Iran is not the islamic radical regime you think it is...

You should know the difference between populist nonsense to keep people happy with the Mullahs, and realpolitick. Aparently you don't which dissapoints me. Oh yes, of course Iranians have hard feelings against America for what they did in the past (ie: putting a puppet Shah in power). However Iran's Mullahs are not plotting war against America as we speak (unless you mean a defensive war, which they obviously are).

Originally posted by Nakash
You should know the difference between populist nonsense to keep people happy with the Mullahs, and realpolitick. Aparently you don't which dissapoints me.

For someone who has not been here less than a month, you seemingly think you know whether or not I have clue as to realpolitiks and populist nonsense. You have balls. Be careful and wear a cup.






seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof
For someone who has not been here less than a month, you seemingly think you know whether or not I have clue as to realpolitiks and populist nonsense. You have balls. Be careful and wear a cup.

Damn good advice.

I just wish I had the energy to debate this tonight. Tomorrow is another day and I believe there is merit in his arguement.

Get some sleep and get your Google ready.

Why all the sudden pressure on Iran by the Media? Saudi Arabia owns 17% of America, has virulent Islamofascist Madrassas, exports terrorism across the Middle East, increased oil prices enormously in the past 6 months or so, treats non-Muslims as second class citizens, even beheads Muslims who apostasize from Islam. I know why- because the Neocons will never invade Saudi Arabia, they want to invade Iran which is a relatively liberal country by Muslim standards with no clear intentions for war and which is right in their clutch due to it's geography. Oh and wait- I now have to wear a cup because I disagree with your BS ? WTF?




[edit on 27-12-2005 by Nakash]

Originally posted by Nakash
Why all the sudden pressure on Iran by the Media?

Would seem quite obvious to one as astute as you in realpolitiks and populist nonsense, that Iran has been, according to the IAEA, lying roughly 18 years about their pursuance of a nuclear weapons program, you know, under the guise of a peaceful intent nuclear energy program?

Saudi Arabia owns 17% of America, has virulent Islamofascist Madrassas, exports terrorism across the Middle East, increased oil prices enormously in the past 6 months or so, treats non-Muslims as second class citizens, even beheads Muslims who apostasize from Islam.

Here's a thought: start another topic thread. Last I checked, this one is discussing Iran, not Saudi Arabia.

I know why- because the Neocons will never invade Saudi Arabia, they want to invade Iran which is a relatively liberal country by Muslim standards with no clear intentions for war and which is right in their clutch due to it's geography.

An unfounded assumption? If not, source?

Oh and wait- I now have to wear a cup because I disagree with your BS ? WTF?

You can agree or disagree with an opinion as you like, but when you make a derogatory personal intellect reference, wear a protecting cup.







seekerof

[edit on 27-12-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof
However, the current mullah run Iranian government is an islamic radical regime.

In the Eyes of Many People around the World, Your Current President also leads a "Radical" Regime - but ofcourse, you will not Accept that.

That may well be so, Souljah.
At any rate, you have started a number of topic threads related to such observations. Might want to add to those, cause as mentioned and self-evident, this topic thread deals with Iran. Hello?







seekerof

Made no such comment, just that with two parents serving as ambassadors and countless years into politics has taught me that there are two sides to the show, and that the naughty "axis of evil" speech Khatami just gave to an audience of teenagers shouting ridiculously shallow Mullah slogans was more of a populist measure than clear cut policy. Iran has always wanted Nuclear power, under Khomeini the intentions might have been ill conceived, but the current regime isn't a tenth as bad as that of the 1979 revolution, and frankly you underestimate Iran if you think they would be stupid enough to give a bomb to a terrorist when everyone would know where it came from. According to Mossad intel assesments (which we know to be bogus) Iran cannot develop a nuclear device within 2 years. A well deliberated assesment indicates that they are incapable of developing such a device for 6-8 years. They are hampered by many factors, and probably already have nuclear weaponry (or enriched Uranium) smuggled from Eastern Europe ( think not? you underestimate Russia ).

[edit on 27-12-2005 by Nakash]

Originally posted by Seekerof
That may well be so, Souljah.

At any rate, you have started a number of topic threads related to such observations. Might want to add to those, cause as mentioned and self-evident, this topic thread deals with Iran. Hello?

My Question is:
"What Makes a Radical Regime?" - and who is Competant to say, which Regimes are Radical and therefore, the Target of the "Regime Change" and which are not. If you see the Bigger Piture (which the Majority of the People Fail to see) - for example, if you look at the Situation from the Alien's point of view, who came to Earth for the first time - you know what he sees?

Makes you think...

Originally posted by Nakash
They are hampered by many factors, and probably already have nuclear weaponry (or enriched Uranium) smuggled from Eastern Europe ( think not? you underestimate Russia ).

[edit on 27-12-2005 by Nakash]

glad you changed this from "russia probably already gave them nukes as they have other nations," because i dont see any supporting sources for that remark...or the one above that you changed it to for that matter.

I didn't change subjects stop that charge NOW. On the side note however we obviously don't have evidence, why should we? Nevertheless Russia gave enriched Uranium to Brazil, Argentina, and many other nations, so why shouldn't it give Iran the same technology and resources? Russia has strategic goals just like America.


[edit on 27-12-2005 by Nakash]

Originally posted by Nakash
Made no such comment...

Here is my derogatory personal intellect reference:

Originally posted by Nakash
You should know the difference between populist nonsense to keep people happy with the Mullahs, and realpolitick. Aparently you don't which dissapoints me.

At any rate, Nakash, I, nor others among this discussion community, have no problem in being wrong. Being wrong helps me to understand and gain another perspective, etc. I took what you mentioned as an attack on my intellect, which is cool from those I know here. Anyhow, if I offended you in any way, then I apologize. Time to move this onward.



Souljah, the issue here is Islamic radical regime, not what is a radical regime. As for what you ask, I will see what I can dig up on how and what defines and/or constitutes a radical regime. And yes, of course, there will be those that will assert that the current US administration is representative of a radical regime.






seekerof

[edit on 27-12-2005 by Seekerof]

It's all cool man, chill Just don't infer I'm an appeaser or something like that. This is a conspiracy board after all, and if people don't disagree all we get to read is boring baloney. Here's a vote to make you happy

[edit on 27-12-2005 by Nakash]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Souljah, the issue here is Islamic radical regime, not what is a radical regime. As for what you ask, I will see what I can dig up on how and what defines and/or constitutes a radical regime. And yes, of course, there will be those that will assert that the current US administration is representative of a radical regime.

Once "Radical Islamic" Regimes were the Tools of the CIA to fight against the "Evils of Communism". USA have installed more "Radical Islamic" Regimes in the Middle East then all the other World Countries Combined - along with Saddam H.

But I guess Today is the Time of "Evil Radical Islamic Regimes" and the Wars against them, ey?

How Times Change - I wonder who the "Civilized West" will Fight Tomorrow to keep this World Free and Liberated.

Originally posted by Souljah
Once "Radical Islamic" Regimes were the Tools of the CIA to fight against the "Evils of Communism". USA have installed more "Radical Islamic" Regimes in the Middle East then all the other World Countries Combined - along with Saddam H.

It is apparent, as you have noted, that "radical regime" is a political, foreign policy, and propaganda tool, but in respects to the Middle East, are there not actual radical Islamic regimes? What is also apparent, is that as with foreign policy, some "radical regimes" will be looked upon differently when compared to others, correct? Nakash mentioned one of them that the US foreign policy makers have long known was radical, yet was also of foreign policy and national interest.

But I guess Today is the Time of "Evil Radical Islamic Regimes" and the Wars against them, ey?

Sometimes I get the distinct impression you are longing for another Crusade and counter Jihad?

How Times Change - I wonder who the "Civilized West" will Fight Tomorrow to keep this World Free and Liberated.

Not sure. Your speculative prediction would be?







seekerof

[edit on 27-12-2005 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Not sure. Your speculative prediction would be?

I don't know man, those Greenlanders have been awfully quiet up there.....

Originally posted by Nakash
I didn't change subjects stop that charge NOW. On the side note however we obviously don't have evidence, why should we? Nevertheless Russia gave enriched Uranium to Brazil, Argentina, and many other nations, so why shouldn't it give Iran the same technology and resources? Russia has strategic goals just like America.


[edit on 27-12-2005 by Nakash]

lmao....thats just too funny. do you know what you just said?
"i didnt change my post, but if i had, this is why i did."

Originally posted by Seekerof
It is apparent, as you have noted, that "radical regime" is a political, foreign policy, and propaganda tool, but in respects to the Middle East, are there not actual radical Islamic regimes? What is also apparent, is that as with foreign policy, some "radical regimes" will be looked upon differently when compared to others, correct? Nakash mentioned one of them that the US foreign policy makers have long known was radical, yet was also of foreign policy and national interest.

Ofcourse there are Radical Regimes in Middle East - and those are the ones you are Focused on. For Example, is Saudi Arabia a RADICAL Regime for you? I think that the Matter of the Middle East is a totally different then in other parts of the World. I hate to tell you, but I don't think Superpowers really give a Damn about the People of the Middle East - they are more focused on what is Beneath them, deep underground. If there was no Oil, people of Middle East would kill each other, like the People of Africa do. There are Several RADICAL Regimes down in Mama Africa, and nobody does really much about it, apart from Selling them TONS of Weapons and Ammunition - espacially Small Arms Fire.

Care to Explain the American National Interests in Africa?

Sometimes I get the distinct impression you are longing for another Crusade and counter Jihad?

Yes, you can say I am a Mujahid, for I struggle against all that is Evil in the cause of that which is perceived as Good, a Cosmic and Epic struggle spanning time and all dimensions of human thought and action, and transcending the physical universe.

How Times Change - I wonder who the "Civilized West" will Fight Tomorrow to keep this World Free and Liberated.

Not sure. Your speculative prediction would be?

I think that these "Terrorists" will consume alot of time in the Future, and as President Bush said about war on Terrorism: "You Can't Really Win it! - which is just Perfect for all Warprofiting Companies, for them that means endless Profit.

[edit on 28/12/05 by Souljah]