

People took to the streets of the capital, Tehran, and other cities on Sunday after Ahura Pirouz Khaleghi Yazdi urged protests across Iran.


I'm not saying there aren't problems but things are better than some people would like us to believe. It's certainly not at the point where a war is needed to 'liberate' the people.



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Ace I obvioulsy respect your opinion


But damn, you can't tell me the Iranian government does not have an iron grip on its people.

Tell me, if Iran was so free, why do they(Iranian government) have such a huge problem with Americans or any western nation for that matter. Why would they not want to be trading with us and interacting with us to better themselvesand ultimalty us.

If Iran is so free why do they call for the destruction of Isreal AND America.


How many news stations are there in Iran that are not either owned or controlled by the Iranian government?

If their nuclear program is so peaceful why lie about it? Why hide the fact that you are making nuclear weapons?

Ace...you know these facts as well as I do



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Yup. A lovely safe environment to protest in.
I think not.

Try looking up what happened to the students who protested a couple of years ago.

This is your progressive, democratic society.

news.bbc.co.uk...


Interesting fact:
Iran is second to only to China in the number of executions that it carries out per year.



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by HardCore American

Tell me, if Iran was so free, why do they(Iranian government) have such a huge problem with Americans or any western nation for that matter. Why would they not want to be trading with us and interacting with us to better themselvesand ultimalty us.


The reason they dont trade with the US might have something to do with the US sanctions against Iran that prevent trade between the US and Iran.

I don't think they have problems with Western nations other than America.


History Of US Sanctions Against Iran

Carter Administration

US unilateral sanctions against Iran began almost a quarter of a century ago after the take-over of the US embassy in Tehran (November 1979). President Carter responded immediately by issuing Proclamation 4702, imposing a ban on the importation into the US of Iranian oil. Ten days later, he issued Executive Order 12170, which blocked all property within US jurisdiction owned by the Central Bank and Government of Iran. In April 1980, President Carter issued Executive Order 12205, instituting an embargo on US exports to Iran (including restrictions on financial transactions) and Executive Order 12211, imposing a ban on all imports from Iran and prohibiting US citizens from traveling to Iran or conducting financial transactions there. Once the US hostages were released, the US revoked the previous executive orders, with the exception of the order blocking Iranian Government property within US jurisdiction, and committed the US not to intervene in Iran’s internal affairs.



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller
Interesting fact:
Iran is second to only to China in the number of executions that it carries out per year.


Interesting fact: Saudi Arabia is third and the US is fourth.

Another interesting fact: Since 2000, only five countries are known to have executed juvenile offenders: China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Pakistan, and the USA. 13 of these 21 executions have been in the USA. (link)


[edit on 1-2-2005 by AceOfBase]



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase


The reason they dont trade with the US might have something to do with the US sanctions against Iran that prevent trade between the US and Iran.


And why does Iran have sactions against them? Sponser of terrorism might be one reason


Originally posted by AceOfBase
I don't think they have problems with Western nations other than America.



And Isreal



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceOfBase
Since 2000, only five countries are known to have executed juvenile offenders: China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Pakistan, and the USA. [/url]


Read the link I gave again.

"The resolution also expressed concern at:

the execution of children

torture, as well as degrading punishments such as amputation, flogging and stoning

discrimination against women and girls

the persecution of political opponents, following last February's mass disqualification of opposition candidates in the run-up to parliamentary elections

discrimination against minorities, including Christians, Jews, Sunni Muslims, and in particular followers of the Baha'i faith, including arbitrary arrest and detention."


Personally, I couldn't give a crap about the US argument as I'm not American. I disagree with capital punishment full stop and my country doesn't use it. So you're onto a loser pointing out the failings of another country to justify those in another when you aim it at me.

As for Iran having great relations with everyone?

en.wikipedia.org...

Iran hates American interference in the region, but it spends plenty of time sponsoring terrorism and formenting revolt in it's neighbour's territories.

Something else that is pertinent to the article that you posted is the fact that the US does not normally execute children. It takes years for anyone to go through the system. Sure they might have committed the crimes when they were juveniles, but they certainly aren't juveniles when they are executed. I can only find records of one seventeen year old being executed in Texas. Iran executes them when they are children.

www.amnesty.org.uk...

[edit on 1-2-2005 by Leveller]



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 11:52 AM
link   
-quick post.

I just wanted to comment on the great pictures of Iran. Mostly the ones posted by FredT. They just reminded me of a quote from Bruce Lee.

"Art is never decoration or embellishment; instead, it is work of enlightenment. Art, in other words, is a technique for acquiring liberty."



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

as posted by
The Iranian people have never had any grudges against the Israelis, UNTIL NOW! While most Iranians probably would argue that Sharon's Israel have caused the Palestinian nation a whole lot of grief, we have always thought that the Israeli- Palestinian question did not concern us as much as the current Iranian regime wants it to concern us. But now that we see Israel's clear intentions against the peaceful Iranian nation, and its determination to prevent Iran to become a highly developed country in the region, at any cost, even if it would involve the death of hundreds of thousands of Iranians, and the destruction of our cities and infrastructure which we with such pain have pursued, then let it be known that the Iranian nation will regard Israel as the arch-enemy of Iran, and would Israel dare to attack Iran, then the Iranian nation will respond with any and all means.



Really? Admirable.
Question:
How long has the current Iranian government, since the fall of the Shah, proclaimed and/or had the agenda calling for the utter destruction of Israel?
RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL



The current Iranian regime does not recognize the Zionist state. That by itself is not a crime. A country reserves the right to not recognize another country's statehood. As for calling for its destruction, you have to understand that the Islamic Republic of Iran is the result of a massive and bloody revolution which took place in 1979 - only 26 years ago. The Iranian revolution of 1979 was of the same calibre as the French and Russian revolutions. It has proved to be a natural phenomenon that these kind of big revolutions are followed by an initial phase when the most radical and reactionary forces prevail. Such was the case in Russia and France, and such was also the case in Iran. Iran went through this initial post-revolutionary phase when the most ardent and zealous reactionaries reigned. This period lasted up until shortly after the end of the Iran-Iraq war and the death of Ayatollah Khomeini. (It should be mentioned here that directly after the revolution, Iran was ruled by a mixture of leftist, religious and semi-nationalist elements. But this period did not last long as the Ayatollah Khomeini managed to isolate these elements and secure a theocracy instead.)

Then came the second phase which I would call the first phase of the pragmatic revolutionaries. During this phase and under the leadership of Khamenei and the presidency of Rafsanjani, Iran started to look at ways to reconstruct the country and understood that it could not afford to be isolated if it wanted to embark on the path of progress and reconstruction. It was during this period that the Iranian leadership started to pursue many projects which the Shah's regime had planned or initiated for Iran, but which Ayatollah Khomeini had condemned and rejected. One such project was Iran's nuclear programme.

Then came the third phase which was the period when the so called "reformists" dominated Iranian politics. The reformist camp recieved the overwhelming majority vote, and President Khatami recieved more than 70% of the vote. Iranians started to be able to express their political opinions in the open like never before. And new liberal newspapers were being published one after the other. These newspapers were getting bolder and bolder until they even dared to question the concept of the so called "Velayat-e Faqih" and its legitimacy. "Velayat-e Faqih" was really a concept that Khomeini promoted and what it means is that there will always be a supreme leader in the Islamic Republic who will have the role of being "God's representative" - I guess one can compare it to the role of the Pope. The reformist period began as Khatami became president in 1997. There is no doubt that the reformists managed to change and reform Iranian society to the better. As a result women dress in thight jeans, were high-heeled shoes, makeup, and fashionable attire, and more and more of them show off more and more hair - Today a loose-sitting scarf showing off 70% of the head and hair is sufficient. Youngsters are once again able to listen to any kind of music without being harassed, and should some hard-core religious moral freaks bug them then all they need to do is to pay them a few bucks and they'll be left alone. Starbucks-like coffeshop chains have opened up in Tehran were youngsters go to flirt with the opposite sex. (Gays have their own clandenstice places to meet) You can basically find anything from the west that your heart desires in Tehran today. Alcohol is served freely in parties although its officially against the law to consume unless you're a non-Muslim. As for the things that are still not allowed, the regime just looks the other way. While the most ardent reformists want to lift the ban on many things, and many of them are even against any kind of dresscode, even the hardliners have realized that they can't go on and deprive the masses and especially the youngsters from having and doing a lot of the things that have been forbidden.

Rafsanjani is a businessman more than he is a politician. He speaks a lot without thinking of the aftermath. Most of the radical things he has said, should not be taken seriously. What he said about the bomb and Israel was fiercely critisized by many members of the Iranian parliament.

But I would like to know why Israel can threaten to bomb our nuclear reactors and military bases, endangering the lives of hundreds of thousands of Iranians, and there is no remarks about that, and then it's so horrible that Rafsanjani talks about using the bomb against Israel. It should be emphasized here also that Rafsanjani did not suggest an Iranian pre-emptive strike against Israel for no reason at all. He was responding to Israeli threats when he suggested that Iran should have the option to use the bomb against Israel.



Another question:
How many within Iran seek and desire the ability to freely vote in their government leaders and as such, are seeking to overthrow the current Mullah regime?


First of all we do have a democratic process in Iran where the president, the parliament, the senate, the governors of the provinces and the assemblies of the municipalities and villages are elected by the people. However, there are currently strict restrictions on who will be allowed to run. For instance, supporters of the restoration of the monarchy, communists, and any person who opposes the constitution of the Islamic Republic are not currently allowed to run. So basically anyone who opposes the theocracy is not allowed to run. But as long as you respect the constitution of the theocracy you reserve the right to run for political office. So while Iran is indeed a well functioning democracy, it is a very restrictive one.

Nobody can really tell how many percent of the Iranian population opposes or supports the current system. One can only guess. My perception of where we stand in this regards, is that while the overwhelming majority of the population - perhaps at least 70-75% - objects to the hardliners, and also object that the priests should have political power to the extent they do today, they are not willing to allow another revolution to happen. And they are ABSOLUTELY NOT willing to allow any foreign attack or invasion of any kind. I can assure you with 1000% confidence that any attack against Iran - however small it may be- will cause the masses to rally behind this regime like never before. Iranians are very nationalistic, and an assault against their territory will cause their nationalist sentiments to flare to such an extent that it will know no boundaries.

The Iranian population do also lack any and all faith in the opposition groups. Most Iranians consider the opposition, from the right to the left, and from monarchists to secular republican nationalists and racialist ultra-nationalist extremists, to be a bunch of incompetent selfish hypocrites, crooks and/or traitors. So while the population are not thrilled with what they have they are not at all eager for any DRASTIC change. This is why it has been so difficult for the opposition to rally the masses time and time again. We have seen demonstrations and riots rock Iranian cities from time to time - especially during the hot summer months (That's usually when it happens for some reason) But most of these demonstrations have consisted of only a few thousand youngsters who have rioted, and then their supporters of mostly middle class Iranians circling around in their cars and honking their horns. The masses though just ignore these incidents.

Iranians want change for sure. But they don't want a drastic change at the time - they want reform and they want it from WITHIN Iran. And the last thing they want is any kind of foreign intervention. Unlike mainstream Americans, Iranians, and in particular the young ones, are very well-read, intellectual and politically aware. They have therefore understood that if they do not want to repeat the mistakes of the past, they are better off being patient and allow the Iranian society to evolve gradually and naturally at its own pace and WITHOUT FOREIGN INTERVENTION of any kind. What the U.S. and Israel are doing right now is only serving the radical forces within the regime and even re-radicalizing those hardliners who had began to soften up.



And yet another:
How large is the Movement of Iranian Students and their calls for Regime Change in Iran?


Again it's difficult to provide numbers or %. I can say this though that while those who were calling for a REGIME-CHANGE, meaning that they are secularist, were a small minority during the heydays of president Khatami's reformist movement, they are a much larger group today because they feel betrayed by the reformist movement's inability to gain more control over the executive powers of the government. What the west has not clearly understood though is that most of the groups that make up this student movement, are so called "Islamic" student organizations, and many of them do not oppose the system as a whole but demand genuine reforms. Some exile opposition groups have tried to make it appear as if these student groups in Iran are supportive of their poltical agenda, but this is not the case. I'm confident that there is a remarkable political evolution taking place inside Iran which will eventually produce the best possible alternative to the current situation, and if that alternative will not mean an immediate change of the constitution and the abolishment of the theocracy, it will nevertheless be an alternative which will be most progressive and liberal, and it will bring about the reforms which will allow Iran to solve most of its current pressing problems. And eventually it will lead to a secular state and democracy. The worst thing that could happen now is to disrupt this evolution by attacking Iran and forcing a new regime upon the Iranian people. Such a regime will not be regarded as legitimate and will not enjoy popular support, and such a situation will only lead to more turmoil and political upheaval down the road.



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by Conqueror
All your arguing cannot answer this simple question:

WHY IS IT THAT THE U.S OF A HAS THE RIGHT TO OVERPOWER ANY OTHER COUNTRY THAT IT DOESNT REALLY LIKE ( OR FOR WHATEVER REASON)

It is not your God-given right

It is not your supreme racial right

In fact, guess what............... YOU DON'T HAVE ANY RIGHT TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT

If u can prove me wrong, prove me wrong in one sentence not give me random brainwashed material from your brainwashed head

[edit on 31-1-2005 by Conqueror]


The United States Constitution gives that sole power to the Congress of the United States and the sole power to execute that power to the President of the United States.

Appropiate Duties of Congress:


To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;


Powers of the President:


The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.


These powers are granted soley to these government branches by the People of the United States.



And you actually believe that nonsense???



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by HardCore American
Ace I obvioulsy respect your opinion


But damn, you can't tell me the Iranian government does not have an iron grip on its people.



People are a lot freer in Iran than your regular brain-washing outlet in the U.S. would want you to believe! Sure, you may not express any kind of threat or hostility against the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, but then I doubt that you can really do so in the U.S. today without having the FBI knocking on your door. In any case it's none of your business what goes on in Iran or not. It's up to us Iranians to take care of our own affairs - definitely not up to a "Hardcore American" (lol!!!)



Tell me, if Iran was so free, why do they(Iranian government) have such a huge problem with Americans or any western nation for that matter. Why would they not want to be trading with us and interacting with us to better themselvesand ultimalty us.


No wonder you people vote for Bush! Uhm....It seems that you have missed that important part called U.S. sanctions against Iran. First of all I suggest that you do your homework a little better. Iran has excellent trade relations with virtually every Western nation except the U.S. - Are seriously telling me that you didn't know that? You know the reputation of the intelligence of mainstream America is a big issue in much of the world right now - especially after you voted for Bush a second time. So why don't you try to make an effort to impress us instead. Take no offense - just a little sarcasm. But seriously, Iran has very good trade relations with all Western countries except the U.S. and it has been that way for many years now. Iran is not the problem. Iran has expressed that it will be ready to negotiate with the U.S. about establishing normal relations under certain conditions. And these conditions are very reasonable. The most important of these conditions is that the U.S. returns the billions of dollars of Iranians assets which it kept after the relations were cut in 1979. Just to give you one example, the government of the Shah had paid the U.S. more than $20 billion for spare parts and weapons. The U.S. just kept the money and delivered nothing. Another condition was that the U.S. would respect Iran's total independence and refrain from any kind of interference in Iran's internal affairs, and that the U.S. would regard Iran as an equal instead of continuing its arrogant attitude. And there were some other conditions. The U.S. put forth its conditions as well, and among the most important ones were that Iran should recognize the Zionist state of Israel, and that Iran should cease all its nuclear activities. So, that was it and no more negotiations. By having these two conditions, the U.S. demonstrated to Iran that it was not willing to accept Iran's condition that the U.S. never interfere in Iran' internal affairs. Whether or not to recognize the Zionist state, and whether or not to pursue its nuclear activities, are indeed Iran's internal affairs.


If Iran is so free why do they call for the destruction of Isreal AND America.


First of all - freedom has nothing to do with calling for the destruction of someone else. The U.S. calls for the destruction of all terrorists or so called "terrorists", should it therefore not be considered free? I don't understand your logic. Second of all, Iran is not calling for the destruction of anyone. Any such remarks in the past against Israel was a revolutionary flavoured rhetoric and did not represent or come from the entire establishment of Iran. Iran does not recognize the existence of the Zionist state. That's no crime, and they have every right to not do so. Many people around the world do not recognize the Zionist state, including some Jews. Iran has never officially called for the destruction of the U.S. - If they chant "Death to the U.S." in demonstrations, it doesn't mean that this is the official stand of the Iranian regime.



How many news stations are there in Iran that are not either owned or controlled by the Iranian government?


Quite a few actually - I don't have the exact number. But more than 10.



If their nuclear program is so peaceful why lie about it? Why hide the fact that you are making nuclear weapons?

lol! Hardcore American, now I know for sure that you voted for Bush. I think you have confused the term "peaceful" with military purposes. You see, Iran is saying that they are not pursuing nuclear weapons. They're saying that they're pursuing a nuclear programme for peaceful purposes, meaning that they are doing it to meet their future energy demands and not to make bombs. The IAEA says that there is no evidence or proof pointing towards that Iran is pursuing a military purpose with its nuclear programme, and that Iran has not violated any standards or agreements so far, and that Iran has the right to pursue a peacefule nuclear programme. It's the U.S. and Israel who keeps insisting, without any proof or evidence, that Iran is pursuing a military purpose programme.

Ace...you know these facts as well as I do



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by HardCore American

Originally posted by AceOfBase


The reason they dont trade with the US might have something to do with the US sanctions against Iran that prevent trade between the US and Iran.


And why does Iran have sactions against them? Sponser of terrorism might be one reason


Originally posted by AceOfBase
I don't think they have problems with Western nations other than America.



And Isreal



Hardcore American - Your beloved U.S. sponsors terrorism too if Iran does! Didn't the U.S. sponsor the Contras against the Socialist Sandinista regime which came thorugh a popular revolution against the corrupt U.S. puppet Somoza? Do you remember the Iran-Contra deal? While the U.S. (The land of the free and brave!) armed Saddam Hussein to the teeth, including chemical componds used for chemical weapons which he used against the Iranians and the Iraqi Kurds, the U.S. were secretely selling weapons to the Iranians and funding the Contra guerilla/terrorist organization in Nicaragua with the money. Talk about being rotten!!

Iran is supporting Hamas and Hezbollah in their struggle against Israeli occupation. I think that is more legitimate than to support a terrorist/guerrila group against a regime which came to power through a POPULAR revolt.

The U.S. has also been supporting the Iranian terrorist group MKO (Mojaheddin-e Khalq Organization) A fascist-like marxist organization hated by all Iranians which sided with Saddam Hussein and fought the Iranian army in the Iran-Iraq war. The MKO is ironically on the State Department's list of outlawed terrorist organizations - Yet the U.S. is supporting the group and now has provided them with new bases in Pakistan and Iraq. The MKO is guilty of having killed many Americans in Iran during the Shah's time. It's time to wake up Hardcore American. Your government is not as holy as they have brainwashed you and your relaitves to believe. On the contrary, it's a government who is guilty of having caused misery, death and destruction in many places in our world. It's a government who only serves the interest of a few corrupt and greedy super-wealthy gangsters at the expense of the hard-working enslaved masses in America and the innocent citizens of countries like mine, whose lives have been tragically affected many times by their actions.



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller

Originally posted by AceOfBase
Since 2000, only five countries are known to have executed juvenile offenders: China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iran, Pakistan, and the USA. [/url]


Read the link I gave again.

"The resolution also expressed concern at:

the execution of children

torture, as well as degrading punishments such as amputation, flogging and stoning

discrimination against women and girls

the persecution of political opponents, following last February's mass disqualification of opposition candidates in the run-up to parliamentary elections

discrimination against minorities, including Christians, Jews, Sunni Muslims, and in particular followers of the Baha'i faith, including arbitrary arrest and detention."


Personally, I couldn't give a crap about the US argument as I'm not American. I disagree with capital punishment full stop and my country doesn't use it. So you're onto a loser pointing out the failings of another country to justify those in another when you aim it at me.

As for Iran having great relations with everyone?

en.wikipedia.org...

Iran hates American interference in the region, but it spends plenty of time sponsoring terrorism and formenting revolt in it's neighbour's territories.

Something else that is pertinent to the article that you posted is the fact that the US does not normally execute children. It takes years for anyone to go through the system. Sure they might have committed the crimes when they were juveniles, but they certainly aren't juveniles when they are executed. I can only find records of one seventeen year old being executed in Texas. Iran executes them when they are children.

www.amnesty.org.uk...

[edit on 1-2-2005 by Leveller]


Let's say we have the most evil regime in the world in Iran. Too bad. But it's no business of the U.S. The U.S. is a sick society and a society with much corruption and injustices. It's a society that is in the process of collapsing. The U.S. is not at all as free and democratic as it wants the world to think it is. It's a two party system where one party is a green apple and the other is a red one. Very little in difference. Instead of calling them the republican and the democratic parties they should call them "The Party of the Greedy" and "The Party of the Even More Greedy".

Many things in Iran are not desirable right now, but it's our country and we decide what to do with it. Not the U.S. and nobody else. Do we butt in to tell you what to do with your country? You have so many problems in the U.S. that I suggest that you start focusing on that instead. Social Security, a nation heavily in debt (The most indebted nation in the world by far!) An economy which is in such a mess that its beyond repair. An educational system which is of an alarming poor quality. The U.S. is also the only industrialized nation which does not have a national health insurance coverage. You have poverty and homelessness which I can guarantee you will get out of hand in a few years the way things are going for you. Especiall when Social Security won't be around anymore. The poor are getting poorer and the few wealthy are getting wealthier. Corruption and greed is increasing and infecting every level of society. Clean your own home instead of expanding your empire under the pretense of exporting freedom and democracy!



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Siroos
Let's say we have the most evil regime in the world in Iran. Too bad. But it's no business of the U.S. Many things in Iran are not desirable right now, but it's our country and we decide what to do with it. Not the U.S. and nobody else. Do we butt in to tell you what to do with your country? Clean your own home instead of expanding your empire under the pretense of exporting freedom and democracy!


To bad you didn't actually read what you quoted. I'm not American.
But anyway. What gives Iran the right to try to influence the way other countries are run by sponsoring terrorism?
Isn't that exactly what you are preaching against the US?



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
Good job, Siroos for giving all this information on Iran


It is very clear from the facts, pictures(speak thousands of words) and all logical arguments that all the western propoganda is all bogus. I just wanted to make a plea to the people. If you are against this war on Iran, then please say something against those people who are here calling for war against it, even when it is very clear from all the evidence that there is no reason too. These people are no less than Nazis. There are so many people who hate Nazis. Why tolerate these neo-Nazis? Nip them in the bud. If you don't they're going to take you down into hell with them.


Indigo Child - It's up to the good people of the world to unite against the evil forces that are once again gaining strength and preparing to put the world ablaze. We the peoples of the all the world's nations must unite and together fight against the forces of fascism, opression, death and destruction.



posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller

Originally posted by Siroos
What kind of djungle laws do you follow where a small country should be allowed to have nukes, and a vast country with 70 million in population and several thousands of years of history and civilization should not - and were that small country should be allowed to bombard the big one, and the big one should not be allowed to defend itself or retaliate?



Err..... I don't know if you've noticed (in fact you probably haven't as you seem to have a very selective view of history) but Israel could have bombed Iran back into the stoneage at any time over the past 50 years (although that wouldn't have taken much). They haven't though. All this "they've got them and we need to defend ourselves" talk is complete and utter rubbish. Your "glorious" armed forces would have been wiped out in the blink of an eye if Israel ever had evil intentions against Iran. Quite simply, Israel couldn't give a # about Iran. All it cares about is surviving and the only way it has survived is by sitting under a nuclear umbrella that keeps away all of the nasty, repressive, despotic little regimes such as your own.

Iran, on the other hand has, since 1979, a history of warlike rhetoric that could easily be construed as demanding the destruction of Israel - in fact only a blinkered fool could see it as otherwise. Israel has never called for the destruction of Iran but you can never claim the same for the Ayatollahs.

Quite simply, Iran doesn't deserve nuclear weapons. It doesn't need them to defend itself as history has proven. The only reason it wants them is so that it can hold the world to nuclear blackmail (as has worked so well for North Korea).

Should the Iranian regime have used nuclear weapons in the war against Iraq. If your answer is no - it shows that you don't need them. If your answer is yes - it shows that you can't be trusted with them.


Leveller - as it is late here, I will respond tomorrow, because what you stated here really deserves a response since you are so incredibly incorrect in what you are saying that it's really astonishing! Iran if anyone needs nukes, and I'll let you know why tomorrow.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join