Warmonger Thread

page: 3
65
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Deetermined
 
I honestly don't doubt you may be right (I hadn't heard about the rest of what you say so I *will* have too look it up, although it makes sense to me), given where else the phrase is supposed to appear in english on official Iranian sources, but as far as what Mahmoud actually said in the famous reference, there is healthy debate on the translation both ways.

I agree, though, that the key argument should be INTERPRETATION, which you've already given me a direction to fire at. Such a solution would seem to solve many problems as well, although given the perceived jewish claim to the land and zionist christian views on the matter, I don't see it ever working out - despite how nice such a thought may be.

Thanks, Deetermined.




posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




First of all, Bub, you have necessarily ignored the totality of my original post to make the absurd claim that my "panties are in a bunch because I cannot own nuclear weapons" which is typical of the tyrants sycophants.


So, I prove you cant own nukes and you call me a tyrant?




Secondly, Wikipedia is hardly a respectable legal source, not by any stretch of the imagination. If this is the best you can do you are woefully lacking.



Prove my sources wrong then. When backed into a corner people claim "OMG WIKIPEDIA BAD"




No one, not any individual and certainly not any government, has any business owning nuclear weapons.


I agree. Too late for that now though.




Your clear advocacy of the ownership of nuclear weapons and only for government is atrocious.


My advocacy for nuclear weapons? Show me one quote where i was like "Yay nukes". Until then, you have been proven wrong.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Every nation that has a nuke,is a threat...lets not color it in one color of paint.
It is scary any way that you look at it.

edit on 16-1-2012 by DrumsRfun because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


I see, since the yield the U.S. used in nuclear weaponry was in your estimation small enough to make their current arsenal quite okay, and the U.S.'s charitable attitude towards Japan makes it even more okay. Interesting.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by chr0naut
 



Your country holds the keys to the destruction of the world and has shown irresponsibility in use of that power.

Please think about that.


But you're fine with adding another nuclear stockpile?? Because allowing Iran to move forward will accomplish exactly that, friend. Iran is a country whose leaders chant DEATH TO AMERICA, DEATH TO ISRAEL, DEATH TO ENGLAND, DEATH TO THE WEST. I think they've demonstrated their intent to use them....at least enough for me.


The Line sits you well for a war monger.




whose leaders chant DEATH TO AMERICA, DEATH TO ISRAEL, DEATH TO ENGLAND, DEATH TO THE WEST

Really? they do chant death? how come they aren't chanting it anymore? in fact why does the chanting only happen when AP or FOX news start with there war mongering?





But you're fine with adding another nuclear stockpile?? Because allowing Iran to move forward will accomplish exactly that,



Did Iraq have any stockpiles? or any actual nukes? no they didn't i cant believe how gullible your falling into the war propaganda against Iran.


You know seabag you remind me of myself when i was a warmonger.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


This time of name-calling and finger-pointing will end eventually when the reality of the situation becomes painfully unavoidable.

You know what is tragically funny?

Iran doesn't need nukes to fulfill their war plans... Remember, God/Allah is on their side, not ours. We are the "great Satan".



Truth is, the time for preemptive strikes on Iran came and passed years ago, when we were caught up in the wrong war, in the wrong place.... So, all of this warmongering and neocon rhetoric is entirely unnecessary now.

Sit back, relax and enjoy the show.


It will be epic.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 




I see, since the yield the U.S. used in nuclear weaponry was in your estimation small enough to make their current arsenal quite okay, and the U.S.'s charitable attitude towards Japan makes it even more okay. Interesting.



He did not say that. He said its better than Iran possessing nukes.

But dont let me stop you from Straw manning your way to victory!

btw, its not okay at all to own nukes. But it is too late. So instead we are supposed to let everyone own them?
edit on 16-1-2012 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by seabag
 


I see, since the yield the U.S. used in nuclear weaponry was in your estimation small enough to make their current arsenal quite okay, and the U.S.'s charitable attitude towards Japan makes it even more okay. Interesting.







funny enough, i watched a documentry today about the bomb
america dropped in japan. All those innocent lives gone, just like
that. It was horrible seeing children who had basically turned to
dust in a matter if seconds. And then you had the people who lived,
with their skin hanging off and burns all over the body. And then you
have the radiation sickness.

I also watched a documentry about the korean war, and america
thought about using the bomb in the chinese.

Its a disgusting, evil weapon!



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 





So, I prove you cant own nukes and you call me a tyrant?


You proved nothing other than the U.S. federal government is more than willing to defy the 2nd Amendment, and I did not call you a tyrant, I called you a sycophant. Find it difficult to read, do you?




Prove my sources wrong then. When backed into a corner people claim "OMG WIKIPEDIA BAD"



We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times a
rmed;


~Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. Memorial Edition 16:45, Lipscomb and Bergh, editors~


No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.


~Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776~


To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.


~John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)~


Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.


~Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787)~


Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.


~Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788~

You provided a website of aggregate writers who have opined on the meaning of the 2nd Amendment written more than 200 years ago, and I have provided just a few quotes from Founding Fathers who opine on the meaning of the 2nd Amendment at the time it was written. Oh My God the Founding Fathers?????



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by seabag
 


I see, since the yield the U.S. used in nuclear weaponry was in your estimation small enough to make their current arsenal quite okay, and the U.S.'s charitable attitude towards Japan makes it even more okay. Interesting.


I hear all this crap about the US occupation of other countries we’ve battled. Where is the occupation of Japan? We are Japan’s biggest trading partner. Where is the occupation of Vietnam? Korea? Germany? Italy? Bosnia? Iraq?Where is all this OIL we supposedly fought for in Iraq? I just paid $3.25 for gas!!!

In Japan, we defeated our enemy; they had a change of heart and now we’re friends! As a matter of fact, we do business now with every country we’ve ever fought. Are you going to claim RIGHT HERE that Iran would be as cordial to THE GREAT SATAN?


If you can’t see the difference then, I don’t know….

We didn’t impose our morality (or Sharia Law) in any countries we fought, we introduced capitalism. I doubt Iran would be so kind.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 





I hear all this crap about the US occupation of other countries we’ve battled. Where is the occupation of Japan?


Stop deflecting, brother. You are asserting that the U.S. is only trying to save the world from the threat of nuclear destruction, and I am asserting that if the U.S. truly wants to do this they should begin with their own obscene cache of weapons of mass destruction.

Occupying other nations has nothing to do with that.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 





So, I prove you cant own nukes and you call me a tyrant?


You proved nothing other than the U.S. federal government is more than willing to defy the 2nd Amendment, and I did not call you a tyrant, I called you a sycophant. Find it difficult to read, do you?




Prove my sources wrong then. When backed into a corner people claim "OMG WIKIPEDIA BAD"



We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times a
rmed;


~Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. Memorial Edition 16:45, Lipscomb and Bergh, editors~


No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.


~Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776~


To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.


~John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)~


Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.


~Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787)~


Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.


~Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788~

You provided a website of aggregate writers who have opined on the meaning of the 2nd Amendment written more than 200 years ago, and I have provided just a few quotes from Founding Fathers who opine on the meaning of the 2nd Amendment at the time it was written. Oh My God the Founding Fathers?????



Oh, the old trick of quoting centuries dead founders. Too bad that is not the law.




You provided a website of aggregate writers who have opined on the meaning of the 2nd Amendment written more than 200 years ago


No, what I have provided is honest to goodness law.




and I have provided just a few quotes from Founding Fathers who opine on the meaning of the 2nd Amendment at the time it was written.



I dont know, what carries more weight? The set-in-stone law or the opinions of the founding fathers(who shouldn't even be giving opinions since they have no knowledge of this controversy or knew anything about nuclear missiles or the conditions of future international treaties).

It is the LAW. Deal with it. You can not own nuclear weapons.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by cavtrooper7
 


The snakes head resides in D.C.

Look up PNAC. The neocons wrote it and basically said that in order for the American public to go along with Americas wars in the beginning of the next century a "Pearl Harbor" type of event needs to happen.

Think about this...it is very important to the future of the USA and the world.

A few of the people at the top have had this in the works for over a decade. All the wars we have rolled out is for resources and it has been planned. Part of the plan was to make sure a "Pearl Harbor type event" happened so people will make statements like you just did and let these horrors happen.

The USA is destabilizing our world. Economically, morally, and through war. We export violence wholesale.

I am not evil and do not want these evil deeds done in my name and with my money.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 





Stop deflecting, brother. You are asserting that the U.S. is only trying to save the world from the threat of nuclear destruction


No, what it wants is to SURVIVE.




and I am asserting that if the U.S. truly wants to do this they should begin with their own obscene cache of weapons of mass destruction.


Yah, and you can say goodbye to our only leverage. Also, possibly to America.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   
This thread, is going to go down hill very quickly...

We have a decade's worth of thread history going over the same exact profound emotional difference between people's opinions.. Even thou I do indeed think and believe the op is at the moment right about his belief's about Iran, Yet we have also North Korea, out there in this World as well, with nukes pretty much following the same ideology about blowing the west up, Yet indeed Iran, trully hates the USA, and blames us for everything, and hell ya if Iran, has nukes or weapons right at this moment that could wipe us off the face of the EARTH, this regime would use them.


Effing DUH, hell you can be a retard watching the crowds in their hate America, day and figure that out..

Its not propaganda, LOL


Our Government could never make up such Great fiction..


Do I think we should kill Iranians or blow Iran, up and kill its citizens, no..

Yet do I think The Iranian Regime, needs nukes to use on Democracies or other countries who do not follow their school of thought? No...

You see no matter how many people come on this thread, and smear their hate Graffiti towards the USA, and Israel, It is the West, NATO, who are trying to preserve and protect innocent lives...



Who the hell said Governing and protecting freedom, was easy or effing fair..


All those attending this thread, Prepare for the monkey doo doo fighting to begin...

edit on 16-1-2012 by Bicent76 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

I hear all this crap about the US occupation of other countries we’ve battled. Where is the occupation of Japan? We are Japan’s biggest trading partner. Where is the occupation of Vietnam? Korea? Germany? Italy? Bosnia? Iraq?Where is all this OIL we supposedly fought for in Iraq? I just paid $3.25 for gas!!!

In Japan, we defeated our enemy; they had a change of heart and now we’re friends! As a matter of fact, we do business now with every country we’ve ever fought. Are you going to claim RIGHT HERE that Iran would be as cordial to THE GREAT SATAN?


If you can’t see the difference then, I don’t know….

We didn’t impose our morality (or Sharia Law) in any countries we fought, we introduced capitalism. I doubt Iran would be so kind.



Only is we can make money on it. We do not do business with nations that do not let us put corporations into their country.

Its all about money and power.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 





Its all about money and power.


Well of course it is. Do you think that we would scratch someone back if they didn't scratch ours?



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

We didn’t impose our morality (or Sharia Law) in any countries we fought, we introduced capitalism. I doubt Iran would be so kind.



Animals practice capitalism. As long as they are dog eat dog we love it!

Capitalism is the lowest form of civilization. Think please, stop listening to the corporate propaganda that has been shoved up our butts since we could sit up and watch TV, tune it out and think.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
What i get from this thread is................................
Kill kill die die to all those other than america and israel that want to posses nuclear capabilities, lets kill them before they kill us ect ect.

What a crock of s**t this thread is, and its filled with many hypocrites.
This isnt just a warmongering thread its also a fearmongering thread.
You poor scared paranoid americans. How do you sleep at night when there are so many boogiemen in the world that are out to get you.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 





Its all about money and power.


Well of course it is. Do you think that we would scratch someone back if they didn't scratch ours?


You mean to act like civilized humans instead of wolves? Everything I do is not so I can profit one way or another because that is what an animal does, not a sentient being.

Does someone HAVE to do something for you in order for you to do something for them?





new topics
top topics
 
65
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join