Am I the only one who agrees with Iran?

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 05:36 PM
link   
btw NATO brought khumeini into power to stop the expanision of communism in the middle east, i've said this over and over and over. and btw why exactly should the US protect israel, i'll tell ya why, and don't give me that "oh well Arabs kill Israeli's everyday and we have to protect" bull#, if that were true, then the US should go help the Palestinians who are getting killed by ISraelis every damn day, hell they can't even get water and food many times!!!!! anyhow US is protecting israel, because israel is the only ally of the US in the middle east, and it's like the US' finger in the middle east, and plus as long as israel is there then the region will stay destabilized and every once in a while america can step in as the "peacekeeper" to put more and more pressure on the countries of the middle east. now why exactly would you think Saudi Arabia is such a good ally of the US, well part of it is bussiness and corruption, and the other part is that they have American troops sorounding them everywhere, there are american troops in jordan, in Iraq, in Kuwait, in UAE, and in Saudi Arabia itself. the whole interest of the US is the OIL in the region, look what happened in the 1973 yom kippur war when Saudi Arabia and other countries practiced an embargo of oil on the US and Israel, Saudi arabia got a lttle money afterwards cuz the price of oil went skyrocketing, so Mr. president probably made a phone call to the emir and said this "i have unemployement in Kansas, in Texas, in Washington State" and the next day Saudi Arabia was buying over priced WWII weaponry or HOAX planes, and the money was gone, and a little after that the emir was assassinated i believe and his brother came to power, and his brother of course did as the big OIL companies and the US wanted and lifted the embargo, do you know why, because they were the one that helped him get to be the emir!!!

the only reason that the region is always termoil is that it has oil! every country that has oil have never been stable, or have servived as a democratic state, because everytime that happens a Western power would come in and keep making and supporeting coops, or not necessarily a western power buta superpower. for instance in Syria, syria does have oil, there were so many coups and revolutions that once a "president" didn't remain a president of nothing more than 2-3 hours, same thing in Iraq, same thing in Saudi Arabia and the other countries, the only country in the region that has remained stable has been Jordan, beceause it doesn't have any valuable resources other than potash which is not that important.

i mean do you really think that America needed to go to Iraq, for what "to spread democracy and free the Iraqi people", no they went there for Oil, they were too scared to go into Iran so they went in Iraq, period. i mean look at his, Iran is a dog that keeps barking an making noice, America is the dinosaur, and Iraw is the tiger, now Iraq was keeping Iran quiet because Iraq was the stronger one, and as long as both saddam and Iran were there, there were no problems, but the when you take Iraq out the dog startes Barking again becasue there is nobody to stop him, there is no tiger anymore, the dinosaur killed the tiger.




posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Yes. you are the only one who agrees with Iran. go live there and plague us with your pathetic presence no more.



posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by RR98
Yes. you are the only one who agrees with Iran. go live there and plague us with your pathetic presence no more.


you know only the pathetic and the unitelligent and the uninformed, and the poor and weak in language would use such open insults. I suggest you rethink your being here on this website, afterall enlightenment and denying ignorance can only be achieved with open minds and debate and communication, insults do not deny your or anybody's ignorance nor do they have an enlightening effect, therefore these insults you make are uncalled for, nor do they belong here.

thank you for your time,

once again, i suggest you rethink your being here.

[edit on 9/6/2006 by INc2006]



posted on Sep, 6 2006 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13

Originally posted by rich23
I had quite a good go with a thread asking WHY Iran is a threat to the US... when you ask people to come up with solid evidence, it's easier to see that there's very little solid stuff to go on. It's mostly propaganda and repetition...


So a country that sits on one of the largest known oil reserves desperately needs nuclear power? And you trust a dictatorship, run by Islamofascist Mullahs who are hell-bent on wiping Israel off the map and are the largest state-sponsor of terrorism, with highly enriched uranium? Sorry, but I don't trust a regime that throws their people in jail just for celebrating Valentine's Day, with nuclear weapons.

There's just no point arguing with people like you. You have your mind made up and you've decided that putting blind faith in these radicals is more important than guaranteeing the safety of millions of people from an Iranian nuclear attack.

God help us all if you get what you wish for, and God help us all if you're wrong on top of it all.



Is it really any different than people blindly believing what our gov't say?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasputin13

I don't think that the issue is Iran's rights as a state to have nuclear technology. I think the issue is more about their intentions for such technology. What overrides it all is the issue of TRUST. I do not trust Iran with nuclear technology.


I'm sure that when we first used "The Bomb" the whole world was thrilled about that. Do you think anybody really trusted the U.S. after dropping it on Japan? It's definitely is a deterent and I think that the only thing that prevented the U.S. from dictating it's terms on how the world should be runned is that the U.S.S.R. also had them. As for the theory that if U.S. hadn't develop "The Bomb" then some other country would and hold the world hostage is pure speculation. The only reason why other countries have them now is because we developed that neat little bit of tech. Granted, the Germans were trying to develop it but without the U.S.'s help they wouldn't have been able to before losing the war and either way, their scientist defected to or were made to "defect" to the U.S. And, though this is speculation, Bush's handling of the U.S. gov't isn't good politics he has set the stage for it to get worse and if he doesn't use nukes some nut down the line might. We just don't know. It scares me just as much that he's the president of the U.S. as Iraq wanting the right to develop nuclear tech. A question that an American friend of mine asked is "who is the U.S. to decide who should have nuclear tech (the only country, by the way, to use it)"? The U.S. was so worried that it would cause the deaths of millions of "Americans" but what about the rest of the world? What about all the Japanese deaths? I guess they don't matter because they are not Americans. I guess it all comes down to what is an acceptable number of deaths (especially if you can lessen your countries casualties). But I maybe wrong?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
Considering that nukes were invented in the USA, I would imagine that we have EVERY right to them. If you invented them, then you would have the right, but we invented it first. The technology had to be stolen before others could make them.


This isn't entirely true. Whilst the manhattan project was indeed conducted within the US, it was a collaborative project between the US, UK and Canada. Work on Nuclear weapons was already being conducted within the UK, but it was considered prudent to move development overseas, when the US finally 'became interested' in working on the project. A relatively accurate version of events can be found on Wikipedia:

Manhattan Project

Countries outside of the project simply had to figure out how to implement the concept, the concept was largely known to the international community who had physicists able to read.

Oh, as for why it was dropped on Japan? Yes, it was to end a war, but not in the ways people may first think. It was more a case of telling Stalin to stop advancing west and 'we won't be wanting your help in November'. So, one war was shortened by a few months, and the cold war started.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 06:31 AM
link   
Religion is the epitomy of mankind's ignorance. The iranian government takes religion and uses it for its own benefits. Any country that delves so deeply into the lies of Islam shouldnt exist.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 06:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by boydog


This isn't entirely true. Whilst the manhattan project was indeed conducted within the US, it was a collaborative project between the US, UK and Canada. Work on Nuclear weapons was already being conducted within the UK, but it was considered prudent to move development overseas, when the US finally 'became interested' in working on the project. A relatively accurate version of events can be found on Wikipedia:


Countries outside of the project simply had to figure out how to implement the concept, the concept was largely known to the international community who had physicists able to read.

Oh, as for why it was dropped on Japan? Yes, it was to end a war, but not in the ways people may first think. It was more a case of telling Stalin to stop advancing west and 'we won't be wanting your help in November'. So, one war was shortened by a few months, and the cold war started.


Well done for correcting the ignorance of others - like so many things the UK generously gave the yanks (nuclear tech, supersonic flight, radar etc) it's all too often forgotten by our cousins.

As to the bombs - it's well-documented that Japan was discussing peace terms both internally and with the allies as soon as the bombing of the Japan mainland started (more japanese died in the area bombing of tokyo than died in both A bombs combined). The bombs were dropped to stop WW3 rather than end WW2, although they did hasten the end of WW2



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by donk_316
I just read a report on the recent visit of Irans president while he was in Malaysia and he makes some very valid points about



TEHRAN, Iran -- President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Tuesday challenged the authority of the UN Security Council as Iran faces a deadline to halt its uranium enrichment and he called for a televised debate with U.S. President George Bush on world issues.
The Security Council has given Iran until Thursday to suspend enrichment, a process that can produce either fuel for a reactor or material for weapons.
"The U.S. and Britain are the source of many tensions," Ahmadinejad said at a news conference. "At the Security Council, where they have to protect security, they enjoy the veto right. If anybody confronts them, there is no place to take complaints to.
"This (veto right) is the source of problems of the world. ... It is an insult to the dignity, independence, freedom and sovereignty of nations," he said.
Ahmadinejad rejected any suspension of enrichment, even if UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan asked for it during an upcoming visit to Iran.
"The use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is the right of the Iranian nation. The Iranian nation has chosen this path. ... No one can prevent it," he said.
Iran last week responded to a Western incentives package aimed at getting Tehran to roll back its nuclear program. Iranian officials said the Islamic country did not agree to halt enrichment -- the key demand -- before engaging in further talks. continues


And the fact he wants to have a debate with Bush Jr is awesome..Ofcourse the blundering baboon would never agree to it as he obviously could string enough words together to HAVE a debate. but i digress.

the report i read:
ctv.ca

mod edit to use "ex" tags instead of "quote" tags
Quote Reference.

[edit on 3-9-2006 by sanctum]

Mod Edit: CAP title

[edit on 3-9-2006 by kinglizard]


I agree.
Here in America the media is controlled before it ever comes into the country. Most of the story's that we hear have been from a "One Sided" view, and that one sided view has to do with Israel/America. We do not hear that it is Israel who has taken over the west bank, with mass murder, and torture. We hear that Israel is "Defending" the west bank. In the first place you cannot defend that which is not yours and that is the reason for the fighting in the first place. We hear that Hezbolla has "Kidnapped" an Israli Soldier yet How can you kidnap someone who has entered your territory illegally? No the truth is that Israel has 1000's of lebanese in their dungeons that they have refused to let go for decades. The lebanese "captured" a soldier who crossed into thei terrirory.

So whay is it O.K. for Israel to have WMD's but it's not O.K. for Iran to produce Uranium?
Doesn't Iran have a right as a free people to do whatever they want as long as they are not trying to hurt someone else?
In this country "One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. it has everthing to do with what kind of words you are speaking in your media.
Here are some good links to go check out If you want to be De-Programed from In-doctrinated propaganda put fourth by the Nazi Influenced Bush Order.

tvnewslies.org...
video.google.com...
news.sky.com...
english.pravda.ru...

[edit on 7-9-2006 by chrestos]



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by nephyx
Religion is the epitomy of mankind's ignorance. The iranian government takes religion and uses it for its own benefits. Any country that delves so deeply into the lies of Islam shouldnt exist.

So does bush
he stated that god told him to invade iraq

Not to mentions all the things that he does in the name of god,god speaks to him
so he has said numeros times, does that mean united states should not exsist?
Using the man up stairs is done all over the world, remember the crusades? remember how many people died then?
I guess we should let bush the crusader preach to us about religios fanatics when he is one.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 07:38 AM
link   
yeah.. kill em all is basically what i say. Anymore questions smart guy?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 08:34 AM
link   
I can't figure out which is worse... militant religious nutters or militant atheist nutters.

Nephyx, you overestimate your won rightness and importance in equal measure.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:07 AM
link   
Originally posted by nephyx



Any country that delves so deeply into the lies of Islam shouldnt exist.



I disagree. I think that the United States of America should be given a chance to reform itself through the election of responsible leaders.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:24 AM
link   
But Mr. Lear... what are the chances of that actually happening in the US? I'd agree with George Carlin that "these guys are there to make you think you have a choice. You don't. None of these rich (expletive deleted) cares about you."

Plus there's increasing evidence that since the introduction of paperless voting machines, elections have been rigged to perfection in favour of the Republicans.

Mind you, this is all hideously off-topic...



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Originally posted by rich23



But Mr. Lear... what are the chances of that actually happening in the US?



Zero. But hope springs eternal for the ignorant.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Phew. Had me going there for a second or two.

But this can't be a one line post, so I have to fill this space with something.... how about this ludicrous fake?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 05:13 PM
link   
You still don't get it do you..

Who is anyone to judge what is "right" and what is "wrong" do you think these words have meaning to the thousands of lives that have been lost in these sensless battles? Do you think our american government gives a flyinhg F@#$ about there lives. Please, Please spare me the relious nonsence. I AM A CHRISTIAN and I HAVE NEVER wished any harm to come onto ANY PERSON OF THE ISLAM nor jewish faith. It is when you give people NO WHERE ELSE TO TURN BUT THERE RELIGIONS FOR HELP WHEN YOU CREATE THESE ACTS OF "TERRORISM". It IS OUR LEADERS WHO WANT these wars for the Rights to the Oil and to make money off the war. Who do you think builds the weapons?? WAR= MONEY for big corps. in the Us. This world makes me sick to my stomach and I tell you what If I didn't have to be here for my loved ones I would have offed myself A LONG LONG time ago. Sorry for such an unorganized rant but people who havnt had the experiance of being in other peoples shoes should open there mouths about what is right and what is wrong. I love america and what our forefathers stood for, what we have become as a nation is embarassing and sorry.



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 10:22 PM
link   
You know, if we irradiate Iran then we won't have to worry about their nuclear program, or their state sponsored terrorisim, nor thier constant threats towards Isreal.

But since the US is hated by so many, no matter what we do it will be wrong.

PS while we are lobbing a few nukes, we should show N. Korea what a real nuke program looks like and send a few that way...




posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 11:08 PM
link   
The question should be, Why should a soverign nation have to justify its domestic policy to the rest of yhe world based on fearmongering by the USA?



posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Iran doesn't have yo...all they have to do is withdraw from the NPT.

It is also the UN (US, Russia, China, Britian, France and Germany) who want Iran to stop enrichment until it can be determine it is for 'peaceful' purposes.

Being a signatory of the NPT REQUIRES it.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join