Warmonger Thread

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by Aeons

 

The europeans were also immigrants to the americas, and how did that work out for the many native americans, exactly?

So let's play with hypotheticals here - if the american indigenous tribes had greater land ownership around the world, the natives here should have willingly left or taken whatever the europeans just wanted to dish out, and their brothers and sisters elsewhere should be responsible for bringing them in?

Can you see the logical collapse there? Just because you can see one possible solution to the issue doesn't make the solution valid or acceptable, or the argument and situation any less offensive.

Granted, it's a muddied water and trying to sort out who's actually at fault for the unpleasantness is difficult and highly-debated, but there are facts in place regardless of that, and people who say "Oh, well the palestinians should just leave and all the other arabs should be happy to take them in" just gets on my nerves.

Your example actually backs me, even if you can't see it through your own confusion.

See - only white people can be immigrant haters. If people see them in other groups, their minds collapse in a fit of insanity.

Originally posted by hmdphantom


The point is that Iran is not even with propaganda to destroy all Jews.

So, hmdphantom, once the Muslims take back ALL of Palestine, as you have clearly shown with the maps, what happens to the Jews? Where do they go? Do they continue to live there under Muslim rule?

reply to post by Aeons


A lot of the world views america as the mobsters and pirates

My internet was law on speed. So I missed the picture and I thought you were talking about Khamenei.

I am very suspicious about that guy.(Musavi , that's his name)

But I don't say anything unless I have some proofs.

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by Aeons

 

all americans who are patriots are rabid nationalists,

there are a lot of americans how have some skewed, borderline racist, borderline hateful view towards immigrants

You just described the Middle East. Rabid nationalists and religionists who have skewed, who have outright hateful views of immigrants.

Literally are willing commit to world killing stupidity to get rid of their immigrants.

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by SyphonX

 

Okay. Give them a nuclear facitity and nuclear weapons.

I never said "give Iran nuclear weapons", and again there is no real evidence suggesting Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons. I've only alluded to their right as a nation, under supervision and treaty to develop nuclear energy.

You know who does have nuclear weapons? Russia. Iran is allied with Russia, and most of you mongers neglect to acknowledge that bridge or suggest a way in which it should be crossed.

I think it's fascinating how fast the powers that be are pushing this fear-mongering in accordance with the election year... Ooohooh, scary times, everything is uncertain!!

reply to post by SyphonX


Nice try

You continuously try to twist it so I have to choose [either/or]

None of the above.

You say war is inevitable because Iran chooses not to deviate from it's present course of action. Then who is at fault here? I agree that Iran has a right to Nuclear Energy. No, I do not think it's impossible to have Nuclear energy and no Nuclear weapons ambitions but...

Why all the secrecy and bunkers?

It may help if they toned down their rhetoric with massive state sponsored crowds all cheering Death to America, Death to the Great Satan.

How would it look if the US had an Annual Demonstration yelling "Death to Iran"

You know that would go over like a fart in Church.

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by Aeons

 

A lot of the world views america as the mobsters and pirates

Nice Dodge.

So which other groups should we arm up to promote peace? Give us a list, then we can get them all and step back and watch them go.

reply to post by Aeons



all those who wish to destroy iran or there chances of gaining nuclear power is one man, america

all those who wish to destroy america, is another man, iran

all of us who wish to seek a peaceful outcome between all, we are another man, the mediator,

a fight between two men, enemies or friends can be averted, with sense, reason, understanding,

And just WHO exactly is claiming that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons?
So they can eradicate "The Great Satan"?
*cough*MSM*cough*
Just asking, ATS...

all men must agree to avert, and believe in its worth

Originally posted by SyphonX

Originally posted by Aeons
reply to post by SyphonX

 

Okay. Give them a nuclear facitity and nuclear weapons.

I never said "give Iran nuclear weapons", and again there is no real evidence suggesting Iran wants to develop nuclear weapons. I've only alluded to their right as a nation, under supervision and treaty to develop nuclear energy.

You know who does have nuclear weapons? Russia. Iran is allied with Russia, and most of you mongers neglect to acknowledge that bridge or suggest a way in which it should be crossed.

I think it's fascinating how fast the powers that be are pushing this fear-mongering in accordance with the election year... Ooohooh, scary times, everything is uncertain!!

They don't have any need for nuclear power.

Iran isn't "allied" with Russia. Russia has interests that are better served by not having Iran be problematic or glowing. Calling them "allies" would be greatly overselling the concept.

Frankly, it is my assessment that Russia needs to walk a very fine line with their support rhetoric because I think that they are risking provoking their non-Muslim populace at the moment.

Originally posted by LionOfGOD
And just WHO exactly is claiming that Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons?
So they can eradicate "The Great Satan"?
*cough*MSM*cough*
Just asking, ATS...

edit on 17-1-2012 by LionOfGOD because: (no reason given)

You're getting your information from where?

reply to post by Aeons

Your example actually backs me, even if you can't see it through your own confusion.

See - only white people can be immigrant haters. If people see them in other groups, their minds collapse in a fit of insanity.

Not so much, actually, and I think you missed my point.

First off, it's not a matter of merely immigration - it's a matter of displacement and takeover, exactly like the europeans did to the native americans - which is considered a near-genocide, depleting their numbers by about 95%. You can't even draw a fair comparison between our current immigration situation and that in Israel/'palestine' as the only fair parallel to our history is over 100 years old now.

Additionally - just to clarify for you, Iranians aren't arab - they're persian, so it's a bit of a misnomer for your to refer to them as "your people" when addressing this with hmdphantom. It's a completely different stock.

Anyhow, that out of the way, your argument here on the palestine situation is silly and unfair, and I couldn't care less if someone wants to turn it into a white/american bigotry claim regarding immigration, since it is NOT simply an immigration issue. It's a matter of claimed occupation and the effective takeover of a peoples' homeland, and you're seeming to forget the obvious historical parallels and claim they should be happy to just up and go. Ludicrous.

I don't have much confusion on this issue, other than trying to understand the warped thought processes you're injecting into it.

reply to post by SLAYER69


I imagine Iran has "bunkers" because they have a defensive-based military and have been surrounded by an air-raiding, bomb-dropping world superpower for a decade. The carrier groups don't help, and I'm sure the packs of nuclear-class subs going for a swim around the Strait don't assist in any matters either.

We don't need any "official demonstrations" of people singing "Death to Iran", we already have a plethora of state-sponsored officials calling for bombs on a near daily basis. Presidential candidates claiming war is necessary, UN ambassadors saying we need to strike. Do I need to get into the pundits and TV arena?

As for "the people", walk into any blue-collar, middle-America, FOX-watching pub, and ask the majority what they think of Iran? You'll get a prompt answer, I'm sure. "Turn the sand to glass." and all that.

Peace is a hard road, isn't it?

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by Aeons

 

all those who wish to destroy iran or there chances of gaining nuclear power is one man, america

all those who wish to destroy america, is another man, iran

all of us who wish to seek a peaceful outcome between all, we are another man, the mediator,

a fight between two men, enemies or friends can be averted, with sense, reason, understanding,

When one sides definition of peace is that you surrender to them it, they will willing discuss the parameters of your surrender as much as you like.

Until you start dealing with the reality that the everyone isn't coming to the table with the same goals, we aren't actually negotiating anything.

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by Aeons

 

all those who wish to destroy iran or there chances of gaining nuclear power is one man, america

all those who wish to destroy america, is another man, iran

all of us who wish to seek a peaceful outcome between all, we are another man, the mediator,

a fight between two men, enemies or friends can be averted, with sense, reason, understanding,

Provided that the two men both have sense.

I think one is lacking.

When that happens, what does the mediator do?

Peace only comes from within.

I don't think the Arab spring has finished yet and the Arab countries are trying to decide what to do with Iran's closest neighbour - Syria. some want to go in to help the people. Once Syria becomes more unstable, it will move virally to Iran and their internal problems will take over any war talk. The Iranian people already think that the last elections were corrupt and the wrong person was elected.

And don't think the CIA had anything to do with starting the Arab Spring, for the first few months it was pretty clear that America and many western countries were caught with their pants down - the events moved far quicker than anyone expected - I remember Clinton backing Mubarak even after the Egyptian riots

reply to post by SyphonX


Peace is a hard road. One that requires rigourous adherence to some standards and logic in order to actually work.

What you guys are doing isn't promoting peace. It is delaying to improve the odds for one side whom you thinik is a poor misunderstood dark horse that you need to protect.