Iran stockpiling food? Why?

page: 6
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB

Publicly rejoiced in and condoned the 911 attacks.

This is something I remember seeing (admittedly on the MSM) after 911. There were several news reports of celebrations in Iran, Syria, and Palistinian areas.


Kidnapped and held students (non-militants) for an extended time.

The Iranian hostage Crisis of the1970s

I believe I misspoke on the American students... it was American embassy residents, but still non-combatants, kidnapped by Iranian students with the tacit approval of the Ayatollah Khomeini.

TheRedneck




posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB

Thank you for that reply!

To make sure I understand the distinction clearly, I am going to rephrase it in my own words. Please let me know if this is accurate or not:

Anti-Semitism: hating one of Jewish descent (i.e: a child of Isaac) for that bloodline.

Zionism: opposition to the Israeli state.

If that is accurate, I ask then what about the Israeli state angers other residents of that area so much? Is it the very existence, or their actions as a state? I know the nation of Israel has not been the poster child for a good neighbor in many cases.

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Ok, this is a truth that the media does not prefer you see:


There was a candlelight vigil in Iran shortly after the attacks, attended by "more than 3,000 mostly young people" (New York Times, 9/21/01).

A few days earlier (9/15/01), the Times reported that "thousands of people attending a World Cup qualifying match between Bahrain and Iran observed a moment of silence."

Palestinians gathered for a candlelight vigil in Jerusalem (Baltimore Sun, 9/15/01

) As NPR reported, "Most Arab leaders were quick to denounce the attacks. Jordan's King Hussein, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri sent their condolences. Officials in Syria, Kuwait and other Gulf nations expressed sympathy for the American people and the families of the victims. Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi said his country was ready to send aid to the United States." (9/12/01)

www.fair.org...

To my knowledge, almost every shia was saddened by what happened on 9/11. I personally cried for the people. The Shia have personally experienced the crimes against humanity that the Wahabbis have a propensity to do, and killing innocent people is forbidden. Period. We have always stood against the actions of wahabbis.

What you saw, was people who follow extremism, the wahabbis, who celebrated... it was sickening to most of us that they would be happy for such a crime!


As far as the Iranian hostage crisis, it was Iranian University students who held the Embassy workers. From the guise of an innocent embassy, covert operations had been taking place... The students wanted two things for the Shah to stand trial for his crimes, and they were many!


Now what the students of Iran truly wanted, for the Shah stand trial in exchange for the hostages



the students also held the embassy long enough to prove the covert operations. The government did not stop them militarily, because they were painstakingly going through all the shredded papers that the embassy was trying to destroy just before the students took the embassy, and because what the students were calling for was the voice of a clear majority, the Shah to stand trial, but the government did make sure that the embassy workers were not harmed. That was an Iranian governmental condition for the students.


The students published all the documents they pieced back together, but currently I am not finding it quickly, therefore i will post what they did and uncovered as soon as I find it! I apologize!

edit on 29-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by trysts

The "initial aggressor" remains the sole aggressor in this case, since Iran's rhetoric is only in reaction to real, physical aggression on the part of the U.S.

Has the US invaded Iran?

The only aggression I see is pretty much historic. The US has:
  • used operatives to facilitate the overthrow of a democratically-elected government to institute the Shah way back when.
  • Hid the Shah from assassins after the (predictable) overthrow of his regime.
  • Tried to enforce US monetary pegging of oil supplies globally.
  • Supported Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq War.
  • Apparently sent drones over Iranian territory.
  • Established military bases in the area.
  • Supported sanctions against an obvious nuclear weapon development.

Iran has:
  • Threatened to pull back from a previously-agreed-to US monetary peg to their oil.
  • Tried to manipulate oil supplies to various countries.
  • Attempted to assassinate the Shah.
  • Kidnapped and held students (non-militants) for an extended time.
  • Publicly rejoiced in and condoned the 911 attacks.
  • Took part on what most Westerners would consider human rights violations.
  • Made repeated threats toward the existence of one of our close allies.

This has been a song-and-dance since day one of the Shah's reign. No one has been invaded; no official war has been declared; no serious overt hostilities have occurred. On the other hand, neither side has been willing to back away from the rhetoric.

I have no problem with admitting the US's role and the reasons Iran has to be concerned about our actions. I disagree with those actions in most cases, although I don't see what we really could do differently now. But I also see the reasons the US has to be concerned itself. Just because we started it, it does not follow that after all this time we do not now have legitimate concerns.

I would like nothing better than to see the US and Iran each back away from the rhetoric and let these issues die a peaceful death. But that will take both sides participating.


Sitting there and speculating upon the amount of enrichment necessary to build a nuclear bomb is not the issue behind the threats and sanctions, and even if it were, Iran has the right to enrich uranium for any purpose they wish.

There is no speculation on enrichment necessary for electrical power generation and for weapons of war. You lose credibility when you dismiss science for propaganda.

I will agree that the US position on Iranian nuclear weaponry is hypocritical. They are surrounded by nuclear countries, both allies and antagonists. Yet, I believe the major concern surrounding this development of weapons is based on the repeated threats made verbally toward Israel. It would only take one nuke to remove Israel from existence due to its small physical size, and I have heard quite a few threats from Iranian officials to the effect of that being exactly their plan.

To use an example, I have no problem with my neighbor having a gun... but if that neighbor has been stating openly for years that his only desire in life is to kill my friend, now I've got a problem with it.

What guarantee can you give me that Iran will be conscientious with their new weaponry and that they will not use it in an assault toward another country in spite of what they say?

TheRedneck


It amazes me that you can compare what the U.S. has done to Iran, to what Iran has done to the U.S., and actually say "the only aggression"?! The U.S. supported an eight year war against Iran which killed, injured, and displaced millions of people. Sanctions, support for terrorist organizations like Jundullah to bomb mosques in Iran, support for the murder of Iranian scientists, a continuous threat of being bombed, etc. From the White House is a straight line over the Atlantic ocean to Iran, but you see it as a circle of reciprocity, because you don't like what Iranians say about the U.S. and it's crazy "friend" Israel.

If you're not outraged enough by this government in the U.S. when you see the amount of countries invaded and people murdered for U.S. hegemony just since I have been on the planet, then you're too far away from my moral point of view on the matter. For me, it would be like asking my toothbrush to be empathetic and reasonable.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by OpinionatedB

Thank you for that reply!

To make sure I understand the distinction clearly, I am going to rephrase it in my own words. Please let me know if this is accurate or not:

Anti-Semitism: hating one of Jewish descent (i.e: a child of Isaac) for that bloodline.

Zionism: opposition to the Israeli state.

If that is accurate, I ask then what about the Israeli state angers other residents of that area so much? Is it the very existence, or their actions as a state? I know the nation of Israel has not been the poster child for a good neighbor in many cases.

TheRedneck


Well, since Isaac and Ishmael (as), are both the children of Abraham (as), and were brothers, it is hard to hate someone based on that, when you both have the exact same bloodline, ie: That of our father Abraham (as).. although granted, we give Ishmael a bit more, religious respect.... but of course you can understand that, since that is who the Arab nation decended from of that bloodline!

IN other words, you really cannot say an arab even could be anti semitic, our bloodline is the same.

Your understanding of Zionism is correct.


The Israelis as a whole are not seen even as a semitic peoples, they are seen as a bunch of white europeans who decided they wanted a plot of land, already being occupied and lived in, based on scriptures that are thousands of years old, and decided they had not only a right to it, but the right to kill innocent people for it.

Many Palestinians can trace their roots to that land, going back anywhere from 3 to 5 thousand years. So who has then the greater right? Some European? Or those who have been there?

When they first started moving there, the Palestinians were happy to be neighbors to them, happy for them to start businesses and build homes and buy land. But this was not enough for the Zionists! They wanted the land only for themselves, and the removal at any cost, of the Palestinian people. They are religious zealots, in short, who we believe to be harming a people, which has been thoroughly documented.

Hence, we are against this, and this mentality, and have deemed it with the term zionism.

This is how it is seen and viewed by the Arab people, while you or others have a right to disagree with this view, and a debate could start on the topic itself, this is what we see, this is what many believe they have lived through, and this is what we are against.

Most of us believe a two state solution can never be had, without causing harm and injustice to one of the two groups of people. It is a very small plot of land to ever try and divide, water rights and air space are just two of the very serious problems with a two state solution.

Those who oppose Zionism, do not believe the Jewish people need to go back to Europe, but we do believe they need to learn to live in harmony with their neighbors, and become one people and one country under diplomacy and equal rights. This is the optimum solution to all the logistic problems with any two state solution. This is very clearly the stance of the Iranian government, and to know this all you need do is to listen to the full speeches of President Ahmadinejad to see the truth of this stance, rather than the misquoted and half quoted statements you find in media.

And beleive me when I say he can talk, most of his speeches are in excess of an hour long so to give a proper understanding of our position on the topic, but no one appears to want to sit through them all, and seems rather content taking a sentence here or there out of context.

Again, while the Israeli Zionists will disagree, this is how it is seen by those who oppose Zionism, and a two state solution.
edit on 29-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB

As usual, there is more to the story than meets our eyes.

I am honestly not surprised to hear Gadhafi's reaction. While he in particular was readily abased in our media, some recent research I did into the Arab Spring coups showed a quite different personality than we had been led to believe.

I am also not surprised to hear the allegations against the embassy, nor can I discount them. I will say that from the point of view of the citizenry of America, it would have been much more profitable for the cause to seize the embassy and return the hostages after a few days. There would have been much less outcry against the kidnappers and perhaps a legitimate concern among the people as to why students would do this and then return the hostages. As it went down, it was fairly easy for the media to dismiss the kidnappers as lunatic fringe elements that simply hated Americans.

I hope you find that link.

Our two cultures are vastly different; that much is certain. It behooves us both, however, to be able to converse like this so we can see things from both standpoints. If the world is ever to know true peace and prosperity, it will be because of conversations like this.


TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


Just a quick edit to add to my above post. The Zionist Jews are seen as racist due to the fact that the Palestinian Jews are also discriminated against. Therefore, it is not simply non-jews they fight, they also fight other Jews.

here are just some issues of racism and intolerance against people for simply race.
imeu.net...

again, while this can be debated by others I am sure, and has been, this is what we see, and why we would consider them racist.

I hope this may help your understanding of our position, or why we hold animosity against the Zionists.We also understand not all Jews are like this, and many, including Israeli Jews, have been against such things.However, the Zionists will describe any person of Jewish faith and origin, who is against such things, to be self hating, which to me is the height of ridiculousness!

But again, I speak only to give more understanding to how this is viewed from our standpoint, and not to debate the Palestinian issues.

I am off for a while, and any responses you give I will respond to when I come back. Thank you for a beautiful discussion intended for understanding.
edit on 29-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB

Since we are skirting the edge of a religious component to this discussion...

My Bible says as well that Isaac and Ishmael were half-brothers, both children of Father Abraham. It also says that Ishmael was not rejected of God, but was rejected of Sarah, Isaac's mother. As a result, both Ishmael and Hagar were banished from Abraham's family, but God Himself laid a blessing on Ismael and his descendents. It implies that this was to atone for Sarah's unjust behavior.

Nowhere does it say the children of Ismael were or are ungodly. It does, however, go on with the lineage of Isaac to show the Israeli people to be strong-headed and rebellious time after time after time. That is not intended to denigrate the Israeli people in any way; I doubt there is any group on this planet that could not be shown to be similar at some point in their history. It is intended to show that, while yes, the Jews are God's "chosen people", they are far from being perfect.

My feelings at this time are that, yes, I do support the existence of the Israeli state; I do not, however, agree with their activities. Like you, I believe the two groups should be able to live in peace.

I also know that the original Jews were not white-skinned. I believe (and again, feel free to correct me) that they were more olive-skinned. That indicates a change, or a "Europeanization" perhaps, of the original people...which would be expected since they were gone so long. That indicates they are not fully Jewish, but also they are not fully European. Thus, would they not feel they had a claim to their ancestral lands?

America is not a melting pot because it's America... it's a melting pot because it had so many immigrants from different cultures over the years. Anywhere can be a melting pot.

As I am seeing this issue based on my limited knowledge, we have two groups who both have ancestral claims to the area. One group has been gone for a long time and returned, changed physically from their absence. Now the land is in dispute. Surely there is a better solution than the one we here are regularly shown: bombs launched from both sides, humanitarian atrocities, tit-for-tat with no end in sight.

My Bible also predicts this... perhaps it could have been easily seen that two peoples maintaining ancestral ownership of the same piece of land would lead to strife.

In any case, you have definitely enlightened me as to the real nature of the strife that exists over Israel. What do you believe could be done to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution?

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by maes9
 

Thanks for the thoughtful post and all the info. So, are you stating that anti-semitism doesn't exist in Iran? Just because you don't believe it to be widespread doesn't mean it doesn't exist. To say otherwise is absurd in my opinion. I also appreciate the concession that some do perpetrate violence under the banner if jihad.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB

The Zionist Jews are seen as racist due to the fact that the Palestinian Jews are also discriminated against.

Do you speak of Palestinian Jews as Jewish by religion or by bloodline?

This is a good example of my ignorance. I didn't know there were Palestinian Jews!


But again, I speak only to give more understanding to how this is viewed from our standpoint, and not to debate the Palestinian issues.

If I may be so bold, decades of debating the Palestinian issues have led to naught. Perhaps understanding the Palestinian issues will be more fruitful.


Thank you for a beautiful discussion intended for understanding.

And thank you as well! I await your return.

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


I agree basically with what you said concerning Isaac and Ishmael (as). While there are a couple points of contention which we could argue on what the bible itself says, that for purpose of this discussion is beside the point. They are both sons, from two wives, of Abraham (as), Ishmael being the first born, which is where the point of contention lay.

You are also right, the sins and/or mistakes according to Quranic text are pointed out so that we learn from the mistakes of others, rather than to repeat the same sins and mistakes. The Jewish people are not the only ones we learn from in regard to their sins. However, this obviously did not stop many people from repeating them! (AKA Wahabbis)

The only solution I see, is a purely diplomatic one, in which both parties learn to live side by side with equality given to both parties. Short of this solution, we will see a never ending war, due to air space and water rights among other considerations. It is this seemingly never ending war that we see today over these considerations. Which is a war many would like stopped, it is good for no one involved.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


Yes! There are Palestinian Jews who are Jewish by both bloodline AND practicing religion! Many of them in fact! It is they who seem to be angriest of all the Palestinian peoples! And they also fight side by side with the Palestinian Muslims against the Zionist state!

Some of the Jewish Palestinians have married Israeli Jews (as you know love knows no bounds) and are still denied citizenship and not allowed access into Israel based solely on the fact they are Palestinian, which is pure racism by the state of Israel.

As far as the issues, we can discuss them further, so that you see more what the exact issues are, but as I said, why dont we do this a bit later, and I will come back with the actual issues involved, and include some good links concerning them!

Thank you again!
edit on 29-7-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   


Iran stockpiling food? Why?


LOL why do you think?




posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by trysts

Which 8-year war are you referring to? The Iran-Iraq War? If so, I believe Iraq came out on the short end of that stick (yes, I know both countries suffered), especially since it was Saddam Hussein's attempts to repair his infrastructure that led eventually to Operation Desert Shield and on to today's fiasco.

Can you please give me the meanings of the term Jundullah, and what Iranian scientists were assassinated? I am unable to comment on something I am not familiar with to some degree.

I'd like to take this opportunity to point you to the conversation between myself and OpinionatedB. Despite the differences in culture that obviously exist, we are having a polite, insightful conversation. Would that we could do the same.

Your toothbrush
TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by glasshouse
 


Lol no.

The Iranian regime has had several chances to strike Israel or other regional powers and further their own agenda but they have restrained themselves and let every country deal in its own affairs (since the 1979 revolution) and even before that they hadn't aggressively attacked another nation in nearly 200 years (with the exception of Iraq and that was with some pretty good reasons).

Then we see the Western war machine slowly grinding down all their allies and turning former allies into mortal enemies before cramming those nations with hardware and soldiers.

Iran has pretty sound logic for beefing up their own military power and preparing for something big.

Look at all the nations that opposed the West. Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria.. All of them have felt the brunt of Western Imperialism (save Syria and they aren't far off). If I was a national leader and saw foreign powers slaughtering their way through the region and threatening to bomb me I would take every measure possible to ensure my nation survived as long as possible and to give us the best chance to fight the enemy.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by OpinionatedB

Yes, I am always amazed when actions contained in the Scriptures are condemned by those scriptures, but considered to be condoned by those reading. I am glad we agree on this point.

I am going to hazard a guess that the Wahabbis are 'bad', although I would like more info as to the scope of this term. Does it include the Taliban? Al-Qaida?

Interesting about the Palestinian Jews, and saddening that they are excluded. Both 'sects' (to use the term loosely) hold Israeli ancestry, so it could indeed be seen as a form of racism - considering the Islamic component of their ancestry as inferior to the European component. Even stranger is that this minor difference is apparently seen as more important than the Jewish component that is the very reason behind the country's existence!

Racism is an ugly thing, born of ignorance of other cultures and nurtured by lies and innuendo. Thank you for helping shine the light of truth and understanding on this particular brand of racism. May it wilt as fast as any other form does in such light.

I have witnessed many atrocities committed by Israel as a member of this forum, just as I am aware of many atrocities committed by the USA, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UK, France, Spain, Germany, Russia, China, Mexico... the list is as endless as a list of humans. So while I obviously cannot contradict the Biblical claim of them being "God's chosen", I can say that this apparently does not make them any better than other groups. The problem apparently lies more with mankind than with any deity. Thus, I see no reason to even bring religion into play henceforth, save to understand the cultural viewpoints.


Please, reply at your leisure; this situation did not emerge in a day, nor will it be resolved in a day. I look forward to your information when you have time to supply it.

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by trysts

Which 8-year war are you referring to? The Iran-Iraq War? If so, I believe Iraq came out on the short end of that stick (yes, I know both countries suffered), especially since it was Saddam Hussein's attempts to repair his infrastructure that led eventually to Operation Desert Shield and on to today's fiasco.

Can you please give me the meanings of the term Jundullah, and what Iranian scientists were assassinated? I am unable to comment on something I am not familiar with to some degree.

I'd like to take this opportunity to point you to the conversation between myself and OpinionatedB. Despite the differences in culture that obviously exist, we are having a polite, insightful conversation. Would that we could do the same.

Your toothbrush
TheRedneck


Yes, you and OpinionatedB have been having a pleasant conversation, which is very nice to see.

You may want to do what I do: Google, "Jundullah", and "Riga". Riga was the head of Jundullah before being caught by the Iranians. Here is a quickie search recovery for you, linked to a mainstream media site, since you keep repeating the talking points of the MSM, on Iran:
abcnews.go.com...

If you would like to know the names of the Iranian scientists who have been murdered, I also suggest "googling".

And you're not a toothbrush...



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by maes9
reply to post by glasshouse
 


homosexuality is not and will never be practiced as a kind of marriage here in Iran. you can be glad that it is going to be considered as a marriage in some western countries. that it will lead their societies to even breaks down more.


Khomeini's letter to Gorbachev::

“Mr. Gorbachev!

It’s necessary to accept the truth; your country’s main problem is not possessorship, economy and freedom. Your problem is lack of real devote to God, the same as that led West to meanness or will lead. Your great problem is the long and useless struggle with God.”


Since you are from Iran and have internet access....what do you think would happen to you were you to speak out negatively towards the ruling regime?



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRedneck
 


I'll throw in my 2 cents on Israel's existence in the Mid East.

I am from Ireland so I am neither Americanized or anti-American.

I think Israel has a right to exist but not when it murders hundreds every year and then screams ''anti-semitism'' at the top of their lungs at whoever speaks out against them.

The majority of the people are arrogant and two faced snakes (I served as part of the Irish battalion in Lebanon) and deserve to be given a sound beating but there are those who are down to earth and know in their heart of hearts that what the Israeli Govt. does is pure and utter evil.

I don't like how Israel constantly threatens to bomb other nations if they don't get their own way and then hide behind their friend, Uncle Sam.

I hate how Israel has this air of arrogance and a built-in snide geo-politically.
They seem to think they can bully whoever they want and not feel the reprecussions but it is just a matter of time until they push someone too far and get smacked for it.

They have felt Iran's bark, it's just a bit of time until they feel their bite.



posted on Jul, 29 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by TinfoilTP
 


The Iranian regime is democratically elected.

The same thing could be said about you my friend. NDAA and the Patriot Act have made your rights null and void. (I am assuming you are American).





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join