Ayatollah Khamenei- U.S. won't bring Iran to its knees

Ayatollah Khamenei- U.S. won't bring Iran to its knees

uk.news.yahoo.com

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Saturday the United States would not be able to bring Iran to its knees in a row over sensitive nuclear work the West suspects is aimed at making bombs.

Khamenei also told the visiting head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog that Iran's nuclear file should be handled by the International Atomic Energy Agency not the U.N. Security Council, which has imposed two rounds of sanctions on Tehran.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Whats different about this , is that its the real power in Iran not the president this time but very defiant language:

"America's problem with Iran is beyond the nuclear issue," state television quoted Khamenei as saying.

"Americans are mistaken by thinking that by pressuring Iran over the nuclear issue they can break Iran. By bringing this and other issues to the fore, they cannot bring the Iranian nation to its knees," he said.

for the clerics to speak out they must be real p****d with the usa.

uk.news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by Harlequin


There's so much talk of war with Iran. I'm a little sick of it in fact. Then again, I've been providing news on it for some time...

Iran deserves nuclear power as much as the next country. If Israel, Pakistan, and India can have nuclear ARMS, why can't Iran have nuclear POWER.

There is the moral issue of nuclear technology as its so freaking dangerous to all life. In that sense, no one should be using it.

However, does a bully (nuclear armed countries) deserve to have the big stick while the others fight over how long they can use the swing set?

Equality my friends is a bitch, but fair.

AND the right thing to do. If the bushmen of Africa wanted a nuke, they'd have every right to pursue that as well.

Of course, someone is going to bring up the whole terrorist suitcase bomb scenario...I can feel it coming.

[edit on 12-1-2008 by biggie smalls]

reply to post by biggie smalls


if the rest of the world ? can have nuclear power why cant iran have the same????? because the rest of the world doesnt threaten on a continuous basis to wipe another country off the face of the earth and the rest of the world doesnt yet send power boats into the midsts of american ships and threaten to sink them with explosives and the rest of the world doesnt use proxy armies in iraq /afghanistan /lebanon and gaza to fight against us and our allies.if iran and its leaders acted like they were sane who would care if they had nukes? iran is another cuckoos nest---you remember that film involving jack nickleson getting his labotomy? so he'd settle down---if you like iran so much you should ask for citizenship there.

Originally posted by biggie smalls
Iran deserves nuclear power as much as the next country. If Israel, Pakistan, and India can have nuclear ARMS, why can't Iran have nuclear POWER.

I believe they don't deserve it because of their actions and terrorist links. Plus, I don't believe the ONE report which stated they had stopped their nuclear weapons program. I choose to believe the NUMEROUS previous reports which state the opposite. Some of their actions include providing money, arms & men to fight U.S. troops in Iraq. Also, they fund a few terror groups plus I still don't like Iran because of the Hostages they took many years ago.

There is the moral issue of nuclear technology as its so freaking dangerous to all life. In that sense, no one should be using it.

I think we need more nuclear power plants.

Equality my friends is a bitch, but fair.

Look at it this way.
Would you intentionally allow or want your neighbor to purchase and own a gun if it was known that he has previously killed someone will a gun? I would hope not. So why should we allow Iran to gain a nuclear weapon when by their previous actions and current words, they want to do harm to America and it's allies.

Of course, someone is going to bring up the whole terrorist suitcase bomb scenario...I can feel it coming.

Now that you mention it.........screw it, I'm tired of typing.

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Would you intentionally allow or want your neighbor to purchase and own a gun if it was known that he has previously killed someone will a gun? I would hope not.

I almost gave up when I read your post.

You do realize that the United States is THE ONLY nation to have nuked another country, right?

So we are the only nation who it is "known that he has previously killed someone will a gun."

Think about things before you post, friend.

Originally posted by cavscout
You do realize that the United States is THE ONLY nation to have nuked another country, right?

I don't like nuclear war or nuclear attack on a population center more than the next guy, I promise. But, the jury is still out, and will be forever, deciding whether nuking the two Japanese cities ended the war soon enough such that it actually cost less lives. There is no way to know, but there is a solid possibility of such situation.

One reason you trust another country that they resist the temptation to nuke somebody they don't like is because you know they are modern enough and reasonable enough. Iran is neither. It's the religious fanaticism of its leaders that raises a huge red flag for me.

I like Iran for its history and for ingenuity of its people. Theoretically, we don't have the right to decide who deserves to have nukes and who doesn't. However, it is squarely not in the interest of the US that Iran does. So screw the rest of the argument. Sorry, but I'm against that. Remember Xerxes

Originally posted by yahn goodey
reply to post by biggie smalls

 

if the rest of the world ? can have nuclear power why cant iran have the same????? because the rest of the world doesnt threaten on a continuous basis to wipe another country off the face of the earth and the rest of the world doesnt yet send power boats into the midsts of american ships and threaten to sink them with explosives and the rest of the world doesnt use proxy armies in iraq /afghanistan /lebanon and gaza to fight against us and our allies.if iran and its leaders acted like they were sane who would care if they had nukes? iran is another cuckoos nest---you remember that film involving jack nickleson getting his labotomy? so he'd settle down---if you like iran so much you should ask for citizenship there.

OK, and all of these "facts", have they not been defined by the U.S of A, by way of the pentagon, as well as Israel?

Please remember that US and Israel is all but technically at war with the muslim world since 9-11. That makes for a bit of conflict of interest when it comes to providing balanced information of their policy.

True, they have a lot of issues, beeing an old empire controlled by quite extreme islam. But if everyone around them stopped gnarling at them and instead reached out a hand - to start a meaningful dialogue - we could perhaps inspire them. We cannot get caught up in this "inevitable clash of civilizations" idea. So to get creative, what would it take from their part, for you to accept them as a partner in dialogue? And that is not a rhetorical question.

reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan


thanks friend for restoring your avatar of bush chenny and rumsfeld out for their driving party fun?----for whatever reason this one attracts my attention much better than the "last one" i had a hard time looking at without feeling quizzy and was kind of ? a turn off ?

Originally posted by cavscout
I almost gave up when I read your post.

You should have because it would save you grief later on.

You do realize that the United States is THE ONLY nation to have nuked another country, right?

So what? What does this have to do with the price of cheese?

So we are the only nation who it is "known that he has previously killed someone will a gun."

Ok, again, so what?
What point are you attempting to make? Instead of beating around the Bush (no pun intended), just say what you mean.

Originally posted by yahn goodey
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan

 

thanks friend for restoring your avatar of bush chenny and rumsfeld out for their driving party fun?----for whatever reason this one attracts my attention much better than the "last one" i had a hard time looking at without feeling quizzy and was kind of ? a turn off ?

You're welcome.
Sorry to make you feel quizzy.

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Ok, again, so what?
What point are you attempting to make? Instead of beating around the Bush (no pun intended), just say what you mean.

I can’t figure out if you really don’t understand or if you are just acting below your real IQ in order to get me to call you names, like stupid or retarded or something, in order to get me in trouble. Am I over or under estimating you? Are you that sneaky or are my initial impressions true?

Let me spell it out for you, just incase you really dont get it.

In a discussion about if Iran should be allowed to have nukes, you said that Iran should not be allowed to have nukes because you would not want your neighbor to have a gun if he had already shot someone in the past.

You used the gun to symbolize a nuke.

HOWEVER, Iran has never nuked anyone.

But the US HAS NUKED ANOTHER NATION.

So with your neighbor's gun parallel, you have stated that the US should not have nukes, and YOU HAVE IMPLIED THAT IRAN HAS MORE OF A RIGHT TO THEM THAN THE UNITED STATES.

Just think real hard about what you type before hitting the enter button and you can save yourself from these self defeating moments.

Originally posted by cavscout
You used the gun to symbolize a nuke.

HOWEVER, Iran has never nuked anyone.

And we should keep it that way by not letting them build one because they don't deserve it as stated in previous posts.
It's so simple.

So with your neighbor's gun parallel, you have stated that the US should not have nukes, and YOU HAVE IMPLIED THAT IRAN HAS MORE OF A RIGHT TO THEM THAN THE UNITED STATES.

Boy, you sure know how to read whats NOT actually written.
Look, it's simple. I will put it into terms even you can understand. Iran = bad thus they should not have it and America = good.

Just think real hard about what you type before hitting the enter button and you can save yourself from these self defeating moments.

Why do you talk about yourself in such a way? Pfft...

[edit on 12-1-2008 by cavscout]

reply to post by cavscout


Not defending or attacking anyone, but when you argue with somebody, it's better to say it this way, something like..."K? K." Hence you forgot to add the "K."

Lol, just thought I'd state it because it needed to be stated.

[edit on 12-1-2008 by TheoOne]

Originally posted by cavscout
No, I agree with you there. I just was wondering if realized how absolutely ridiculous and uneducated your neighbor with a gun parody made you sound.

Okay, thats YOUR opinion. I still think its valid. It's not my fault you don't get it. Perhpas you need a little more education.

Your making us look bad, kid.

Wow, I did not realize you are the spokesperson for 'us'.

WOW, is this grade school, or do they let you have computers at the group home?

Hey, I only responded in kind to your sly and utterly unnecessary comment.

OK, I get it, you really don’t understand what I was saying. It isn’t an act after all. I am very sorry for your condition and I wish you all the best in life. You keep your chin up buddy, you have nothing to be ashamed of!
There is nothing wrong with you, you are special.

You may want to ask your advocate to edit your writing before you post, k?

Here you go again with your sly, rude and unnecesary comments.
This is not very civil of you now is it? Oh well, I guess when you cannot make a decent point your only alternative is to demean the person you are talking to. Sad, just sad.

[edit on 12-1-2008 by 4thDoctorWhoFan]

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Here you go again with your sly, rude and unnecesary comments.

This is not very civil of you now is it? Oh well, I guess when you cannot make a decent point your only alternative is to demean the person you are talking to. Sad, just sad.

It was sad. Sad and unnecessary.

It was wrong of me to make fun of you in your condition, that is why I deleted my post entirely.

I really am sorry. You keep your special head up little guy, K? K.
(better Theo?)

[edit on 12-1-2008 by cavscout]

Originally posted by cavscout

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Here you go again with your sly, rude and unnecesary comments.

This is not very civil of you now is it? Oh well, I guess when you cannot make a decent point your only alternative is to demean the person you are talking to. Sad, just sad.

It was sad. Sad and unnecessary.

It was wrong of me to make fun of you in your condition, that is why I deleted my post entirely.

I really am sorry. You keep your special head up little guy, K? K.
(better Theo?)

Thanks for continuing to prove my point.
We do all enjoy sly, rude and useless posts so keep up the good work, K.
Pathetic......

[edit on 12-1-2008 by 4thDoctorWhoFan]

Yahn, what a joke so its alright for the terrorist state Israel to have hundreds of nukes and threaten to use them. its ok for the US and its allies to threaten and invade other countries but no one else.

Get it into your head mate the axis of evil consist of the UK/USA/ISRAEL end of story they are the only countries on this planet that attack other nations on a regular basis and if you want to stick the boot in expect to get it back.

I really do hope the US/Israel attack Iran because they will get a real ass wuppin which they both richly deserve.

4th, so you think the US is good do you, well I suppose even the Nazis had their supporters. You are either incredibly naieve or a blind patriot either way you and you kind will loose big time in this conflict.

How can one be proud of a nation that murders men, women and children on a daily basis is beyond me and beyond all humanity. A nation that is corrupt beyond belief and one that is two jack boots way from being a full blown Fascist State.

If you wish to ally yourself to the criminal element that is your choice as long as you are prepared to face the consequences.