Question for people that live in the USA

page: 14
41
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Even though they are not the same, the people protesting were treated worse than dogs. Remember people sitting and some rent a cop pepper spraying them? Cops hitting pregnant women? It doesn't matter where you live, people are going to protest, and there will always be idiots with a small man complex serving in the local police.
I wasn't comparing the protests themselves, I was comparing how the protesters were treated.




posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Iran has ADMITTED to breaking it.

Off the top of my head I will list NPT violations.

Iran's building of underground secret Nuclear Sites.
Removing U.N. NPT oversight groups cameras in Irans Russian Built Reactors.
Enrichment of Uranium beyond Reactor grade.
Throwing out of the country U.N. personal.

Those are just a few.

Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 





Even though they are not the same, the people protesting were treated worse than dogs. Remember people sitting and some rent a cop pepper spraying them?


Lest you think I support a Police State, I do not. Let me be clear on that. But my point about them being disturbers of the Peace is that they were using specific protest tactics designed to force LEO to interact with them. This is leftist stuff, so please do not misunderstand my meaning.
While the Pro Iran Obama admin clearly did not intercede for and on behalf of the Iranian students protesting that lousy leadership, they did support the Occupy movement with public statements, and they also supported the rest of the Arab Spring uprisings and subsequent ousting of pro Western leaders. For this reason, I believe this admin and Obama in particular with his crony Jarrett are acting contrary to the real interests of the US.

Do you see the difference at all? Not to mention that no one was actually killed in any of the Occupy protests, at least not by LEO, but students were beaten to death in Iran.



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Yes let us not forget what this thread is about...not gun laws and not Irans supposed building of nuclear weapons!



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by superman2012
 





Even though they are not the same, the people protesting were treated worse than dogs. Remember people sitting and some rent a cop pepper spraying them?


Lest you think I support a Police State, I do not. Let me be clear on that. But my point about them being disturbers of the Peace is that they were using specific protest tactics designed to force LEO to interact with them. This is leftist stuff, so please do not misunderstand my meaning.
While the Pro Iran Obama admin clearly did not intercede for and on behalf of the Iranian students protesting that lousy leadership, they did support the Occupy movement with public statements, and they also supported the rest of the Arab Spring uprisings and subsequent ousting of pro Western leaders. For this reason, I believe this admin and Obama in particular with his crony Jarrett are acting contrary to the real interests of the US.

Do you see the difference at all? Not to mention that no one was actually killed in any of the Occupy protests, at least not by LEO, but students were beaten to death in Iran.


Are you 100% sure ALL occupy protesters were trying to engage the police? Just as sure as ALL Iranian student protesters were not? Protesting is protesting. Didn't one woman lose her baby after getting hit? And people did die, just as many as the Iranian student protests.



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Calling Iran's development of nuclear arms a "national issue" fo Iran is simply wrong. Nukes aren't developed for "national use". It's for international use.Hello? The gun issue in the US isn't about civilians invading someone or using those guns outside their country, there's for domestic use, "national use".

Your arguement has merit, this point doesn't.....



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


to your post on page one,

i'm not telling other people what they should do, but sort of talking about gross implications of this dependant thought process that some may try to encourage through events which cases do not hold water. like you can say it's all official and everything and that the military should have guns with the capacity to lay down supressive fire and the non military portion of the american population should not or if you want a long lengthy process of registering and putting people on lists means they can take back these weapons at any time due to computing errors, hearsay, some freshly hatched idea to bring about martial law on a whim or otherwise whenever they wish leads me to distrust the whole registering process that does not work.



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:16 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by nwtrucker
reply to post by superman2012
 


Calling Iran's development of nuclear arms a "national issue" fo Iran is simply wrong. Nukes aren't developed for "national use". It's for international use.Hello? The gun issue in the US isn't about civilians invading someone or using those guns outside their country, there's for domestic use, "national use".

Your arguement has merit, this point doesn't.....


That may be true...if any nukes were developed.


The argument was because Americans are afraid that Iran is using its nuclear program to build bombs, thereby being about their nuclear enrichment and power plants, which would make it a national issue.
edit on 10-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Yes let us not forget what this thread is about...not gun laws and not Irans supposed building of nuclear weapons!


First, YOU were the one to introduce US gun laws as a comparison to Iran's nuclear enrichment program, so do not try to tell us that we are wrong to argue the point or off topic, because you were the one to make the comparison first.

You wanted to know what Americans think of the issue of the Iranian nuclear program and looks like you didn't like some of the answers.



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Yes let us not forget what this thread is about...not gun laws and not Irans supposed building of nuclear weapons!


First, YOU were the one to introduce US gun laws as a comparison to Iran's nuclear enrichment program, so do not try to tell us that we are wrong to argue the point or off topic, because you were the one to make the comparison first.

You wanted to know what Americans think of the issue of the Iranian nuclear program and looks like you didn't like some of the answers.


I was also the first to introduce the idea that it was only meant to show the hypocrisy, not an actual literal comparison of the two.
I did not want to know what Americans thought of the issue of the Iranian nuclear program, I already do know, and you are right, I don't like stupidity. But this thread was never about that. If you cared enough to read instead of trying to jump on your high horse, you would have realized that. I have spelled it out numerous times on this thread.
Don't get mad at me just because you don't understand the question asked of you.
edit on 10-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


All I know, is if the people of the world were able to mingle with one another, I think we would all be looking at each other through different eyes. What our government and every government in the world dictates, doesn't necessarily mean the majority of the people agree with it.

I find some of our foreign policies hypocritical.

-We tell other countries they can't own a nuclear weapon, yet we protect our right to own and have stock piles of nuclear weapons.

-We point the finger at other countries for human rights abuse, yet we have are own human rights issues right here in the U.S..

-The U.S. will sound alarms when foreign countries have missiles in striking distance, but yet we move our offensive weapons in striking distance just outside foreign borders.

-We complain about dictators and how ruthless they are, but yet we turn around and arm "rebels" to overthrow them. We than covertly arrange to put a new dictator in power who benefits us and not the people of that country.

-We invaded a country that we said supports, trains and backs terrorists. Yet we give billions of dollars to Pakistan who are known to harbor terrorist organizations.

-We complained the Soviet Union was trying to spread Communism around the world. We complained their government spied on its citizens. Heck, the U.S. is trying to spread democracy in the middle east, and with all the internet spying, phone taps, public security cameras and illegal searches, we're going down the same path!



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


In response to your listed link...you seem to think that I am one to be afraid that Iran will build a bomb or I am unreasonably afraid of something you feel is propaganda designed to generate fear.

The reality is I am fearful for what will happen to Iran. Iran could become and is to an extent a threat to the countries of the Middle East but it is not anywhere near so much of a threat to the United States. This could change if Nuclear Fuel was sold to a terrorist group.

Should Iran be so stupid to build a Nuke then the level of the U.S. Military response would be designed to take into consideration it is acting against a nation with Nuclear Weapons.

That level of U.S. Military action is not something I or anyone else would want to see.

Split Infinity



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons
 


Right, and it isn't just Americans. I'm Canadian and we are just as bad when it comes to foreign relations. The only reason I made this thread about Americans is that I wanted to reach a large base of people that would be awake when I was. I'm assuming the majority of the members on here are American.



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 





Should Iran be so stupid to build a Nuke then the level of the U.S. Military response would be designed to take into consideration it is acting against a nation with Nuclear Weapons. That level of U.S. Military action is not something I or anyone else would want to see.


I agree. Let's hope Mahmoud is as intelligent as he seems.



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


Yes let us not forget what this thread is about...not gun laws and not Irans supposed building of nuclear weapons!


First, YOU were the one to introduce US gun laws as a comparison to Iran's nuclear enrichment program, so do not try to tell us that we are wrong to argue the point or off topic, because you were the one to make the comparison first.

You wanted to know what Americans think of the issue of the Iranian nuclear program and looks like you didn't like some of the answers.


I was also the first to introduce the idea that it was only meant to show the hypocrisy, not an actual literal comparison of the two.
I did not want to know what Americans thought of the issue of the Iranian nuclear program, I already do know, and you are right, I don't like stupidity. But this thread was never about that. If you cared enough to read instead of trying to jump on your high horse, you would have realized that. I have spelled it out numerous times on this thread.
Don't get mad at me just because you don't understand the question asked of you.
edit on 10-1-2013 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)


There is no hypocrisy. Gun owners of America never told Iranians not to carry guns in their country. As others have said here, nuclear capabilities are not even comparable to an American citizen's 2nd Amendment right to bear arms in our country and it totally does not affect Iran in any way, unless of course Iran wants to invade the US, in which case GOOD LUCK



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I'm totally ok with Iran having nukes. I'm totally ok with Americans having guns. I'm all about fairness and equal opportunity. I'm also American.



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malynn
I'm totally ok with Iran having nukes. I'm totally ok with Americans having guns. I'm all about fairness and equal opportunity. I'm also American.


Beautiful. Thanks for responding.



posted on Jan, 10 2013 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
Serious question looking for serious answers. I know this will not dissuade some of you, but at least I tried.

Quite a few people that believe Iran is building towards a nuclear bomb are saying that they should not be doing so.

Quite a few people, in the US, responded in quite a few 2nd amendment threads where people from other countries, were telling them they should get rid of their guns.

So, my question is, why is it ok for some US citizens to tell people what to do in their country, but, if someone tells you what to do in your country, it is stupid and they should keep their nose out of your business?

Is this a case of, do as I say, not as I do? Also, why, in the face of this double standard, should we take anything you say from now on seriously?

Thanks in advance for keeping this civil.


Here we have a situation that differs not at all from what Americans are facing on the home front . Why should these people be forced to live in the middle of a region with hateful neighbors who have nukes popping out of every nook and cranny and not be equally armed so as to at least deter a nuclear attack? Balance of power! M.A.D. was good enough for the US and Soviet Union not so long ago!






top topics



 
41
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join