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.

 

Ahmadinejad invites Bush to speak at an Iranian University

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dallas
Copernicus, In this case I feel the USA Gov has an interest in Iranian nuclear affairs and being next door to the US I do too. Iran's actions in Iraq and the history of distrust between, actually hatred between Iran & US Govs has come to a point where there is no trust and no-way to feel confident a loose nuc or radio active wmd could not find it's way out of Iran and linger into north america.


You see, thats the viewpoint I dont agree with. Iran says they want nuclear power for peaceful purposes. USA dont believe them, and does the "i dont need no stinking warrant" gesture it has become infamous for globally.

What if the rest of us start acting the same way? I fear America, so should I decide that its best to attack USA just in case? You think so? Clearly you can see the scenario if all countries act like that. They are doing the law of the jungle on a global scale, attacking the weak for greed and profit.

The international rules are there for a very good reason, but Bush completely ignores them, much in the same way he ignores the constitution and calls it "just a damn paper".

You know as well as me that after Iran has been destroyed, there will always be a new target. Venezuela or North Korea is my bet, but nobody really knows. But the rest of the world will not accept one country attacking other countries without them having done anything. Not forever.

It doesnt stop the Bush administration though, because they dont need proof to attack countries. They just want a reason - any reason. They are acting just like rabid dogs.

Actually I shouldnt really blame the Bush administration since they are not the ones running the show, the shadow government is, but you know what I mean.


[edit on 29-9-2007 by Copernicus]




posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 09:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xfile
Bush has to be the worst public speaker ever elected president.Why people here have voted for this babbling buffoon twice is beyond me but certainly bodes badly for the future of this country.


There is no reason to insult the American public by accusing them of having elected Bush since they didn't in either of the elections.
We might raise the question why so many did vote for him but i don't want to deal with such depressing thoughts right now.



Originally posted by Dallas
Copernicus, In this case I feel the USA Gov has an interest in Iranian nuclear affairs and being next door to the US I do too.


The USA and Iran are on different sides of the Atlantic and since Iraq is not part of the United States ( despite Cheney and the gang's best efforts so far) lets not invent arguments....


Iran's actions in Iraq and the history of distrust between, actually hatred between Iran & US Govs has come to a point where there is no trust and


What actions of Iran in Iraq? Did you forget that it was Iraq who invaded Iran and that it was the US who deposed Mosadegh and installed the brutal Shah? Iranians may have good reason to hate or be suspicious of the US but US citizens have absolutely no reason that is grounded in fact.


no-way to feel confident a loose nuc or radio active wmd could not find it's way out of Iran and linger into north america.


But we have no evidence that Iran has made any nukes and if the Russians are giving them some that's not something the US can prevent given the Russian strategic arsenal... There really is no reason for Iran to try nuke the US as one won't change ANYTHING for Iran and will do miracles to serve as 'proof' that the US were right to fight this nonsensical war on terror.


There are some situations where lack of trust between two countries means little in world events, but in the wmd world -- with unproven security, it could mean the difference between life and death in the oodles and I'm not referring to Iran.

Dallas


I want to say something but since i can't really tell what your trying to say i guess i wont.

Stellar



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by StellarX
 


StellarX: "...I want to say something but since i can't really tell what your trying to say i guess i wont.

Stellar"

Yes, you are having some troubles understanding so I see. One point you made that I could understand, though you totally misinterrupted my meaning, was Iran. It's been news since 2004 that is the Insurgency inside Iraq and Iran's role in it. Or is that a Cheney move too.

I'd say more but you haven't said anything anyway warranting a response from me other than the few words above.

Dallas



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Copernicus
 


The present US administration has done little that I can support globally. I'm certainly no fan of Mr Bush or the rest of his monopolizers but times changed in 2001. Not suggesting it means it's OK to invade a foreign country that was not responsible for the attack, but what was principle world policy prior to 2001 needs review after 091101, perhap's through a body such as the UN?

I agree, the international rules are there for everyone, but they were written before 091101 and needs review perhap's a new global terrorism investigation and action plan to hold both the people and to a degree their country responsible for killing innocent people in other countries? The rules of pending or declaring War are no longer valid. Terrorists are here now.

Dallas



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dallas
I agree, the international rules are there for everyone, but they were written before 091101 and needs review perhap's a new global terrorism investigation and action plan to hold both the people and to a degree their country responsible for killing innocent people in other countries? The rules of pending or declaring War are no longer valid. Terrorists are here now.

Dallas


You know, thats WHY 9/11 even happened. Its an obvious inside job. Terrorists are here now, yes, but they are in the White House, not the middle east. 9/11 was carried out because they needed a large event like Pearl Harbor in order to make the public afraid of terrorists, so they could introduce lots of new laws to control people, like the Patriot Act. The constitution went out the window with 9/11, which is exactly what they wanted.

Dont believe me? I recommend the 9/11 coincidences documentary here.

Sorry, but its the cold, harsh truth of it.


[edit on 29-9-2007 by Copernicus]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Frankly, I cracked up myself when I saw this.


IMHO, I don't think there will be a war between U/S and Iran, it's just another new cold war era between them, history begins to repeat itself again.


[edit on 29-9-2007 by TheoOne]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheoOne
Frankly, I cracked up myself when I saw this.


IMHO, I don't think there will be a war between U/S and Iran, it's just another new cold war era between them, history begins to repeat itself again.



Yes, because nobody learns from history. And guess who pays the price? The people. You and me are going to be paying for this, because the leaders act like idiots.

Actually I take that back. Its very intentional - USA wants a war. So its not idiotic really, its the agenda that is being carried out.


[edit on 29-9-2007 by Copernicus]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Finally, Bush and 100 megatons on AF-1............a speaking opportunity I can get behind.
Will Akmadingdong and Osama be close?



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 01:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Copernicus

Guess which leader has courage and which one doesnt.


[edit on 28-9-2007 by Copernicus]


Yeah, because I'm sure Bush would be just as safe in Iran as Ahmadinejad was here...



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Herman

Yeah, because I'm sure Bush would be just as safe in Iran as Ahmadinejad was here...


Im guessing you havent even been to Iran with a statement like that.



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dallas
Yes, you are having some troubles understanding so I see. One point you made that I could understand, though you totally misinterrupted my meaning,


How did i misrepresent the fact that you seem to think that the Iranian state is involved in Iraq? Why would they have to become involved when the US actions is serving their interest so perfectly? Why would it be so hard for the US armed forces to seal the borders with Iran if a effort were made?


was Iran. It's been news since 2004 that is the Insurgency inside Iraq and Iran's role in it. Or is that a Cheney move too.


If your already wondering maybe it's time to go check what the military commanders serving in Iraq had to say about Iran's role in the insurgency?


I'd say more but you haven't said anything anyway warranting a response from me other than the few words above.

Dallas


If you say so!



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Is it just me that sees the inherent hypocrisy of people complaining about the possible involvement of Iran in supplying weapons to groups in Iraq, when the only reason its happening is because the US invaded Iraq on the pretence of a lie in the first place, attacking a soveriegn nation that had not, in any way shape or form attacked the US or even presented a credible threat to it?



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


No. I believe a lot of people have a hard time seeing the faults of their own country when debating this, and personally I think its because they dont know much about the other country except for what they see in their own country's mass media.

What we need to make this world a lot better is to get to know each other. Its very simple. Its difficult to hate entire races when you are friends with some of them.


[edit on 29-9-2007 by Copernicus]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Why the hell would Bush go to Iran?



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Ah Bush hasn't got the bottle to face the Iranians on his own.It wouldn't even be is choice. The people who run and map his life would say a big no, they would know he wouldn't be able to answer important questions. A lot of the problems we hear in regard to Iran are fabricated and it's just propaganda for a pretense of sanctions or future conflict. And we can't have a Muslim nation acquiring technology to match Israel can we. What would Israel do then? I hope Iran acquires nukes! Don't give me that crap about Iran saying they would nuke Israel because he's never said that, he's been misquoted lots of times by the propaganda machine.

[edit on 29uSaturday07/27/20 by paul76]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by paul76
A lot of the problems we hear in regard to Iran are fabricated and it's just propaganda for a pretense of sanctions or future conflict.


I keep seeing people present this argument. Do you know what the funny thing is? Hmmmm... I have yet to see anyone come up with one shred of verifiable proof that what is being said about Iran are "lies."

[edit on 29-9-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:47 PM
link   
I would love to see Mr. Bush going on public without a pre arranged hell yes crowd.
Here in the US.

Anybody really think that this man in the white house sitting as the leader of the "free world" will dare take a challenge by anybody with more speech power than him?

No way in a thousand years.



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Amadinejad went unarmed to the belly-of-the-beast (the USA) according to
his reckoning. so he's (absurdly) proposing that the US president reciprocate by coming unarmed into his country.

someone said 'gamesmanship'...right on!

IF the USA even entertained a notion of a President entering Iran
(a Axis of evil nation) on a diplomatic mission/speaking engagement
that action would "tell the world"... that the USA recognized the Islamic
Republic as an ~Equal~ and a 'trusted' and 'respected' nation.


errrrr.....maybe after another 20 generations



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Just dropped in to drop my 2 centavos.

CAJONES= Boxes
COJONES= this is the correct one.



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 05:22 PM
link   
My god--Mahmoud floors me with his hilarity. He looks perpetually stoned to me; some of this stuff he comes up with, maybe he IS stoned.

I almost laughed out loud reading that he invited Bush to come speak.

F



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join